Datasets:

kkawamu1

/

fmd_train_val

like 0

FMD_train_1196

Card for child support in Delaware.

01/09/2016

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

False

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

FMD_train_975

Was it stated by Donald Trump that the Earth is flat?

11/29/2016

In December 2016, rumors flew about Donald Trump's personal beliefs and connections as he continued to announce picks for his incoming administration. One such rumor was a meme with a quote that purported to be from the President-elect, painting him as a flat-earther: flat-earther mocked up Speaking to reporters in Baltimore on Monday, following the 138th conference for the National Guard Association of the United States, the Republican Partys presidential nominee revealed that he is a member of a growing population known generally as flat earth truthers. I fly a lot, and I mean a lot. No one flies more than me. Listen, I own a jet. I own a 757, beautiful plane, its the best plane! If the world were round, believe me, I would know! The comments came in response to a question from AP reporter, Charles Darr, regarding the future role of the National Guard, as private companies proliferate space travel. Mr. Trump, if elected, are you willing to increase taxes in order to meet the growing budget demands of the National Guard, as existential threats from our enemies grow along with the advancement of space travel technology? Darr asked. The presidential hopeful replied that such a future is nonsense, adding that the round earth people, and you know who they are, these people have an agenda. CNN.com.de (like many pages of its ilk) is not affiliated with the legitimate news organization CNN. The site uses a web address similar to CNN.com's in order to trick readers into believe that they are reading genuine news items. However, this web site does not publish factual stories. publish While there is no disclaimer on the web site that specifically states its content is fictional, it does provide several hints that its stories are hoaxes. For instance, the provided contact number of (785) 273-0325 does not lead to CNN's, but that of the Westboro Baptist Church. (785) 273-0325

False

In December 2016, rumors flew about Donald Trump's personal beliefs and connections as he continued to announce picks for his incoming administration. One such rumor was a meme with a quote that purported to be from the President-elect, painting him as a flat-earther:CNN.com.de (like many pages of its ilk) is not affiliated with the legitimate news organization CNN. The site uses a web address similar to CNN.com's in order to trick readers into believe that they are reading genuine news items. However, this web site does not publish factual stories.While there is no disclaimer on the web site that specifically states its content is fictional, it does provide several hints that its stories are hoaxes. For instance, the provided contact number of (785) 273-0325 does not lead to CNN's, but that of the Westboro Baptist Church.

FMD_train_1706

Zuccotti Park - Brookfield Properties

11/10/2011

Zuccotti Park is owned by Brookfield Properties, which has other political connections. What a coincidence! This is great! Imagine the odds of this happening. Do you know the park in NYC that the Wall Street protesters are occupying? Zuccotti Park. Did you know this park is not owned by the city? It is owned by Brookfield Properties. Who was just hired by Brookfield Properties as an attorney? Vice President Joe Biden's son. Who sits on the board of Brookfield Properties? Mayor Bloomberg's live-in girlfriend. Now, guess what company just received some of the last of the Obama Stimulus funds. That's right, Brookfield Properties. Isn't life great! On a completely unrelated note, Wisconsin is shaping up to be the swing state in the 2012 presidential elections. Not Florida. Not Ohio. But Wisconsin. Now, guess who owns the company that will be tabulating the electronic votes in Wisconsin. That's right, the biggest contributor to Obama, George Soros. What a coincidence! Remember what Stalin said: "He who votes does not have power. He who counts the votes has power." Origins: Between Broadway, Trinity Place, Liberty Street, and Cedar Street in Lower Manhattan, New York City, sits 33,000 sq. ft. Zuccotti Park. Created by U.S. Steel, it was originally named Liberty Plaza Park. After undergoing renovations in 2006, the park was renamed by its current owners, Brookfield Office Properties, to Zuccotti Park in honor of John Zuccotti, the U.S. chairman of Brookfield Properties, who was also the chairman of the Real Estate Board of New York, former first deputy mayor of the City of New York, and former chairman of the New York City Planning Commission. In mid-September 2011, "Occupy Wall Street" protesters began using Zuccotti Park as a rallying area and campground in part because it held the desirable combination of being a public plaza required to stay open 24 hours a day yet also a privately owned park not subject to the same curfew restrictions as New York's other public parks. Thus, the protesters could occupy the park around the clock and could not be removed by the NYPD except at the behest of the park's owners, Brookfield Office Properties. Robert Hunter Biden, the son of Vice-President Joseph Biden, is an attorney who was a founding partner of Oldaker, Biden & Belair (now known as Oldaker Law Group), a law and government relations firm, and who is now a partner at Rosemont Seneca Partners, an alternative investment and market advisory firm, as well as counsel to the Boies, Schiller, Flexner law firm. Back in 2002 and 2003, Oldaker, Biden & Belair was retained to undertake some lobbying efforts on behalf of Brookfield Office Properties. However, we could not find evidence of any professional or business connection between Hunter Biden and Brookfield Office Properties since 2003. Biden quit working as a federal lobbyist in 2008, and we found no connection between Brookfield Office Properties and either of the firms with which he is currently associated. Diana L. Taylor is often described in the press as being the "girlfriend" or "domestic partner" of New York's mayor Michael Bloomberg (a former Republican who ran for a third term as mayor in 2009 as an independent candidate). Ms. Taylor is a managing director at Wolfensohn & Company, an investment and advisory firm, and also sits on the board of directors of Brookfield Office Properties. In September 2011, the Department of Energy's Loan Programs Office finalized a partial guarantee (80%) of a $168.9 million loan to Granite Reliable Power for the development of a wind turbine farm in New Hampshire, consisting of 33 Vestas V90 3.0-MW turbines, said to be enough to power 20,000 homes and offset 124,000 tons of carbon annually. The Granite Reliable Power wind farm project is headed by Brookfield Renewable Power and Freshet Wind Energy. The former outfit is wholly owned by Brookfield Asset Management, which is also the parent company of Brookfield Office Properties. The state of Wisconsin utilizes a variety of electronic voting systems, including those provided by Election Systems & Software, Dominion Voting Systems, Populex, and Vote-PAD. Financier George Soros holds no ownership stake in any of these companies. The quote about voting attributed to Soviet dictator Josef Stalin is most likely apocryphal. On 15 November 2011, a New York judge upheld the city's dismantling of the Occupy Wall Street encampment, ruling that the protesters' First Amendment rights didn't entitle them to camp out indefinitely in the plaza. Last updated: 15 November 2011. Hoppock, Julia. "Hunter Biden Quits Lobbyist Work." ABCNews.com. 13 September 2008. Taylor, Kate. "Diana Taylor, Bloomberg's Girlfriend, Criticizes Obama." The New York Times. 30 September 2011. [New York] Daily News. "Occupy Wall Street Protesters Stripped of Their Power." 28 October 2011.

NEI

Origins: Between Broadway, Trinity Place, Liberty Street and Cedar Street in Lower Manhattan, New York City, sits 33,000 sq. ft. Zuccotti Park. Created by U.S. Steel, it was originally named Liberty Plaza Park. After undergoing renovations in 2006, the park was renamed by its current owners, Brookfield Office Properties, to Zuccotti Park in honor of John Zuccotti, the U.S. chairman of Brookfield Properties, who was also the chairman of the Real Estate Board of New York, former first deputy mayor of the City of New York, and former chairman of the New York City Planning Commission.In mid-September 2011, "Occupy Wall Street" protesters began using Zuccotti Park as a rallying area and campground in part because it held the desirable combination of being a public plaza required to stay open 24 hours a day yet also a privately owned park not subject to the same curfew restrictions as New York's other public parks. Thus the protesters could occupy the park around the clock and could not be removed by the NYPD except at the behest of the park's owners, Brookfield Office Properties. Robert Hunter Biden, the son of Vice-President Joseph Biden, is an attorney who was a founding partner of Oldaker, Biden & Belair (now known asOldaker Law Group), a law and government relations firm, and who is now a partner at Rosemont Seneca Partners, an alternative investment and market advisory firm, as well as counsel to the Boies, Schiller, Flexner law firm.Back in 2002 and 2003, Oldaker, Biden & Belair was retained to undertake some lobbying efforts on behalf of Brookfield Office Properties. However, we could not find evidence of any professional or business connection between Hunter Biden and Brookfield Office Properties since 2003. Biden quit working as a federal lobbyist in 2008, and we found no connection between Brookfield Office Properties and either of the firms with which he is currently associated. Diana L. Taylor is often described in the press as being the "girlfriend" or "domestic partner" of New Yorks mayor Michael Bloomberg (a former Republican who ran for a third term as mayor in 2009 as an independent candidate). Ms. Taylor is a managing director at Wolfensohn & Company, an investment and advisory firm, and also sits on the board of directors of Brookfield Office Properties. In September 2011, the Department of Energy's Loan Programs Office finalized a partial guarantee (80%) of a $168.9 million loan to Granite Reliable Power for the development of a wind turbine farm (windpark) in New Hampshire "consisting of 33 Vestas V90 3.0-MW turbines, said to be enough to power 20,000 homes and offset 124,000 tons of carbon annually."The Granite Reliable Power wind farm project is headed by Brookfield Renewable Power and Freshet Wind Energy. The former outfit is wholly owned by Brookfield Asset Management, which is also the parent company of Brookfield Office Properties. The state of Wisconsin utilizes a variety of electronic voting systems, including those provided by Election Systems & Software, Dominion Voting Systems, Populex, and Vote-PAD. Financier George Soros holds no ownership stake in any of these companies The quote about voting attributed to Soviet dictator Josef Stalin is most likely an apocryphal one.

FMD_train_717

Publix Calendar - Islamic New Year

01/07/2010

Claim: A 2010 calendar distributed by Publix supermarkets identifies December 7 as "Islamic New Year." Example: [Collected via e-mail, January 2010] Dear Fellow Americans, Publix is giving away free calendars at their stores. This calendar is a disgrace and an insult to every American. This Publix calendar displays December 7th, ("A day that will live in infamy") with a notation "Islamic New Year" marked for that day. No mention of "Pearl Harbor Day," which commemorates the death of over 2500 American Service Men and an untold death toll of civilians on that fretful day. I have attached a copy of the December 2010 page for your review. Please go to https://publix.com. On top of the page is a link to "Contact us", click on this and on the next page under the Consumer Relations paragraph is the link for "e-mail. Write to them and inform them of your feelings about Publix recognizing the Muslim New Year over Pearl Harbor Day. Let Publix know that you will not tolerate this un-American attitude and boycott their stores. You can inform them that your shopping will be done at Walmart, Target and Winn Dixie, who recognize Americans and their fighting men and women. And, they are also cheaper than Publix. Origins: Muslims observe the Islamic New Year on the first day of Muharram, which is the first month in the Islamic calendar. However, since the Islamic calendar is based on a lunar calendar of 354 days, its notable dates move around relative to the Gregorian calendar from year to year: the Islamic New Year fell on December 29 in 2008, and on December 18 in 2009. In 2010, the Islamic New Year corresponds to December 7 on the Gregorian calendar, a coincidence which has caused something of a brouhaha for Publix, a Florida-based supermarket chain. Publix, like many businesses, offers calendars to its customers at the beginning of each year, and those calendars include legends identifying days of particular interest, such as federal holidays and religious holidays. Publix's 2010 calendar bears a legend for December 7 marking that date as the "Islamic New Year," which it is however, that day also has a special significance for Americans, as the passage of public law 103-308 in 1994 officially designated that date as National Pearl Harbor Remembrance Day, a day to remember and honor all those who died in the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor on 7 December 1941. (December 7 had also been observed as an annual day of remembrance for those killed at Pearl Harbor long before it was officially designated as such in 1994.) 103-308 That Publix's calendars included mention of the Islamic New Year but not Pearl Harbor Remembrance Day was a source of some controversy (although Publix pointed out that the Islamic New Year had been noted on their calendars since 2006, while Pearl Harbor Remembrance Day had never been listed). The company responded by stating it would add a notation for the latter to the next year's calendars: For several years, Publix has given away calendars with valuable coupons inside. Traditionally, our calendars have solely noted holidays. Due to the number of holidays in a calendar year, days of remembrance have not been noted. This year, Islamic New Year happens to fall on Dec. 7. Like Chinese New Year, which is also a holiday, Islamic New Year rotates dates, is a holiday, and is noted on the calendar as such. We regret that the day of remembrance Pearl Harbor is not noted, and as a result of customer feedback, we will add Pearl Harbor to our next year's calendar. The calendars are no longer available at retail. Last updated: 9 January 2010 Ortega, Juan. "Complaints Prompt Publix to Remove Calendar That Omitted Pearl Harbor." [South Florida] Sun-Sentinel. 8 January 2010. UPI. "Pearl Harbor Omission Plagues Calendar." 9 January 2010.

True

In 2010, the Islamic New Year corresponds to December 7 on the Gregorian calendar, a coincidence which has caused something of a brouhaha for Publix, a Florida-based supermarket chain. Publix, like many businesses, offers calendars to its customers at the beginning of each year, and those calendars include legends identifying days of particular interest, such as federal holidays and religious holidays. Publix's 2010 calendar bears a legend for December 7 marking that date as the "Islamic New Year," which it is however, that day also has a special significance for Americans, as the passage of public law 103-308 in 1994 officially designated that date as National Pearl Harbor Remembrance Day, a day to remember and honor all those who died in the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor on 7 December 1941. (December 7 had also been observed as an annual day of remembrance for those killed at Pearl Harbor long before it was officially designated as such in 1994.)

FMD_train_477

98 percent of small businesses make less than $250,000 and would not see a tax increase under Barack Obama's plan.

10/16/2008

During the final presidential debate in Hempstead, N.Y., Barack Obama and John McCain got into an argument about Joe the Plumber. McCain said Joe would get a bigger tax bill under the Obama tax plan. Obama defended himself by saying that 98 percent of small businesses make less than $250,000 and would not see a tax increase under the Obama plan. Joe the Plumber is an actual person: Joe Wurzelbacher, who met Obama during a campaign stop a few days before the debate in Toledo, Ohio. I'm getting ready to buy a company that makes about $250,000, $270,000, $280,000 a year, he told Obama. Your new tax plan is going to tax me more, isn't it? Obama said yes, it would --seetheir entire conversation on YouTube-- but Obama defended his tax policy as being good for people who are struggling. It's not that I want to punish your success. I just want to make sure that everybody who is behind you, that they've got a chance at success, too, Obama said. During the debate, John McCain mentioned Joe the Plumber at least a dozen times as the kind of small business owner who would pay more taxes under Obama's plans. It's not clear from the exchange just what Joe means when he says the business makes up to $280,000 a year. Is he talking about total revenue? Profits? That's an important point here and it's one that Obama and Joe the Plumber never discussed. Based on Obama's proposals and current tax policy, for Joe's taxes to rise Joe would have to make $250,000 in net profit, after deducting all his expenses: his employees' pay, his supplies, his truck, his fuel costs, and other legitimate business expenses. He'd have to be an extremely successful plumber. In response to McCain's statements during the debate, Obama said only 2 percent of small businesses would be subject to the tax. It seems likely that Obama is right, according to data and an analysis from the experts at the Tax Policy Center. Obama's plan is to roll back the Bush tax cuts on the top two tax brackets. In practice, this means that people with income above $200,000 for single people and $250,000 for couples would see taxes increase. Now what does this mean for small businesses? It's not as easy as you might think to identify small businesses via the tax code. But there are several typical ways that small business owners pay their taxes, usually by declaring business income on their individual tax returns. Many people who declare business income are small businesses, though the group also includes professionals like lawyers, authors, or public speakers. Looking at all the tax filers who report any business income at all, the Tax Policy Center confirms that about 2 percent will see their taxes increase under Obama's plan. In an effort to focus more effectively on small business owners, the Tax Policy Center did an additional analysis where they looked at people who reported business income that accounted for at least 50 percent of their income. This means people who derive a significant living off their business income. In 2007, about 2 percent of those tax filers would have made enough money to see a tax increase under Obama's plans. There is a small bit of uncertainty in the best data available; it includes some people who we would not think of as traditional small business owners. But still, Obama's statement during the debate that 98 percent of small businesses make less than $250,000 matches the findings of a respected, non-partisan group of tax analysts. For that reason, we rate Obama's statement True.

True

Obama said yes, it would --seetheir entire conversation on YouTube-- but Obama defended his tax policy as being good for people who are struggling.

FMD_train_405

Hydrogen Beer

09/10/1999

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

False

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

FMD_train_1389

Fannie Mae is loosening credit standards in order to assist in providing mortgage loans.

10/02/2008

E-mail reproduces a 1999 newspaper article warning about potential troubles with Fannie Mae. Example: [Collected via e-mail, September 2008] Right out of the pages of the NY Times!!! And look at the date..!!! September 30, 1999 Fannie Mae Eases Credit To Aid Mortgage Lending. In a move that could help increase home ownership rates among minorities and low-income consumers, the Fannie Mae Corporation is easing the credit requirements on loans that it will purchase from banks and other lenders. The action, which will begin as a pilot program involving 24 banks in 15 markets, including the New York metropolitan region, will encourage those banks to extend home mortgages to individuals whose credit is generally not good enough to qualify for conventional loans. Fannie Mae officials say they hope to make it a nationwide program by next spring. [Rest of article here.] Origins: In any crisis, one of the most common reactions is to ponder the question, "How did we get into this mess?" People begin to search for explanations about who was responsible for bringing about the current state of affairs, who had the ability to head it off (but failed to act or was thwarted), and who foresaw the looming danger (but declined to speak up or was ignored). With the United States currently in the throes of an economic crisis, one symptom of which was the September 2008 government takeover of the foundering Federal National Mortgage Association (commonly known as Fannie Mae), a nine-year-old warning about the home mortgage underwriter's vulnerability to economic problems that could require government rescue was bound to pique public interest. On September 30, 1999, the New York Times published an article entitled "Fannie Mae Eases Credit to Aid Mortgage Lending" by Steven A. Holmes. The complete text of the article is available online, but in a nutshell, the Times reported that Fannie Mae was easing its credit requirements for home mortgage loans in response to increasing pressure from a variety of groups: Clinton administration officials who wanted Fannie Mae "to expand mortgage loans among low and moderate-income people" (particularly minority groups); stockholders who wanted Fannie Mae "to maintain its phenomenal growth in profits"; and banks, thrift institutions, and mortgage companies (from whom Fannie Mae purchases loans) who wanted the company to facilitate "more loans to subprime borrowers." In light of recent events, what caught the attention of most readers was a couple of paragraphs in the middle of the article cautioning about the possible consequences of Fannie Mae's loosening its credit requirements: In moving, even tentatively, into this new area of lending, Fannie Mae is taking on significantly more risk, which may not pose any difficulties during flush economic times. But the government-subsidized corporation may run into trouble in an economic downturn, prompting a government rescue similar to that of the savings and loan industry in the 1980s. "From the perspective of many people, including me, this is another thrift industry growing up around us," said Peter Wallison, a resident fellow at the American Enterprise Institute. "If they fail, the government will have to step up and bail them out the way it stepped up and bailed out the thrift industry." Another New York Times article that has attained a significant amount of retrospective interest is an September 11, 2003 article entitled "New Agency Proposed to Oversee Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae" by Stephen Labaton, which reported on the efforts of the Bush administration to create a new regulatory agency to assume oversight of those mortgage lenders: The Bush administration today recommended the most significant regulatory overhaul in the housing finance industry since the savings and loan crisis a decade ago. Under the plan, disclosed at a Congressional hearing today, a new agency would be created within the Treasury Department to assume supervision of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the government-sponsored companies that are the two largest players in the mortgage lending industry. The new agency would have the authority, which now rests with Congress, to set one of the two capital-reserve requirements for the companies. It would exercise authority over any new lines of business and determine whether the two are adequately managing the risks of their ballooning portfolios. The plan is an acknowledgment by the administration that oversight of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, which together have issued more than $1.5 trillion in outstanding debt, is broken. A report by outside investigators in July concluded that Freddie Mac manipulated its accounting to mislead investors, and critics have said Fannie Mae does not adequately hedge against rising interest rates. Of especial interest to current readers were the following paragraphs about Congressional resistance to the Bush administration's regulatory proposal: Significant details must still be worked out before Congress can approve a bill. Among the groups denouncing the proposal today were the National Association of Home Builders and Congressional Democrats who fear that tighter regulation of the companies could sharply reduce their commitment to financing low-income and affordable housing. "These two entities—Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac—are not facing any kind of financial crisis," said Representative Barney Frank of Massachusetts, the ranking Democrat on the Financial Services Committee. "The more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of affordable housing." Last updated: October 2, 2008. Sources: Holmes, Steven A. "Fannie Mae Eases Credit to Aid Mortgage Lending." The New York Times. September 30, 1999. Labaton, Stephen. "New Agency Proposed to Oversee Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae." The New York Times. September 11, 2003.

NEI

[Rest of article here.]On 30 September 1999, the New York Times published an article entitled "Fannie Mae Eases Credit to Aid Mortgage Lending" by Steven A. Holmes. The complete text of the article is available online, but in a nutshell the Times reported that Fannie Mae was easing its credit requirements for home mortgage loans in response to increasing pressure from a variety of groups:Another New York Times article that has attained a significant amount retrospective interest is an 11 September 2003 article entitled "New Agency Proposed to Oversee Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae" by Stephen Labaton, which reported on the efforts of the Bush administration to create a new regulatory agency to assume oversight of those mortgage lenders:

FMD_train_1032

Gun Ownership and Homicides in Honduras vs. Switzerland

10/04/2015

Every mass shooting event in the United States prompts renewed debate about the efficacy of gun control regulations, and the 1 October 2015 shooting at Umpqua Community College in Oregon that left nine people dead on was no exception. Such debates typically feature each side presenting charts contrasting violent crime and homicide rates in countries with permissive and restrictive gun ownership laws to make the case that the prevalence of guns corresponds to either higher or lower crime rates. The wake of the Umpqua Community College shooting brought the widespread online circulation of an image which sought to make the point that two countries of roughly equal population, Honduras and Switzerland, had radically different laws regarding gun ownership and radically different homicide rates: Switzerland, where gun ownership is supposedly mandatory, has the world's lowest homicide rate, while Honduras, where gun ownership is supposedly prohibited, has the world's highest homicide rate: First off, even before we check the specific claims about each country, we have to note that this item presents a flawed premise. For a comparison of this nature to be valid, the two things being compared should be fairly equivalent outside of the factors being examined, but that isn't the case here. The two countries mentioned here are so very different that this isn't just a comparison of apples and oranges; it's more like a comparison of apples and radishes. Honduras and Switzerland are roughly equivalent in population (a little of upwards of 8 million people each), but other than that, they aren't the least bit similar in geography, economics, or culture. Switzerland is a small, landlocked country in western Europe surrounded by three of the most affluent countries in the world (Germany, France, and Italy) in terms of gross domestic product (GDP), and even though Switzerland itself is fairly small in population (96th in the world) and size (134th in the world), it ranks in the top 20 in terms of GDP. On the other hand, Honduras is a Central American country that is nearly three times the size of Switzerland and possesses coasts along both the Pacific Ocean and the Caribbean sea, but is a "lower middle-income country with persistent poverty and inequality challenges,"with a GDP only about 2.5% that of Switzerland and three neighbors (Nicaragua, El Salvador, Guatemala) that share similar economic conditions. Not to mention that Honduras is right in the path of the flow of drugs shipped by sea and air from Colombia and has therefore been ravaged by the drug war and its attendant factors of massive criminal organizations, violence, and governmental instability. population GDP size poverty drug war As far as homicide rates go, Honduras does have the highest intentional homicide rate in the world at about 90.4 homicides per 100,000 people per year (which is even shockingly higher than the homicide rate of the next worst country, Venezuela, at 53.7). Although Switzerland's intentional homicide rate is indeed low at 0.6, it isn't quite the lowest in the world: it's bested by several other countries such as Liechtenstein, Monaco, Iceland, Hong Kong, Singapore, Japan, the latter two of which have some of the most restrictive gun control laws in the world. Moreover, a better metric for comparison purposes here might perhaps be the firearm-related death rate rather than the overall intentional homicide rate; in that case, Honduras is still the worst, but Switzerland doesn't fare quite as well (ranking behind about 43 other countries). highest latter two firearm-related Additionally, it is not true that Honduras "bans citizens from owning guns" nor that Switzerland "requires citizens to own guns." Honduras enacted a ban on open and concealed carry in 2007, but a 2012 news report stated that "under the existing law, citizens are allowed to own as many as five personal firearms," and in mid-2014 Guns & Ammo rated Honduras as one of the "10 Best Countries for Gun Owners," saying that "Hondurans may purchase most popular types of shotguns, handguns or rifles for the recognized purposes of self-defense and recreation." While Switzerland ranks fourth among all countries in gun ownership per capita (much higher than Honduras), they do not "require" all their citizens to own guns. Switzerland has a long history of mandatory military service for all able-bodied male citizens. The government issues firearms to conscripted men which, after training, they take home with them and keep until the conclusion of their military obligation (about age 34 for non-officers), but no other citizens are "required" to own guns: news report rated gun ownership mandatory firearms Switzerland trails behind only the U.S, Yemen and Serbia in the number of guns per capita; between 2.3 million and 4.5 million military and private firearms are estimated to be in circulation in a country of only 8 million people. Yet, despite the prevalence of guns, the violent-crime rate is low: government figures show about 0.5 gun homicides per 100,000 inhabitants in 2010. By comparison, the U.S rate in the same year was about 5 firearm killings per 100,000 people, according to a 2011 U.N. report. Unlike some other heavily armed nations, Switzerlands gun ownership is deeply rooted in a sense of patriotic duty and national identity. Weapons are kept at home because of the long-held belief that enemies could invade tiny Switzerland quickly, so every soldier had to be able to fight his way to his regiment's assembly point. (Switzerland was at risk of being invaded by Germany during World War II but was spared, historians say, because every Swiss man was armed and trained to shoot.) The "gun in every closet" tradition was challenged in 2001, after a disgruntled citizen opened fire with his army rifle inside a regional parliament, killing 14 and injuring 14 others. The subsequent opposition to widespread gun ownership spearheaded a push for stricter arms legislation. The government and pro-gun groups argued, however, that the country's existing laws regulating the sale, ownership and licensing of private guns, which includes a ban on carrying concealed weapons, are stringent enough. The law allows citizens or legal residents over the age of 18, who have obtained a permit from the government and who have no criminal record or history of mental illness, to buy up to three weapons from an authorized dealer, with the exception of automatic firearms and selective fire weapons, which are banned. Semiautomatics, which have caused havoc in the U.S., can be legally purchased. The authorities made one concession, though: since 2008, all military but not private ammunition must be stored in central arsenals rather than in soldiers homes. The debate culminated in a nationwide referendum, when 56% of voters rejected the proposal initiated by anti-gun organizations to ban army rifles from homes altogether. Swiss citizens may buy and keep firearms, subject to certain restrictions and licensing requirements: restrictions An acquisition license is required primarily for handguns. Rifles and semiautomatic long arms that are customarily used by recreational hunters are exempt from the licensing requirement,whereas fully automatic guns are banned. An applicant for a weapons license must be at least eighteen years of age, may not have been placed under guardianship, may not give cause for suspicion that he would endanger himself or others with the weapon, and may not have a criminal record with a conviction for a violent crime or of several convictions for nonviolent crimes. The license is issued by the canton of residence of the applicant but is valid throughout Switzerland. All in all, this meme compares two countries that aren't the least bit similar, then gets wrong nearly all the aspects of those countries it references. As such, it isn't the least bit useful or instructive as a discussion point for debates over gun ownership laws.

False

Honduras and Switzerland are roughly equivalent in population (a little of upwards of 8 million people each), but other than that, they aren't the least bit similar in geography, economics, or culture. Switzerland is a small, landlocked country in western Europe surrounded by three of the most affluent countries in the world (Germany, France, and Italy) in terms of gross domestic product (GDP), and even though Switzerland itself is fairly small in population (96th in the world) and size (134th in the world), it ranks in the top 20 in terms of GDP. On the other hand, Honduras is a Central American country that is nearly three times the size of Switzerland and possesses coasts along both the Pacific Ocean and the Caribbean sea, but is a "lower middle-income country with persistent poverty and inequality challenges,"with a GDP only about 2.5% that of Switzerland and three neighbors (Nicaragua, El Salvador, Guatemala) that share similar economic conditions. Not to mention that Honduras is right in the path of the flow of drugs shipped by sea and air from Colombia and has therefore been ravaged by the drug war and its attendant factors of massive criminal organizations, violence, and governmental instability.As far as homicide rates go, Honduras does have the highest intentional homicide rate in the world at about 90.4 homicides per 100,000 people per year (which is even shockingly higher than the homicide rate of the next worst country, Venezuela, at 53.7). Although Switzerland's intentional homicide rate is indeed low at 0.6, it isn't quite the lowest in the world: it's bested by several other countries such as Liechtenstein, Monaco, Iceland, Hong Kong, Singapore, Japan, the latter two of which have some of the most restrictive gun control laws in the world. Moreover, a better metric for comparison purposes here might perhaps be the firearm-related death rate rather than the overall intentional homicide rate; in that case, Honduras is still the worst, but Switzerland doesn't fare quite as well (ranking behind about 43 other countries).Additionally, it is not true that Honduras "bans citizens from owning guns" nor that Switzerland "requires citizens to own guns." Honduras enacted a ban on open and concealed carry in 2007, but a 2012 news report stated that "under the existing law, citizens are allowed to own as many as five personal firearms," and in mid-2014 Guns & Ammo rated Honduras as one of the "10 Best Countries for Gun Owners," saying that "Hondurans may purchase most popular types of shotguns, handguns or rifles for the recognized purposes of self-defense and recreation." While Switzerland ranks fourth among all countries in gun ownership per capita (much higher than Honduras), they do not "require" all their citizens to own guns. Switzerland has a long history of mandatory military service for all able-bodied male citizens. The government issues firearms to conscripted men which, after training, they take home with them and keep until the conclusion of their military obligation (about age 34 for non-officers), but no other citizens are "required" to own guns:Swiss citizens may buy and keep firearms, subject to certain restrictions and licensing requirements:

FMD_train_878

Does the Dow Jones Do Worse Under Republican Presidents?

02/08/2018

After the Dow Jones Industrial Average lost a historic 1,175 points in a single day in February 2018, the left-wing Facebook page Occupy Democrats was keen to point out a trend. In a meme posted on February 6, the page listed what it called the "Biggest One-Day Drops in Dow Jones History," along with the name of the U.S. president in office at the time of each point drop. According to the meme, each of the largest drops occurred during the presidencies of Donald Trump and George W. Bush—both Republicans. The meme concluded: "Share this for your friends who STILL think Republicans are GOOD for the economy!" The meme correctly lists the seven biggest one-day point drops in Dow Jones history, which all took place during the tenure of two Republican presidents, though it leaves out the eighth, ninth, and tenth, which occurred with Democrats Bill Clinton and Barack Obama in the White House. The main problem with the meme, however, is that its conclusion (that the numbers show which president is good for the economy) overstates the influence of a president— as opposed to macroeconomic and geopolitical forces—on stock market trends. In fact, one-day losses and gains can sometimes happen despite the policies and efforts of the person in the Oval Office. For example, many commentators attributed the September 29, 2008, points drop—the second-biggest ever—to the U.S. House of Representatives' failure to pass a $700 billion bank bailout bill, which President George W. Bush had pushed for. Even if one simply wanted to examine during which presidencies the Dow suffered the largest single-day losses, looking at the largest point drops wouldn't be the way to do it. As the stock market has grown in value over the last century, large point drops have become more common, even if their impact on the overall market value isn't particularly great. To get a clearer picture of the impact of these drops, one would have to measure the drop in percentage terms rather than points. Five of the ten events with the biggest one-day percentage losses took place during the era of the Great Depression, and all but one occurred during the tenure of Republican presidents. However, if one were to insist on linking the occupant of the White House to the performance of the stock market, a better way to do it would be to track the average performance of the Dow Jones over the entire course of a presidency, rather than looking at one-day outliers in isolation. To illustrate this, we looked at the average performance of the Dow over the course of the last nine presidential terms. We used Yahoo! Finance data for this, which only goes back as far as January 29, 1985, so we're missing figures for the first week or so of Ronald Reagan's second administration. So while Donald Trump's presidency did see the largest one-day points drop in Dow Jones history, it has also seen the biggest average one-day percentage growth since 1985. However, this is based on only 12 months of data, and the next three years could see that 0.09 percent growth rate drop. The biggest average daily percentage growth over the course of a four-year presidency was 0.08 percent, during Bill Clinton's first administration between 1993 and 1997.

NEI

After the Dow Jones Industrial Average lost a historic 1,175 points in a single day in February 2018, the left-wing Facebook page Occupy Democrats was keen to point out a trend. In a 6 February meme, the page listed what it called the "Biggest One-Day Drops in Dow Jones History," along with the name of the U.S. president in office at the time of each point drop. The main problem with the meme, however, is that its conclusion (that the numbers show which president is good for the economy) overstates the influence of a president -- as opposed to macro-economic and geopolitical forces -- on stock market trends. In fact, one-day losses and gains can sometimes happen despite the policies and efforts of the person in the Oval Office. For example, many commentators attributed the 29 September 2008 points drop -- the second-biggest ever -- to the U.S. House of Representatives' failure to pass a $700 billion bank bailout bill, which President George W. Bush had pushed for. (Sources: Wall Street Journal's Market Data and Yahoo! Finance's downloadable Dow Jones data)

FMD_train_1170

Fair distribution

08/01/2008

Claim: During an interview with the Wall Street Journal, Barack Obama said, "a strong government hand is needed to assure that wealth is distributed more equitably." Example: [Collected via e-mail, July 2008] Well, Barack has finally decided to step up and tell us what he has in mind for us with his promises of 'change.' Just a few short days ago, he had an interview with the Wall Street Journal to further discuss his economic plans/policies for the future and he spelled it out quite clearly. As you can see from the excerpt quote from that interview (below), he plans on officially doing away with capitalism and replacing it with his much favored system of socialism. Many of us already knew of his strong socialist tendencies in the past, but he has now put it out there officially on record. It is amazing that this article, and specifically this quote, is getting overlooked, especially when he is so direct and brazen about his plans. Every single American who works for a living should be absolutely scared spitless. Pass this along to everyone you can. Quote from Wall Street Journal: "a strong government hand is needed to assure that wealth is distributed more equitably." Barack Obama, WSJ, 6/17/08 If this doesn't scare Republicans to get out the vote, I don't know what would!! Origins: This item comes from a 17 June 2008 Wall Street Journal article about Senator Barack Obama's economic plans for the U.S., some of which was based on an interview Senator Obama gave to that publication.not article Sen. Obama cited new economic forces to explain what appears like a return to an older-style big-government Democratic platform skeptical of market forces. "Globalization and technology and automation all weaken the position of workers," he said, and a strong government hand is needed to assure that wealth is distributed more equitably. (The phrase "a strong government hand is needed to assure that wealth is distributed more equitably" also does not appear in the Wall Street Journal's transcript of Senator Obama's interview.) transcript As for whether the phrase in question is a fair summary of Senator Obama's economic philosophy (whether or not he actually uttered those words), here is what he said during the portions of the interview apparently summarized by that phrase: I do believe the tax policies over the last eight years have been badly skewed towards the winners of the global economy. And I do think there is a function for tax policy in making sure that everybody benefits from globalization or at least the benefits and burdens are shared a little more easily. If, as some talk about, we've got a winner-take-all economy where the highly skilled, highly educated are reaping huge rewards and the unskilled or even semi-skilled are getting a much smaller share of the economy, then our tax policies can help cushion some of the blow through providing health care. So if people lose their jobs they're not losing their health care as well. That actually makes a more flexible work force that makes workers more mobile and less resistant to change. If we've got investments in education, that will make us more competitive in the long run. We've got to pay for that like anything else. But it would be a mistake to say I view our tax code only as a distribution question. I also think that our tax code has come to distort a lot of economic decision making so I'd like to see simplification as part of an overall tax agenda. On the corporate side, for example, one of the things I've asked my folks to look at is: Are there ways we can close existing loopholes in tax havens at the same time as we're lowering overall rates? We've got this new problem: The biggest problem with our tax code when it comes to the business side is that we have one of the highest tax rates corporate tax rates on paper but our effective tax rate is one of the lowest ... You know, how much you pay in taxes as a corporation a lot of times is going to depend on how good your lobbyist is, as opposed to any sound economic theories. So those distorting effects I'd like to actually remove and eliminate from our tax system, but obviously that's a complicated and difficult task. The last time we did it was in 1986. We're going to have to, I think, revisit that. I say that the combination of globalization and technology and automation all weaken the position of workers. I would add an anti-union climate to that list. But all weakens the position of workers, particularly blue-collar workers, in the economy, and some of it is just historical. You know after World War II,we were in this unique position where Europe was decimated, Japan was decimated. China was off the grid because of Mao. And so we didn't have a lot of competition out there, and now other countries are rising and automation has supplanted a lot of work that used to be done by middle-class workers. We have drastically increased productivity since 1995, and there was the theory that if you increase productivity enough some of these problems of living standards would solve themselves. But what we've seen is rising productivity, rising corporate profits but flat-lining or even declining wages and incomes for the average family. What that says is that it's going to be important for us to pay attention to not only growing the pie, which is always critical, but also some attention to how it is sliced. I do not believe that those two things fair distribution and robust economic growth are mutually exclusive. You get to a point, I think, if you have a participatory income tax, for example, where you might be discouraging work because marginal rates are so high. You might undoubtedly get to a point where the capital gain and dividend taxes are so high that they distort investment decisions and you're weaker economically. But you know if you've got a sensible policy that says, we're going to capture some of the nation's economic growth ... and reinvest it in things we know have to be done, like science and technology research or fixing our energy policy, and then that is actually going to be a spur to productivity and not an inhibitor. Last updated: 17 August 2008 Sources: Davis, Bob and Amy Chozicks. "Obama Plans Spending Boost, Possible Cut in Business Tax." The Wall Street Journal. 17 June 2008 (P. A1). Davis, Bob and Amy Chozicks. "Barack Obama on Economics: 'We're Going Through a Big Shift.'" The Wall Street Journal. 17 June 2008.

False

Origins: This item comes from a 17 June 2008 Wall Street Journal article about Senator Barack Obama's economic plans for the U.S., some of which was based on an interview Senator Obama gave to that publication.not(The phrase "a strong government hand is needed to assure that wealth is distributed more equitably" also does not appear in the Wall Street Journal's transcript of Senator Obama's interview.)

FMD_train_1394

Large Weird Truck Convoy?

10/27/2014

Claim: A mysterious "large weird truck convoy" in Virginia remains unexplained. : : Video shows a large convoy of tractor trailers in Virginia. : No one knows why the convoy occurred. Examples: [Collected via e-mail, October 2014] I saw the following post on Facebook today with the caption 'ALERT: Virginia Highway Completely Closed for Mysterious Convoy. I'm wondering if there's any truth to it. Origins: On 25 October 2014, a Facebook user posted video of a large truck convoy spotted in Virginia involving dozens of tractor trailer trucks. The clip depicted several semis traveling on Virginia's Interstate 64 under what appeared to be State Trooper escort. video The unusual sighting and temporary interstate shutdown caused widespread speculation on social media sites as to what could possibly have been afoot. The most widely circulated clip of the large truck "parade" captured several branded trailers as they passed, including Coca-Cola and Walmart vehicles, further confusing the convoy's witnesses as to why the trucks might require a police escort. One user's comments echoed concerns repeatedly expressed as the truck convoy video circulated on sites like Facebook: I can tell you one thing. These trucks are transporting more than you think ? It's all starting. Some will know what I'm talking about and other's will just keep believing what FOX news tells them and vote for the candidate who lies the best ! We are SOOO screwed ! Well, we who are paying attention, know something big is going to happen for sure and really soon ! So many things and all of them are so close together........ I see a dictatorship being announced, military hitting the streets, jets overhead, forced Ebola/flu immunizations (rather true or not) Martial Law, food/water shortages, etc....... We'll see ? Many people worried the event was a covert maneuver to transport supplies, hide medical equipment, or engage in otherwise suspicious activity fears that particularly loomed large due to the then-current concern over Ebola. covert maneuver However, the convoy's purpose wasn't hard to discover with a small amount of digging: The truck convoy is a unique one-day celebration where police escort a convoy of trucks through cities and towns in 38 states and Canada. The event helps raise funds and awareness for Special Olympics athletes. About 110 vehicles participated in the ride. In 2013, over $20,000 was raised with 49 trucks participating in Virginia's nearly 50-mile round-trip convoy along Interstate 95 from Caroline County to Henrico County, according to a press release sent by Virginia State police. The footage from Virginia was taken during a leg of the Special Olympics' World's Largest Truck Convoy, described thusly on the organization's website: website Inspired by the powerful impact Special Olympics had on his life through his participation in the Law Enforcement Torch Run, combined with his family's involvement with the trucking industry, Norm Schneiderhan, a Corporal with the Orange County Sheriff's Department, created the Truck Convoy, a one-daycelebration of the trucking industry to help raise awareness and funds for Special Olympics. Post by ABC 8 News - WRIC. Post ABC 8 News - WRIC Although some drivers in Virginia were confused and alarmed by the truck convoy on 25 October 2014, local news stations covered and explained the event on their pages. The purpose of the convoy was not immediately obvious to bystanders, but an explanation was not difficult to find after the fact. Last updated: 16 July 2015

NEI

user posted video of a large truck convoy spotted in Virginia involving dozens of tractor trailer trucks. The clip depicted several semis traveling on Virginia's Interstate 64 under what appeared to be State Trooper escort.Many people worried the event was a covert maneuver to transport supplies, hide medical equipment, or engage in otherwise suspicious activity fears that particularly loomed large due to the then-current concern over Ebola. The footage from Virginia was taken during a leg of the Special Olympics' World's Largest Truck Convoy, described thusly on the organization's website: Post by ABC 8 News - WRIC.

FMD_train_1315

Canada provides financial assistance to immigrant polygamists in the form of 'start-up money'?

01/06/2017

In January 2017, an image macro circulated via Facebook targeting Muslim refugees in Canada by misstating the nature of several benefits available to them. The misleading nature of the macro begins with the suggestion that a smiling gentleman depicted in the image actually entered Canada with "two wives and six children," even though this photograph has been used by various "funny pictures" websites for several years. The "two wives" claim appears to play off reports of Muslim male immigrants secretly practicing polygamy, even though the practice of having more than one spouse at a time is illegal in Canada. The Supreme Court of British Columbia upheld that law in a November 2011 ruling involving a non-Muslim polygamous sect. According to Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada, a federal agency that assists both immigrants and refugees, that law is taken into account during the immigration process. The agency stated: "Polygamy is illegal in Canada, and therefore multiple marriages are not recognized under Canada's immigration laws." This means that a permanent resident or Canadian citizen can only immigrate with one spouse after having dissolved other marriages to convert their polygamous marriage to a monogamous one. Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada (IRCC) has advised the United Nations Refugee Agency that individuals in a polygamous marriage should not be referred for resettlement to Canada. Additionally, IRCC officers assess privately sponsored refugee cases against Canada's immigration laws, including monogamous marriage requirements. Therefore, individuals practicing polygamy would be inadmissible to Canada. The reference to "privately sponsored refugees" concerns a separate program, though Syrian and Iraqi refugees are currently exempt from having to show documentation recognizing them as such. Regarding the claim of a "government-owned townhouse" and "a three-bedroom government-owned apartment," the agency stated: "The government does not own apartments or townhouses which are then given to resettled refugees." Immigration officials also provided examples of regional average payments for refugees and their families distributed through the Resettlement Assistance Program (RAP), which can be seen below: The agency explained: "Resettlement support normally includes a one-time start-up payment to assist the refugees in establishing a household in Canada, as well as monthly income support to help them get through their first year in Canada." Monthly support is provided to cover the costs of food and incidentals, shelter, and transportation. This amount varies depending on family size and is guided by the prevailing provincial social assistance rates in the province where the refugee(s) reside. Income support for most resettled refugees is provided for their first year in Canada by the federal government, private sponsors, or a mix of both. When income support ends, it is common for some refugees in need to transition to provincial or territorial social assistance support. The program also provides referrals to agencies in the country's various provinces that can help them acclimate after emigrating. According to the agency, among other things, these service provider organizations help newcomers find and retain employment, including referrals to assess foreign credentials. They also offer free language assessment and training to help newcomers contribute to the economy. Support services, including child care, transportation assistance, translation, interpretation, crisis counseling, and provisions for disabilities, are offered across the Settlement program to enable access to direct settlement services. The reference to immigrants being given "health cards" is a possible allusion to the Interim Federal Health Program (IFHP), which provides "limited, temporary coverage of health-care benefits" to refugees until they qualify for the country's public healthcare system, which is administered through provincial and territorial governments and not funded by the federal government. Immigration officials noted that as of April 1, 2016, IFHP beneficiaries are also eligible for urgent dental care (meaning "conditions involving pain, infection, or trauma") and limited vision care. As noted above, the benefits payments distributed to refugees do cover the cost of buying food, but the macro's statement regarding "access to a halal-only food bank" misleadingly presents that as another government service. In reality, those services are often operated by private organizations such as the Canadian Muslim Women's Institute (CMWI). We were unable to get in touch with CMWI for more information prior to publication, but the group's president, Yasmin Ali, explained the circumstances facing many of the people they help in a September 2016 interview: "When [refugees] come here, yes, they are given help by the government, but they have to start afresh. They are given some basic furniture, but they have to buy every single thing to equip themselves in a home, from a broom to pots and pans to sheets to every single thing, so the money doesn't stretch very far. With the kids going to school and needing clothing and school supplies, the extra food that they can get through Winnipeg Harvest is a good help to free up some money so they can actually access other necessities, pay other bills, and get other things that they need." The macro closes by stating that "voicing your opinion" could open people up to hate speech charges. In reality, the country's anti-hate laws do not address just general "opinions," but hate speech: Under section 318, everyone who advocates or promotes genocide is guilty of an offence punishable by up to five years imprisonment. The term genocide is defined to mean killing members of an identifiable group or deliberately inflicting on an identifiable group conditions of life calculated to bring about the group's physical destruction. Section 318(4) of the Criminal Code defines an identifiable group as any section of the public distinguished by colour, race, religion, ethnic origin, or sexual orientation. No prosecution under this provision can be undertaken without the consent of the provincial Attorney General. Under section 319(1) of the Criminal Code, everyone who, by communicating statements in a public place, incites hatred against any identifiable group where such incitement is likely to lead to a breach of the peace is guilty of an indictable offence punishable by up to two years imprisonment or of a summary conviction offence. Section 319(2) makes it an offence to communicate, except in private conversation, statements that willfully promote hatred against an identifiable group. Section 319(7) defines communicating to include communicating by telephone, broadcasting, or other audible or visible means. Public place is defined to include any place to which the public has access as of right or by invitation, express or implied. Statements include words spoken or written or recorded electronically, electromagnetically, or otherwise, and also include gestures, signs, or other visible representations. IRCC also provided the following statement: "The ongoing conflict in Syria has triggered the worst humanitarian crisis in the world today. The Government of Canada remains committed to upholding its humanitarian tradition to resettle refugees and offer protection to those in need. Canada has a long and proud tradition of providing protection to those who need it the most by providing refuge to the world's most vulnerable people and has welcomed generations of newcomers who have helped us build our society, culture, and economy in long-lasting and enduring ways. Immigration from all streams provides significant benefits to Canada and to the immigrants who have come here to build their new lives. When we come together to welcome and integrate newcomers, it strengthens our communities and contributes to our country's success—it helps build our society, culture, and economy in long-lasting and enduring ways." The agency also noted that, according to preliminary findings, 53 percent of privately-sponsored adult refugees living outside of Quebec by March 1, 2016, had already found employment. IRCC stated that the employment rate for adult refugees taking part in government assistance programs outside of the same province was around 10 percent, which it attributed to "substantially lower language skills."

False

In January 2017, an image macro circulated via Facebook taking aim at Muslim refugees in Canada by misstating the nature of several benefits available to them. The misleading nature of the macro begins with suggestion that a smiling gentleman depicted in the image actually entered Canada with "two wives and six children," even though this photograph has actually been used by various "funny pictures" web sites for several years.The "two wives" claim appears to play off of reports of Muslim male immigrants secretly practicing polygamy, even though the practice of having more than one spouse at a time is illegal in Canada. The Supreme Court of British Columbia upheld that law in a November 2011 ruling involving a non-Muslim polygamous sect.According to Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada, a federal agency that helps both immigrants and refugees, that law is taken into account during the immigration process.Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada (IRCC) has advised the [United Nations Refugee Agency] that individuals in a polygamous marriage should not be referred for resettlement to Canada. As well, IRCC officers assess privately sponsored refugee cases against Canadas immigration laws, including monogamous marriage requirements. Therefore, individuals practising polygamy would be inadmissible to Canada.The reference to "privately sponsored refugees" concerns a separate program, though Syrian and Iraqi refugees are currently exempt from having to show documentation recognizing them as such. Regarding the claim of a "government-owned townhouse" and "a three bedroom government-owned apartment," the agency said:The program also provides referrals to agencies in the country's various provinces who can help them acclimate themselves after emigrating. According to the agency:The reference to immigrants' being given "health cards" is a possible allusion to the Interim Federal Health Program (IFHP) which provides "limited, temporary coverage of health-care benefits" to refugees until they qualify for the country's public healthcare system, which is administered through provincial and territorial governments and not funded by the federal government.As noted above, the benefits payments distributed to refugees do cover the cost of buying foods, but the macro's statement regarding "access to a halal-only food bank" misleadingly presents that as another government service. In reality, those services are often operated by private organizations such as the Canadian Muslim Women's Institute, or CMWI. We were unable to get in touch with CMWI for more information prior to publication, but the group's president, Yasmin Ali, explained the circumstances facing many of the people they help in a September 2016 interview:The macro closes by stating that "voicing your opinion" could open people up to hate speech charges. In reality, the country's anti-hate laws do not address just general "opinions," but hate speech:

FMD_train_1905

The Affordable Care Act permits mandated home visits.

08/27/2013

Claim: A provision of Obamacare allows federal agents to conduct forced home inspections and remove children from the custody of their parents. Examples: [Green, September 2013] Grassfire's Liberty News team is reporting on a little-known aspect of ObamaCare FORCED HOME INSPECTIONS. Simply put, provisions of ObamaCare allow federal agents to activate forced home inspections. The inspections are being sold as a simple act to ensure eligibility, but upon digging deeper we find the agents will have broad authority in using the new tool to clamp down on privacy and violate American rights. Homeschool your kids? Smoke a cigar from time to time? Have a member who was at one time active duty military? ObamaCare enables agents to force a home inspection upon you. And no state will be off limits to the ObamaCare inspections. [Collected via e-mail, October 2013] DID YOU KNOW... Even your children belong to the government. Under Obamacare, on October1, 2013, CPS field agents, armed with a manual published by Human Healthand Services and codified under Obamacare will begin operating under thepower granted to them by Obamacare. Subsequently, they will be able toconduct forced home visits without a warrant. Things such as a (yetundefined) bad grade, missing more than 5 days in school in any one month,can get a parent to be declared guilty of educational neglect. Having agun or beer in your house can get your children removed from your custody.Even the traditional act of grounding your child for misbehavior will getyou declared to be guilty of "isolation neglect" and subject your childfor removal from your authority and your home. If you are a parent and youhave not heard of this provision of Obamacare, I would suggest you readthe 110 page manual that was created by the United Nations. This is theHHS/CPS field manual that goes into effect this week! Origins: This alarmist warning about a provision of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act [PPACA] (commonly known as "Obamacare") supposedly authorizing federal agents to undertake "forced home inspections" under the guise of ensuring eligibility began in August 2013 as a blog post that was picked up and uncritically spread via other blogs and web sites. The original entry claimed, in part, that: blog post According to an Obamacare provision millions of Americans will be targeted. The Health and Human Services' website states that your family will be targeted if you fall under the "high-risk" categories below: Families where mom is not yet 21. Families where someone is a tobacco user. Families where children have low student achievement, developmental delays, or disabilities. Families with individuals who are serving or formerly served in the armed forces, including such families that have members of the armed forces who have had multiple deployments outside the United States. There is no reference to Medicaid being the determinant for a family to be "eligible." In 2011, the HHS announced $224 million will be given to support evidence-based home visiting programs to "help parents and children." Individuals from the state will implement these leveraging strategies to "enhance program sustainability." Constitutional attorney and author Kent Masterson Brown states, "This is not a 'voluntary' program. The eligible entity receiving the grant for performing the home visits is to identify the individuals to be visited and intervene so as to meet the improvement benchmarks. A homeschooling family, for instance, may be subject to 'intervention' in 'school readiness' and 'social-emotional developmental indicators.' A farm family may be subject to 'intervention' in order to 'prevent child injuries' The sky is the limit." No provision of the PPACA authorizes federal agents to undertake "forced home inspections." What this item (erroneously) references is the PPACA's creation of the Maternal, Infant, and Early Childhood Home Visiting Program (MIECHV), which "facilitates collaboration and partnership at the federal, state, and community levels to improve health and MIECHV development outcomes for at-risk children through evidence-based home visiting programs" by awarding development grants to states that "currently have modest home visiting programs and want to build on existing efforts." The grant program is intended to assist states (not the federal government) in conducting voluntary in-home visits to high-risk households with children younger than the age of five to help match those families with government services related to issues such as maternal and child health, child development, school readiness, economic self-sufficiency, and child abuse prevention. (These home visiting programs are not something new created by Obamacare; there were extant home visiting programs in nearly every state prior to the passage of the PPACA.) extant As noted in a September 2011 press release from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS): press release "Home visiting programs play a critical role in the nation's efforts to help children get off to a strong start. Parenting is a tough job, and helping parents succeed pays big dividends in a child's well-being and healthy development," said HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius. Both the formula and competitive grants will be used by state agencies to support home visiting programs that bring nurses, social workers, or other health care professionals to meet with at-risk families that agree to meet with them in their homes. They work with families to evaluate their circumstances, help parents gain the skills they need to succeed in promoting healthy development in their children, and connect families to the kinds of help that can make a real difference in a child's health, development, and ability to learn. Research has shown that home visiting programs can improve outcomes for children and families, including improving maternal and child health, reducing child maltreatment, increasing parental employment, and improving the rate at which children reach developmental milestones. HHS undertook an exhaustive review of the research evidence on different home visiting programs to identify the models that have been shown to work. The PPACA defines high-risk households as: Low-income eligible families. Eligible families who are pregnant women who have not attained age 21. Eligible families that have a history of child abuse or neglect or have had interactions with child welfare services. Eligible families that have a history of substance abuse or need substance abuse treatment. Eligible families that have users of tobacco products in the home. Eligible families that are or have children with low student achievement. Eligible families with children with developmental delays or disabilities. Eligible families who, or that include individuals who, are serving or formerly served in the Armed Forces,including such families that have members of the Armed Forces who have had multiple deployments outside of theUnited States. However, nothing in the PPACA authorizes federal or state agents to "target" and conduct forced inspections at such households. The PPACA requires that MIECHV grant recipients give priority to such households (because that's where the return on money spent is highest), but as stated in the press release quoted above, the MIECHV grant program brings "nurses, social workers, or other health care professionals to meet with at-risk families that agree to meet with them in their homes. Likewise, the relevant section (p. 251) of the PPACA specifically states that MIECHV grant recipients must provide "assurances that the entity will establish procedures to ensure that the participation of each eligible family in the program is voluntary." PPACA Last updated: 5 October 2013

False

Origins: This alarmist warning about a provision of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act [PPACA] (commonly known as "Obamacare") supposedly authorizing federal agents to undertake "forced home inspections" under the guise of ensuring eligibility began in August 2013 as a blog post that was picked up and uncritically spread via other blogs and web sites. The original entry claimed, in part, that:No provision of the PPACA authorizes federal agents to undertake "forced home inspections." What this item (erroneously) references is the PPACA's creation of the Maternal, Infant, and Early Childhood Home Visiting Program (MIECHV), which "facilitates collaboration and partnership at the federal, state, and community levels to improve health andThe grant program is intended to assist states (not the federal government) in conducting voluntary in-home visits to high-risk households with children younger than the age of five to help match those families with government services related to issues such as maternal and child health, child development, school readiness, economic self-sufficiency, and child abuse prevention. (These home visiting programs are not something new created by Obamacare; there were extant home visiting programs in nearly every state prior to the passage of the PPACA.) As noted in a September 2011 press release from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS):However, nothing in the PPACA authorizes federal or state agents to "target" and conduct forced inspections at such households. The PPACA requires that MIECHV grant recipients give priority to such households (because that's where the return on money spent is highest), but as stated in the press release quoted above, the MIECHV grant program brings "nurses, social workers, or other health care professionals to meet with at-risk families that agree to meet with them in their homes. Likewise, the relevant section (p. 251) of the PPACA specifically states that MIECHV grant recipients must provide "assurances that the entity will establish procedures to ensure that the participation of each eligible family in the program is voluntary."

FMD_train_832

An Open Letter to President Obama - Lou Pritchett

05/31/2009

Claim: Lou Pritchett penned an "open letter" to President Obama. CORRECTLY ATTRIBUTED Example: [Collected via e-mail, May 2009] AN OPEN LETTER TO PRESIDENT OBAMA Dear President Obama: You are the thirteenth President under whom I have lived and unlike any of the others, you truly scare me. You scare me because after months of exposure, I know nothing about you. You scare me because I do not know how you paid for your expensive Ivy League education and your upscale lifestyle and housing with no visible signs of support. You scare me because you did not spend the formative years of youth growing up in America and culturally you are not an American. You scare me because you have never run a company or met a payroll. You scare me because you have never had military experience, thus don't understand it at its core.. You scare me because you lack humility and 'class', always blaming others. You scare me because for over half your life you have aligned yourself with radical extremists who hate America and you refuse to publicly denounce these radicals who wish to see America fail. You scare me because you are a cheerleader for the 'blame America' crowd and deliver this message abroad. You scare me because you want to change America to a European style country where the government sector dominates instead of the private sector. You scare me because you want to replace our health care system with a government controlled one. You scare me because you prefer 'wind mills' to responsibly capitalizing on our own vast oil, coal and shale reserves. You scare me because you want to kill the American capitalist goose that lays the golden egg which provides the highest standard of living in the world. You scare me because you have begun to use 'extortion' tactics against certain banks and corporations. You scare me because your own political party shrinks from challenging you on your wild and irresponsible spending proposals. You scare me because you will not openly listen to or even consider opposing points of view from intelligent people. You scare me because you falsely believe that you are both omnipotent and omniscient. You scare me because the media gives you a free pass on everything you do. You scare me because you demonize and want to silence the Limbaughs, Hannitys, O'Relllys and Becks who offer opposing, conservative points of view. You scare me because you prefer controlling over governing. Finally, you scare me because if you serve a second term I will probably not feel safe in writing a similar letter in 8 years. Lou Pritchett Origins: Lou Pritchett is a former vice president of Procter & Gamble whose career at that company spanned 36 years before his retirement in 1989, and he is the author of the 1995 business book, Stop Paddling & Start Rocking the Boat. Lou Pritchett Mr. Pritchett confirmed to us that he was indeed the author of the much-circulated "open letter" quoted above: I did write the 'you scare me' letter. I sent it to the NY Times but they never acknowledged or published it. However, it hit the internet and according to the 'experts' has had over 500,000 hits. In April 2012, the following update was added to the original: In April 2009, I sent President Obama and the New York Times a lettertitled "You Scare Me" because, as a candidate, he promised to"fundamentally transform America." Now, after observing his performancefor over three years, he no longer scares me he terrifies me for thefollowing reasons: FIRST-- He has done more to damage America's standing in the world, tolower the standard of living in America, to impoverish future generationsand to shake our faith in the country's future than any other Americanpresident in history. SECOND-- With a compliant Democrat congress, a lapdog media and a weak,almost nonexistent Republican opposition, he has shattered the Americandream of job security, home ownership and rugged individualism formillions of Americans and has poisoned and divided our civil society withhis politics of envy, class warfare, race warfare, and religious warfarewhich he is using as fundamental building blocks for his 'socialist'agenda. THIRD-- culturally, he remains totally out of touch with traditionalAmerican values. This has absolutely nothing to do with race or where hewas born, rather it has everything to do with where, how and with whom hewas raised, schooled, educated, trained and associates with still today. FOURTH-- he has surrounded himself with naive academicians, lawyers,politicians, bureaucrats and socialist leaning czars who arrogantly thinkand behave exactly as he does.People who offer no balanced suggestions or devils advocate positions andthink in lock step with him that big government is the answer to all ourproblems. FIFTH-- he not only encourages but aids and abets the unionization of allAmerican industry, the albatross around the neck of the free market. Inturn, they provide the money and muscle to intimidate his opponents. SIXTH-- he has increased the national debt by over 30% in just threeyears. If re-elected and this rate of increase continues, America will beburdened with an unsustainable 20 trillion dollar debt which will resultin the Country's financial death. Recovery will be impossible ---- Americawill be the Greece of 2016. SEVENTH-- given his fanatical beholding to the 'environmental' and'man-caused global warming' fringe, he has deliberately discouraged U.S.fossil fuel exploration and production while wasting millions of tax payerdollars on solar, wind and algae experiments. He refuses to accept thatoil, gas and coal are not America's enemies, they are America's assetswhich, properly managed, could make us energy independent within ageneration. EIGHTH-- He views the U.S. as a power in retreat which abused its Worlddominance. Therefore he systematically apologizes round the world. LastMarch he whispered to Russian President Medvedev "--this is my lastelection. After my election, I have more flexibility". Just what is thesecret that Obama and Putin are concealing from the American people untilafter the election? With what other leaders has he made similar secretagreements? NINTH---and finally, after all his mis-steps, bad decision making, poormanagement, and zero leadership, the fact that he has the audacity to seekre-election should terrify every American.I predict that if re-elected, future historians and political interpreterswill look back at the eight year period 2008-2016, and conclude "the 44thPresident of the U.S. allowed the takers to overpower the payers whichresulted in the greatest economy in history vanishing from the face of theEarth". Lou Pritchett April 15, 2012Farewell America, the World will really miss you! Last updated: 12 May 2012

True

Origins: Lou Pritchett is a former vice president of Procter & Gamble whose career at that company spanned 36 years before his retirement in 1989, and he is the author of the 1995 business book, Stop Paddling & Start Rocking the Boat.

FMD_train_867

Was the individual who created the 'Bernie Mittens' design forced to shut down their business due to taxation?

01/29/2021

As memes of U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders wearing hand-crafted mittens at Joe Biden's presidential inauguration plastered the Internet in early 2021, rumors surfaced alleging that the creator of the mittens had stopped selling recycled wool products because of high federal taxes. Snopes received numerous inquiries to investigate the validity of the claim, which attempted to expose the hypocrisy of people who support the Vermont senator's goals of imposing new taxes to pay for various proposals, including free universal health care. Here's some background: Jen Ellis, a Vermont elementary school teacher, said she made the mittens out of discarded wool sweaters and gifted them to the senator after he lost the Democratic presidential nomination to Hillary Clinton in the 2016 presidential race. "I sent him these mittens kind of as a shoutout to who he is, and I put a note in that said something to the effect of, 'I hope you run again,'" she told Slate. The viral image of Sanders wearing Ellis' gift and sitting with his arms and legs crossed made the teacher famous by the viral standards of 2021. She gave multiple interviews to news outlets including NPR and Slate in which she discussed her support for Sanders and her reaction to the memes; social media users and other websites republished those comments, in part to harness the virality of the moment. Among the latter group was The Federalist, an online hub of articles with a conservative bent. Two days after the inauguration, the website published a page with the headline, "Woman Behind Bernie Sanders' Iconic Mittens Quit Making Them Because High Taxes Killed Her Business," reading: "The Vermont school teacher who made Bernie Sanders' mittens, featured in the most recent viral meme, said she had to stop making them after the federal government taxed her too much." To support the claim, The Federalist cited a portion of Ellis' interview with Slate. According to a transcribed version of that conversation, which Slate published on Jan. 21, the elementary school teacher indeed told writer Rachelle Hampton: "Speaking of bittersweet, you supported Bernie. How did you feel about watching Biden be sworn in as president?" Ellis responded, "Oh my gosh, I cried. I'm 42 and I've waited four decades of my life to see a woman be vice president. I wish that she was president, although I think Biden is pretty great. [...] And then there was this little side nagging thing of every five minutes I was getting several hundred more emails about the mittens. A year ago, when Bernie was on the campaign trail, he was wearing those mittens and Twitter buzzed about it then. I'm not really on Twitter—I have an account, but I don't really participate—but a lot of my younger colleagues do, and they were like, 'You've gotta check this out.' [...] So I put it out there that I made the mittens, they were a gift, and they're not knitted, they're sewn from repurposed and up-cycled sweaters. At that time, I had 30 or 40 mittens for sale, and being a little naïve about Twitter, I put my Gmail account on that, which someone picked up yesterday and retweeted. People have been contacting me thinking that they can get mittens, and actually they can't. I don't have any more, and I don't have much of a mitten business anymore because it really wasn't worth it. Independent crafters get really taken for a ride by the federal government. We get taxed to the nth degree, and it wasn't really worth it pursuing that as a business, even as a side hustle. I mostly just make them as gifts." In other words, Ellis said she did not "have much of a mitten business anymore," or that she previously sold the handmade items for a price and then mostly stopped. She implied that federal taxes were a leading factor in her decision to make that change. On Jan. 20, as social media lit up with the memes following the inauguration, she confirmed on Twitter that she was not selling mittens like the senator's. Snopes reached out to Ellis to learn more about her history of trying to sell mittens for profit and paying federal taxes as a self-described independent crafter. We have not yet received a response, but we'll update this report when or if we do. All of that said, the size of Ellis' former business was unknown, as well as how long or via what methods she sold the handmade mittens. U.S. tax code requires all independent contractors—no matter if they use online marketplaces such as Etsy to sell handmade products—to pay local and federal taxes based on net profits. Also, we should note here: Sanders' proposed changes to the country's tax system would repeal aspects of the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act so that taxpayers who earn between about $9,500 and $250,000 would pay about 4% more, and taxes on the country's top earners would generate the majority of revenue. Additionally, he wants to impose a new payroll tax on businesses that earn more than $2 million annually, a change that intends to protect ventures like Ellis' from paying more. So while it was true that taxes played a role in Ellis' decision to stop charging people money for mittens prior to her viral fame, it was false to claim that she "quit" making them altogether, as The Federalist headline alleged. Between Jan. 23 and 24, she said in a series of tweets that she made three more pairs of "Bernie mittens," two of which she donated to Passion 4 Paws Vermont and Outright Vermont for fundraising, and one that she was auctioning off to benefit her daughter's college fund. After that, Sanders' official campaign began selling merchandise with the senator's meme-worthy image that Ellis made possible. The so-called "Chairman Sanders" sweatshirts, T-shirts, stickers, etc., helped raise $1.8 million for charitable organizations in Vermont over the course of five days, The Associated Press reported. On Jan. 24, Ellis tweeted that the senator called her to tell her that "the mitten frenzy" had raised "an enormous amount of money" for the charities. Besides that evidence, it was unclear how, or to what extent, the teacher was involved in the making or selling of the campaign-official products featuring her mittens. As further proof to debunk claims that she had ceased all mitten-making, the teacher on Jan. 27 announced that she had partnered with entities including Darn Tough Socks to make socks inspired by the viral mittens, and the following day she said she was in the process of another project "to get Bernie Mittens for ALL." "I'm not opening a mitten factory or quitting my job as a second-grade teacher! However, I am going to choose a new adventure on the side," Ellis said on her official website and GoFundMe page. "Never fear—I will make more mittens, but I won't be selling them for myself. I will be donating them to Vermont charities to help them fundraise and make up for the funds lost due to the pandemic." In sum, while it was true that, prior to her viral fame, Ellis mostly stopped charging people for handmade mittens due to costs including federal taxes, she was still creating the recycled wool products, and people were spending money on them as of this writing. For those reasons, we rate this claim a "Mixture" of truthful and misleading information.

NEI

As memes of U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders wearing hand-crafted mittens at Joe Biden's presidential inauguration plastered the Internet in early 2021, rumors surfaced alleging that the creator of the mittens had stopped selling recycled wool products because of high federal taxes.Snopes received numerous inquiries to investigate the validity of the claim, which attempted to expose hypocrisy of people who support the Vermont senator's goals of imposing new taxes to pay for various proposals, including free universal health care.Here's some background: Jen Ellis, a Vermont elementary school teacher, said she made the mittens out of discarded wool sweaters and gifted them to the senator after he lost the Democratic presidential nomination to Hillary Clinton in the 2016 presidential race. "I sent him these mittens kind of as a shoutout to who he is, and I put a note in that said something to the effect of, 'I hope you run again,'" she told Slate. (Photo by JONATHAN ERNST/POOL/AFP via Getty Images)The viral image of Sanders wearing Ellis' gift and sitting with his arms and legs crossed made the teacher famous by the viral standards of 2021. She gave multiple interviews to news outlets including NPR and Slate in which she discussed her support for Sanders and reaction to the memes; social media users and other websites republished those comments, in part to harness the virality of the moment.Among the latter group was The Federalist, an online hub of articles with a conservative bent. Two days after the inauguration, the website published a page with the headline, "Woman Behind Bernie Sanders' Iconic Mittens Quit Making Them Because High Taxes Killed Her Business," reading:The Vermont school teacher who made Bernie Sanders mittens, featured in the most recent viral meme, said she had to stop making them after the federal government taxed her too much.To support the claim, The Federalist cited a portion of Ellis' interview with Slate. According to a transcribed version of that conversation, which Slate published on Jan. 21, the elementary school teacher indeed told writer Rachelle Hampton:So I put it out there that I made the mittens, they were a gift, and theyre not knitted, theyre sewn from repurposed and up-cycled sweaters. At that time, I had 30 or 40 mittens for sale and being a little nave about Twitter, I put my Gmail account on that, which someone picked up yesterday and retweeted it. People have been contacting me thinking that they can get mittens, and actually they cant. I dont have any more, and I dont have much of a mitten business anymore because it really wasnt worth it. Independent crafters get really taken for a ride by the federal government. We get taxed to the nth degree, and it wasnt really worth it pursuing that as a business, even as a side hustle. I mostly just make them as gifts.On Jan. 20, as social media lit up with the memes following the inauguration, she confirmed on Twitter that she was not selling mittens like the senator's.All of that said, the size of Ellis' former business was unknown, as well as how long or via what methods she sold the handmade mittens. U.S. tax code requires all independent contractors no matter if they use online marketplaces such as Etsy to sell handmade products to pay local and federal taxes based on net profits.Also, we should note here: Sanders' proposed changes to the country's tax system would repeal aspects of the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act so that taxpayers who earn between about $9,500 and $250,000 would pay about 4% more, and taxes on the country's top earners would generate the majority of revenue. Additionally, he wants to impose a new payroll on businesses that earn more than $2 million annually, a change that intends to protect ventures like Ellis' from paying more. (See here for a detailed breakdown of Sanders' tax proposal by Forbes.)Between Jan. 23 and 24, she said in a series of tweets that she made three more pairs of "Bernie mittens," two of which she donated to Passion 4 Paws Vermont and Outright Vermont for fundraising and one that she was auctioning off to benefit her daughters college fund.After that, Sanders' official campaign began selling merchandise with the senator's meme-worthy image that Ellis made possible. The so-called "Chairman Sanders" sweatshirts, T-shirts, stickers, etc. helped raise $1.8 million for charitable organizations in Vermont over the course of five days, The Associated Press reported.On Jan. 24, Ellis tweeted that the senator called her to tell her that "the mitten frenzy" had raised "an enormous amount of money" for the charities. Besides that evidence, it was unclear how, or to what extent, the teacher was involved in the making or selling of the campaign-official products featuring her mittens.As further proof to debunk claims that she had ceased all mitten-making, the teacher on Jan. 27 announced that she had partnered with entities including Darn Tough Socks to make socks inspired by the viral mittens, and the following day she said she was in the process of another project "to get Bernie Mittens for ALL.""Im not opening a mitten factory or quitting my job as a second grade teacher! However, I am going to choose a new adventure on the side," Ellis said on her official website and GoFundMe page. "Never fear I will make more mittens, but I won't be selling them for myself. I will be donating them to Vermont Charities to help them fundraise and make up for the funds lost due to the pandemic."

FMD_train_1332

Did Daughter of WEF's Klaus Schwab Say 'Permanent Climate Lockdowns' Are 'Coming'?

07/31/2023

Conspiracy-minded social media accounts rehashed a tired claim about the World Economic Forum (WEF) in late July 2023 that, per Nicole Schwab (the daughter of that organization's founder and chairman), the group would be mandating "climate lockdowns" in the near future: rehashed The WEF is an international Non-Governmental Organization (NGO) that, it says, "engages the foremost political, business, cultural and other leaders of society to shape global, regional and industry agendas." While the organization has no actual governmental power to institute any of the policies it is alleged to be forcing on the populace, the prominence of its members and the wealth of the companies it works with have made it the source of myriad conspiracy theories. it says "Climate lockdown" claims, frequently leveled against the WEF and other governments, are growing in popularity. The basic notion is that COVID-19 lockdowns were a test by elites to see how much tyranny they could level against the global populace without resistance, and that lockdowns predicated on climate emergencies would be next. growing This conspiracy theory gained wider exposure in February 2022, when The Hill published an opinion piece by writer Kristin Tate titled "Coming Soon: Climate Lockdowns?" The piece, citing vague climate initiative ideas or statements linked to Bill Gates and the Red Cross as evidence, argued: published The past two years have been a checklist for the worst impulses of government and public sentiment. COVID allowed for supposedly temporary measures to morph into two years of "emergency" restrictions. But what if COVID was only the opening act, and another proclaimed crisis is the main event? Implementing significant but partial restrictions, one by one, in the name of the common good can allow for encompassing government control that results in relatively little backlash. Fear over climate change could lead to long-term soft lockdowns, given the precedent of immense growth of government power and significant support for sweeping state actions. As reported by NBC News in July 2023, people who promote these claims are "a growing group that evolved out of anti-vaccine protests and has energized a campaign against environmental measures across Britain and elsewhere." Many pushing these claims conflate the concept of a "15-minute city" with WEF-mandated lockdowns, as reported by Logically Facts: reported reported 15-minute cities, or polycentric neighborhoods, aim to offer basic services, including healthcare, public transport, and recreational spaces, no more than a quarter-hour walk from home. However, despite this proposed convenience, conspiratorial beliefs about the concept are rife. Supporters of the conspiracy believe that the World Economic Forum a supposed network of evil elites will remove people's freedoms and lock them in their homes under the pretext of climate change. As a result, the term "climate lockdown" has been a magnet for conspiracy-minded social media users, and this fact is regularly exploited by clickbait conspiracy outlets. Among the most prolific of these outlets, a network of websites currently running under the moniker The People's Voice, is responsible for the claim shared widely on social media that Schwab's daughter made any mention of a "climate lockdown." responsible The headline claim of that story does not match, in any sense, the statement from which it is allegedly derived. Nicole Schwab is a member of the World Economic Forum and the head of a climate-based initiative under its roof. In a roundtable discussion, she referenced a 2020 WEF initiative known as the "Great Reset," explaining that the pandemic exposed weaknesses about how the world prepares for disaster and opportunities to prepare for the next disaster: 2020 WEF initiative This crisis has shown us that first of all, things can shift very rapidly when we put our minds to it and when we feel the immediate emergency to our livelihoods. And second, that, clearly the system that we had before, is not sustainable. So I see it as a tremendous opportunity to really, to have this Great Reset and to use the huge flows of money, to use the increased levers that policymakers have today in a way that was not possible before, to create a change that is not incremental, but that we can look back and we can say, this is the moment where we really started to position nature at the core of the economy. Because she never mentioned climate lockdowns in those statements and never stated that they were "coming whether you like it or not," we have rated this assertion as. How 15-Minute Cities Became a Conspiratorial Talking Point. https://www.logicallyfacts.com/en/analysis/15-minute-cities-conspiratorial-talking-point. Accessed 31 July 2023. "How 'climate Lockdowns' Became the New Battleground for Conspiracy-Driven Protest Movement." NBC News, 2 July 2023, https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/climate-lockdowns-became-new-battleground-conspiracy-driven-protest-mo-rcna80370. "Klaus Schwab's Daughter: 'Permanent Climate Lockdowns Coming Whether You Like It or Not.'" The People's Voice, 30 July 2023, https://thepeoplesvoice.tv/klaus-schwabs-daughter-permanent-climate-lockdowns-coming-whether-you-like-it-or-not/. Kristin Tate. "Coming Soon: Climate Lockdowns?" The Hill, 2 Feb. 2022, https://thehill.com/opinion/finance/592011-coming-soon-climate-lockdowns/. "The Great Reset." World Economic Forum, https://www.weforum.org/focus/the-great-reset/. Accessed 31 July 2023.

False

Conspiracy-minded social media accounts rehashed a tired claim about the World Economic Forum (WEF) in late July 2023 that, per Nicole Schwab (the daughter of that organization's founder and chairman), the group would be mandating "climate lockdowns" in the near future:The WEF is an international Non-Governmental Organization (NGO) that, it says, "engages the foremost political, business, cultural and other leaders of society to shape global, regional and industry agendas." While the organization has no actual governmental power to institute any of the policies it is alleged to be forcing on the populace, the prominence of its members and the wealth of the companies it works with have made it the source of myriad conspiracy theories."Climate lockdown" claims, frequently leveled against the WEF and other governments, are growing in popularity. The basic notion is that COVID-19 lockdowns were a test by elites to see how much tyranny they could level against the global populace without resistance, and that lockdowns predicated on climate emergencies would be next.This conspiracy theory gained wider exposure in February 2022, when The Hill published an opinion piece by writer Kristin Tate titled "Coming Soon: Climate Lockdowns?" The piece, citing vague climate initiative ideas or statements linked to Bill Gates and the Red Cross as evidence, argued:As reported by NBC News in July 2023, people who promote these claims are "a growing group that evolved out of anti-vaccine protests and has energized a campaign against environmental measures across Britain and elsewhere." Many pushing these claims conflate the concept of a "15-minute city" with WEF-mandated lockdowns, as reported by Logically Facts:As a result, the term "climate lockdown" has been a magnet for conspiracy-minded social media users, and this fact is regularly exploited by clickbait conspiracy outlets. Among the most prolific of these outlets, a network of websites currently running under the moniker The People's Voice, is responsible for the claim shared widely on social media that Schwab's daughter made any mention of a "climate lockdown."The headline claim of that story does not match, in any sense, the statement from which it is allegedly derived. Nicole Schwab is a member of the World Economic Forum and the head of a climate-based initiative under its roof. In a roundtable discussion, she referenced a 2020 WEF initiative known as the "Great Reset," explaining that the pandemic exposed weaknesses about how the world prepares for disaster and opportunities to prepare for the next disaster:

FMD_train_476

Vladimir Putin did not refer to Obama as foolish for his socialist policies.

02/17/2016

On 15 February 2016, the Facebook page "The Original Wake Up People" posted a years-old memefeaturing a quote ostensibly uttered by Vladimir Putin: This is not a real quote from the Russian president.The above-displayed quote has been circulating since 2009 in one form or another (usually in the form of a meme such as the above image) when it was originally published on the satirical web siteScooter's Report: published Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin haswarned the Obama administration against adopting further socialism, saying Russian historyclearly proves it is a recipe for failure. "Any fourth grade history student knows socialism has failed in every country, at every time in history," saidPutin. "President Obama and his fellow Democrats are either idiots or deliberately trying to destroy their own economy." Scooter's Report, whichfrequently featured anti-Obama rhetoric, has adisclaimer on the web site that states, "Like I have to tell you: This isfictitious satire and any resemblance to persons, places, or events is coincidental." Putin has, however, addressed the responsibilities of businesses to the community in the past: addressed We need business to understand its social responsibility, that the main task and objective for a business is not to generate extra income and to become rich and transfer the money abroad, but to look and evaluate what a businessman has done for the country, for the people, on whose account he or she has become so rich.

False

This is not a real quote from the Russian president.The above-displayed quote has been circulating since 2009 in one form or another (usually in the form of a meme such as the above image) when it was originally published on the satirical web siteScooter's Report:Putin has, however, addressed the responsibilities of businesses to the community in the past:

FMD_train_2

Did Ford Make Colin Kaepernick the Face of Their New Ad Campaign?

09/10/2018

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

False

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

FMD_train_441

What is the reason for Charles Shaw wine being priced so low?

01/02/2003

Claim: Charles Shaw wine was sold cheaply because airlines could no longer use corkscrews after 9/11 and dumped their stocks of wine. Origins: We tend to equate quality with cost, so the appearance of an underpriced wine of surprising virtue is bound to spark its share of interesting backstories. We view wine as a luxury item, and since we reject the intellectual construct that such an item can be both good and inexpensive, we instead seize upon plausible-sounding (but apocryphal) tales to explain the disparity between cheapness and quality. Good wine must be expensive, and if a good wine is being vended at a bargain price, there must be a calamitous reason for this fortuity. In early 2002, rumors of airlines dumping their Merlot (and the like) were launched from this springboard. As the Los Angeles Times noted in a 2002 article about the burgeoning sales of Charles Shaw label wines: The morning after a friend served Anna McNeal a glass of Charles Shaw Merlot, she made a beeline to the Mid-Wilshire Trader Joe's to stock up on the wine selling at an astonishing $1.99 a bottle. "I had to come and get a case," she said in a checkout line with half a dozen other shoppers who had somehow heard of the mysterious "Napa" wine. Since it was introduced in February, Charles Shaw wine has gained a cult-like following in Southern California, with wine drinkers backing their cars up to the loading dock of the Los Angeles-based discounter to lay in a supply of the Trader Joe's exclusive. "It's selling like crazy," said Jon Fredrikson, a wine consultant based in San Mateo County. "A great story for consumers." Why was such a popular wine (Charles Shaw was one of the top 20 brands in the U.S.) being sold so cheaply? As usual, consumers collectively created several inventive urban legend-like explanations for this seemingly inexplicable phenomenon: Security regulations enacted after the September 11 terrorist attacks prohibited the carrying or use of corkscrews on commercial flights, so several airlines dumped their large stocks of wine on the market, thereby depressing prices. Financially-distressed United Airlines attempted to raise some quick cash by selling its food service stocks, including an ample supply of Charles Shaw wine. Charles Shaw himself, engaged in a bitter divorce struggle, attempted to reduce the value of his winery's assets by flooding the market with cheap wine. Also as usual, the real explanation why many wine brands (not just Charles Shaw) could be had so cheaply at the time (2001) was a mundane one: the market was experiencing a wine glut. The wine boom of the 1990s led vineyards to increase production, but a downturn in the U.S. economy and the effects of September 11 resulted in a greatly lessened demand (particularly in the restaurant industry), creating such an oversupply that many wines were selling for less than the cost of production. Some vintners in northern California were even allowing their grapes to wither on the vine because the cost of picking them exceeded their market value. The Charles Shaw label (known in local slang as "Two-Buck Chuck") was the focus of those "cheap wine" rumors because it bore a prestigious Napa label, even though it sold for less than $2 per bottle. The catch was that it's made with cheaper grapes from California's Central Valley rather than more desirable grapes from the Napa Valley, but because the label's parent company does own a winery and bottling facility in Napa, it is allowed to put "Napa" on the Charles Shaw label (which only indicates that the wine is "bottled and cellared" in Napa) even if the grapes used in the wine actually come from some other part of California: Napa Valley [W]ine industry experts say that despite the classy Napa label, there probably isn't a hint of those pricey grapes in a bottle of Charles Shaw Merlot, Chardonnay or Cabernet Sauvignon. Even with the depressed market, grapes from Napa sell for around $2,000 a ton, said Brian Sudano of Beverage Marketing Corp. To make money on a $2 bottle, he added, a vintner would have to buy grapes for around $200 a ton the price of less desirable Central Valley grapes. This summer the market price for those grapes hit a low of $60 a ton. Swimming in excess wine, [Bronco Wine Co. head] Franzia revived the Charles Shaw label, believing it would be more cost-effective to dump his wine on the consumer market than to pour it on the ground. Taking advantage of the depressed wine grape market, he also bought up excess stock from other Central Valley vintners, according to several wine industry sources. "Franzia was able to take advantage of distress sales by other vineyards, said [wine consultant Jon] Fredrikson. "And he's got the high-speed production lines to do it and still make money." The Bronco Wine Co. produces a variety of low-cost wines, and its president, Fred Franzia, has earned the enmity of plenty of other Wine Country citizens: Franzia was forced to step down as Bronco's president for five years after Bronco was fined $3 million in 1993 for misidentifying grape varietals on its labels, and other Napa vintners have long been disputing Bronco's use of "Napa" in the names of wines, such as their "Napa Ridge" variety, made from grapes grown elsewhere (but so far the courts have sided with Bronco). That enmity was famously (albeit accurately) expressed in 2011 by Chris Knox, a self-described vintner who once caustically asserted on Quora, in a since deleted response to an inquiry about why Trader Joe's wine (and the Charles Shaw blend in particular) was sold so cheaply, that those wines were inexpensive to buy because they were ... well, made cheaply: asserted The basic gist of it all is that Two Buck Chuck is owned by Bronco Wines, which is owned by Fred Franzia, a trash-mouthed, unapologetic downright crude and shrewd business man who sees it as his mission to pretty much remove any shred of pretentiousness (and dare I say integrity and quality along with it) from the wine world. He started by buying the then failing Charles Shaw label years ago along with massive amounts of bulk wine in the 90's for pennies on the dollar and a staggering 35,000 acres of land in the very cheap San Joaquin Valley which he then planted to vines. That gives his Bronco Wines the prestige of holding the most acreage of vines of any American winery, even surpassing Mondavi and Gallo. A few things to keep in mind about his vineyards: one is that they are located in what is known as the Central Valley in the California wine world which is notoriously flat and quite hot producing massive yields of overripe grapes. The other thing is that Fred Franzia is no dummy he planted those vineyards in such a way as the rows run north-south, giving the vines maximum sun exposure and he made the rows as long as he possibly could, minimizing the number of turns his tractors would need to make. And third, these aren't hand-picked vineyards ... they are all machine harvested. And that means these large tractors with huge claws go down the rows of vineyards grabbing the grapes and depositing them in its huge receptacle. And it not only grabs ripe grapes, but unripe and down right rotten ones as well and throws them all together. Add to that leaves, stems and any rodents, birds, or insects that may have made those vines their home they all get thrown into the bin as well. And guess what? You think there's going to be any sorting when that truck arrives at the winery (or should I say processing facility)? Nope. Everything, and I do mean everything (including all those unripe grapes, rotten grapes, leaves, stems, birds, rodents, and insects) gets tossed into the crusher and transferred to large tanks to ferment. So think about all the animal blood and parts that may have made their way into your wine next time you crack open that bottle of Two Buck Chuck! Hardly even seems worth the $2 does it? If you were to taste that wine right after it was made, I guarantee you it would be undrinkable. They will then manipulate the finished wine in whatever way necessary, including adding sugar or unfermented grape juice if needed to make the wine palatable. And then the wine goes into bottling, packaging and shipping facilities, all of which Fred Franzia owns himself. They then get put on trucks (also owned by Fred Franzia) and shipped to Trader Joe's. The only part of the process Fred doesn't own is Trader Joe's itself and I'm sure if he got his way, he'd include that in his empire as well. So the summary is this to make $2 wine one must compromise all sense of integrity and quality, own tens of thousands of acres of vineyards in the worst possible wine region possible where land is incredibly cheap and yields are exceptionally high, use machines to execute every part of a homogenized system that substitutes manipulation for hand crafted quality, and own every step of the winemaking process including bottling, packaging and distribution, all while giving the finger to the entire wine industry and plowing down anyone who gets in your way. According to a CNBC report on the controversy engendered when Knox's comments were widely republished three years later: Franzia does use mechanized harvesting, as do an increasing number of grape growers. He insists the machines shake loose everything but the grapes, and there are other methods along the way to filter out leaves, twigs and animal residue. "We're in the grape-picking business," he said. "We're looking for quality wines and quality grapes. We're not looking for animals." Some animal matter does end up in winemaking, as it does in almost all agricultural products. "If you worry about things like that, you shouldn't eat anything, you shouldn't drink anything," Franzia said. "When the wine's fermenting, they're going to eliminate anything that's possibly there." But what about this mysterious "Charles Shaw"? Was he a real person? Indeed he was. Shaw, a Stanford Business School graduate, bought a Napa winery with his wife, Lucy, in 1974 and began to produce Charles Shaw Beaujolais. However, after the Shaws divorced in 1991, they sold the winery. The Charles Shaw label possessed a good reputation, though, and Bronco Wine Co., a mass-market wine conglomerate located in the Central Valley's Stanislaus County, bought it up and revived it in 2002 for sales of a line of inexpensive wines through the Trader Joe's chain of grocery stores. Trader Joe's Additional information: Charles Shaw (Interbrand) Last updated: 15 August 2014 Brown, Corie. "Hard Times at the Winery? Not for Everyone." Los Angeles Times. 26 February 2003 (p. F1). Emert, Carol. "Wine Drinkers Gaga Over 'Two-Buck Chuck'." San Francisco Chronicle. 26 December 2002. Moran, Tim. "$1.99 Wine Is Hottest Deal in Dodge." The Modesto Bee. 25 December 2002. Wells, Jane. "The Really Big Ruckus Over 'Two Buck Chuck.'" CNBC. 14 August 2014.

True

The Charles Shaw label (known in local slang as "Two-Buck Chuck") was the focus of those "cheap wine" rumors because it bore a prestigious Napa label, even though it sold for less than $2 per bottle. The catch was that it's made with cheaper grapes from California's Central Valley rather than more desirable grapes from the Napa Valley, but because the label's parent company does own a winery and bottling facility in Napa, it is allowed to put "Napa" on the Charles Shaw label (which only indicates that the wine is "bottled and cellared" in Napa) even if the grapes used in the wine actually come from some other part of California:That enmity was famously (albeit accurately) expressed in 2011 by Chris Knox, a self-described vintner who once caustically asserted on Quora, in a since deleted response to an inquiry about why Trader Joe's wine (and the Charles Shaw blend in particular) was sold so cheaply, that those wines were inexpensive to buy because they were ... well, made cheaply:Indeed he was. Shaw, a Stanford Business School graduate, bought a Napa winery with his wife, Lucy, in 1974 and began to produce Charles Shaw Beaujolais. However, after the Shaws divorced in 1991, they sold the winery. The Charles Shaw label possessed a good reputation, though, and Bronco Wine Co., a mass-market wine conglomerate located in the Central Valley's Stanislaus County, bought it up and revived it in 2002 for sales of a line of inexpensive wines through the Trader Joe's chain of grocery stores. Charles Shaw (Interbrand)

FMD_train_570

I delivered to you a budget that ... cuts taxes by $2 billion.

03/08/2011

Gov. Rick Scott asked Florida legislators to pass his proposed budget during his first State of the State speech on March 8, 2011. It's a budget that cuts spending to balance the budget as required by the state Constitution. And,it cuts taxes. I delivered to you a budget that ... cuts taxes by $2 billion, Scott told legislators on the first day of its 60-day legislative session. Let's walk through the math of his budget. Scott proposed a two-year budget that cuts a host of taxes and fees.Here's a breakdown from the governor's office. Scott's budget proposal would: Reduce the corporate income taxfrom 5.5 percent to 3 percent in 2011-12 and from 3 percent to 2.5 percent in 2012-13. The rate cut will save those who pay the tax $459 million this year and a little more than $1 billion in 2012-13;Reduce the required local effort, a property tax to fund schools, saving taxpayers around $600 million in 2011-12. The tax cut would carry forward in 2012-13;Reduce the property tax collected by state water management districts25 percent for two years, saving taxpayers $180 million annually; Reduce unemployment compensation taxes by shortening how long Floridians can collect benefits and making it more difficult for them to be eligible. Scott's office says that will save $630.8 million over two years; Roll back 2009 Legislature-approved fee increases for driver licenses, vehicle registrations and other motor vehicle fees. Scott says the rollback would save drivers $492 million over two years; And repeal or alter other small taxes on ammonia, pesticides, fertilizer, solvents, dry cleaning, tires and lead acid batteries, among other things. The changes would save $77 million over two years, Scott's office says.Taken together, that is a total of $1.7 billion in tax and fee cuts in 2011-12 -- slightly below the figure he claimed in his speech. (Scott's office, by the way, claims a total of $4.1 billion over two years, but that number is deceivingbecause most cuts in the second year of Scott's budget aren'tadditionalcuts; they are just the same cuts rolled over.) Scott said his budget cuts taxes by $2 billion. But really, the number is about 15 percent high, based on the estimates of his own budget office. We rate this claim Mostly True.

True

Let's walk through the math of his budget. Scott proposed a two-year budget that cuts a host of taxes and fees.Here's a breakdown from the governor's office. Scott's budget proposal would:Reduce the corporate income taxfrom 5.5 percent to 3 percent in 2011-12 and from 3 percent to 2.5 percent in 2012-13. The rate cut will save those who pay the tax $459 million this year and a little more than $1 billion in 2012-13;Reduce the required local effort, a property tax to fund schools, saving taxpayers around $600 million in 2011-12. The tax cut would carry forward in 2012-13;Reduce the property tax collected by state water management districts25 percent for two years, saving taxpayers $180 million annually; Reduce unemployment compensation taxes by shortening how long Floridians can collect benefits and making it more difficult for them to be eligible. Scott's office says that will save $630.8 million over two years; Roll back 2009 Legislature-approved fee increases for driver licenses, vehicle registrations and other motor vehicle fees. Scott says the rollback would save drivers $492 million over two years; And repeal or alter other small taxes on ammonia, pesticides, fertilizer, solvents, dry cleaning, tires and lead acid batteries, among other things. The changes would save $77 million over two years, Scott's office says.Taken together, that is a total of $1.7 billion in tax and fee cuts in 2011-12 -- slightly below the figure he claimed in his speech. (Scott's office, by the way, claims a total of $4.1 billion over two years, but that number is deceivingbecause most cuts in the second year of Scott's budget aren'tadditionalcuts; they are just the same cuts rolled over.)

FMD_train_708

Is Carrier owned by Donald Trump or does he own its stock?

12/06/2016

A negotiation on 30 November 2016 between Donald Trump and the company Carrier aimed to keep approximately 1,000 jobs in the United States. This was soon followed by claims that he either owned or was a shareholder in the company or its parent, United Technologies. As part of its #TrumpLeaks program, the Democratic Coalition Against Trump uncovered the financial disclosures Trump filed in May 2016, which show he owns stock in UT. According to the 104-page financial disclosure form that all candidates running for President are required to complete, Trump made between $2,501 and $5,000 in interest from an investment in United Technologies. The entry in the financial disclosure can be found on page 45 under Part 6. The full financial disclosure is available online. The material quoted above cited the Democratic Coalition Against Trump, which claimed to be pursuing legal action against Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) head James Comey. That group was involved in several questionable efforts against Trump and appeared to exist solely to mount legal and media-based challenges against him. Claims that Trump owned Carrier or stock in United Technologies closely mirrored similar rumors that the President-elect was vested in the controversial Dakota Access Pipeline. Although the Wall Street Journal reported that Trump had at one point owned Carrier or United Technologies stock in 2014 or 2015, his 2016 Personal Financial Disclosure (PFD) did not reflect any such investment. Trump's spokeswoman, Hope Hicks, stated that there was a "goal of the immediate transfer of management of The Trump Organization and its portfolio of businesses to Donald Jr., Ivanka, and Eric Trump, as well as a team of highly skilled executives." Trump's transition team vowed that any holdings representing potential conflicts of interest would be transferred before his January 2017 inauguration. In early December 2016, additional details about the Carrier deal emerged, including the total number of jobs preserved in the negotiation and a portion slated for outsourcing by the end of 2017.

False

A 30 November 2016 negotiation between Donald Trump and the company Carrier in order to keep some 1,000 jobs in the United States was soon followed by claims that he either owned (or was a shareholder in) the company or parent United Technologies:The material quoted above cited the Democratic Coalition Against Trump, which claimed to be pursuing legal action against Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) head James Comey. That group was involved in several questionable efforts against Trump, and appeared to exist solely to mount legal and media-based challenges against him.Claims that Trump owned Carrier or stock in United Technologies closely mirrored similar rumors the President-elect was similarly vested in the controversial Dakota Access Pipeline. Although the Wall Street Journal reported that Trump had at one point owned Carrier or United Technologies stock in 2014 or 2015, his 2016 Personal Financial Disclosure [PFD] did not reflect any such investment:Trump's spokeswoman Hope Hicks said that a "goal of the immediate transfer of management of The Trump Organization and its portfolio of businesses to Donald Jr., Ivanka and Eric Trump as well as a team of highly skilled executives." Trump's transition team vowed that any holdings that represented potential conflicts of interest would be transferred before his January 2017 inauguration. In early December 2016 additional details about the Carrier deal emerged, including the total number of jobs preserved in the negotiation as well as a portion slated for outsourcing by the end of 2017.

FMD_train_1312

Can You Text to 83361 to Receive a Free Target Gift Card?

05/28/2018

In May 2018, social media users began reporting a new Target gift card scam in the form of a viral message that typically read something along the lines of "Text TARGET to 83361 and claim a free Target gift card": On Facebook, these messages follow a formula: a greeting followed by the text scam and a smiling emoji. This suggests the involvement of bots, and that some users' Facebook accounts may have compromised. At least one person whose account posted a similar gift card scam subsequently said that the message was posted without their knowledge to every Facebook group of which they were a member: As noted by sites such as IDTheftInfo.org, such messages are a form of "smishing" scam: IDTheftInfo.org This type of scam is known as smishing, a type of phishing scam where the scammer sends you a text message, instead of an e-mail. If you click on the link in the text message, youll be required to provide personal information such as your credit card number or social security number before you can claim any gift card. If the link provided in any text (or e-mail) message doesnt lead you directly to a page on the companys main website, its more likely than not that the offer is a scam. The most popular website being used in this particular smishing scam, for example, is www.walmartgift.mobi (rather than the stores actual site, which is www.walmartstores.com). Walmart does give away legitimate gift cards to the winners of drawings for receipt surveys, and these drawings take place four times per year. However, the winners of these gift cards are always notified by certified mail, not via email or text message. Almost all the Facebook posts we found came with photographs of food to give a false impression that the "gift card" has allowed its recipients to splash out on a bounty of Target products. In reality, we were able to confirm that many of these images are taken from other sources some from years ago and used to add credibility to the scam. posts many of these images taken from other sources This particular scam is similar to previous insidious hoaxes relating to free gift cards from Walmart and other retailers. On its web site, Walmart offered this advice to anyone who receives suspicious or unsolicited communications: previous advice Don't respond or reply to an email, phone call, or text message that: A spokesperson for Walmart confirmed by telephone that the previous similar "83361" gift card offer was a scam and "not legitimate."

False

As noted by sites such as IDTheftInfo.org, such messages are a form of "smishing" scam:Almost all the Facebook posts we found came with photographs of food to give a false impression that the "gift card" has allowed its recipients to splash out on a bounty of Target products. In reality, we were able to confirm that many of these images are taken from other sources some from years ago and used to add credibility to the scam. This particular scam is similar to previous insidious hoaxes relating to free gift cards from Walmart and other retailers. On its web site, Walmart offered this advice to anyone who receives suspicious or unsolicited communications:

FMD_train_1909

The Senate bill hands enormous tax cuts to the rich and to the drug and insurance industries, paid for by cutting health care for everybody else.

06/26/2017

Former President Barack Obama has maintained a low profile since leaving the White House, but recently he took to Facebook to blast a Senate health care bill that threatens to dismantle much of the Affordable Care Act, his signature legislative achievement. The Senate bill hands enormous tax cuts to the rich and to the drug and insurance industries, paid for by cutting health care for everybody else, Obama wrote in a Facebookpost. We decided to look into the former presidents claim about the budgetary effects of the Senate Republican plan that repeals or reworks much of the ACA, also known as Obamacare. Obama is right that the Senate bill contains a tax cut for wealthy Americans and medical-related businesses. The Congressional Budget Office has yet to put a number on the Senate bills tax cut. But the amount will likely be in the same ballpark as its scoring of the House bill, which cut taxes by about $1 trillion over 10 years, with high-income households and the health care industry gaining most of those benefits, according to the Tax Policy Center. The Senate bill repeals Affordable Care Act taxes that levy a 3.8 percent fee on investment income, as well as a tax on individuals making $200,000 or more ($250,000 for couples). The bill also eliminates ACA taxes that target health insurers, and makers of prescription drugs and medical devices. We should also note that middle- and lower-income consumers would likely see benefits from tax cuts in the form of lower prices and reduced fees on health savings accounts, as we pointed out inan earlier check of a House version of the bill. Obama is correct that tax cuts would be offset by cutting spending on health care. But its a stretch to sayeverybodyshealth care would suffer, when whats on the chopping block is federal funding for lower-income Americans. In the individual market, the Senate bill changes the formula for calculating how much help the federal government gives lower-income Americans to buy insurance. Compared with the Obamacare formula, the Senate GOP version would amount to a15 percent across-the-board cutin premium subsidies, andresult inlow-income people paying higher premiums for bigger deductibles, according to Larry Levitt, senior vice president of the Kaiser Family Foundation, a nonpartisan health care think tank. Starting in 2020, the Senate bill also repeals Obamacares cost-sharing subsidies that help lower-income Americans defray the cost of deductibles and out-of-pocket expenses. But the biggest cut in federal spending comes out of Medicaid, by changing the share carried by the federal government, relative to states. The Senate bill converts federal Medicaid funding to a per capita cap starting in 2020, placing a ceiling on the amount of funding a state gets per enrollee. Alternatively, states could opt for a block grant, a fixed amount of federal funds. Under either approach, the federal government would provide less to states than under Obamacare. Separately, starting in 2021, the Senate bill begins a three-year phase out of enhanced funding given to the 31 states (plus Washington, D.C.) that expanded Medicaid under Obamacare. As we noted in aprevious check of the House bill, reducing this funding would likely cause states to end expansion. This graphic from the liberal Center on Budget and Policy Priorities is a side-by-side illustration of Obamas claim that Republicans are rewarding wealthy Americans through a health care cut. The yellow bar shows $33 billion going to the top 400 highest-income households as a result of repealing the Obamacare tax cuts. The red bar shows how removing $33 billion in revenue translates to cutting off funding for Medicaid expansion population of four statesAlaska, Arkansas, West Virginia and Nevada. (Note: This graphic is based on the CBOs earlier score of the House version, which will likely differ from its score of the Senate). Obama said that the Senate bill hands enormous tax cuts to the rich and to the drug and insurance industries, paid for by cutting health care for everybody else. The Senate bill does give a tax cut to wealthy Americans and medical-related industry. Assuming a budget analysis of the Senate bill is similar to that of the House version, the tax cut will be to the tune of $1 trillion. Its a bit hyperbolic to say everybodys health care would be cut to finance the tax cut; its mostly lower-income people who lose out as a direct result of the bill. Hes right that the Senate bill would deliver a tax cut as it reduces the amount of federal funding lower-income Americans would get to help buy insurance. The bill would also repeal funding to defray deductibles and out-of-pocket costs for those eligible. It also lessens the share of Medicaid funding carried by the federal government, relative to states. We rate Obamas statement Mostly True.

True

The Senate bill hands enormous tax cuts to the rich and to the drug and insurance industries, paid for by cutting health care for everybody else, Obama wrote in a Facebookpost.We should also note that middle- and lower-income consumers would likely see benefits from tax cuts in the form of lower prices and reduced fees on health savings accounts, as we pointed out inan earlier check of a House version of the bill.Compared with the Obamacare formula, the Senate GOP version would amount to a15 percent across-the-board cutin premium subsidies, andresult inlow-income people paying higher premiums for bigger deductibles, according to Larry Levitt, senior vice president of the Kaiser Family Foundation, a nonpartisan health care think tank.Separately, starting in 2021, the Senate bill begins a three-year phase out of enhanced funding given to the 31 states (plus Washington, D.C.) that expanded Medicaid under Obamacare. As we noted in aprevious check of the House bill, reducing this funding would likely cause states to end expansion.

FMD_train_1671

Is it Impossible to Cancel Recurring Donations to the Trump Campaign?

08/08/2016

On 3 August 2016, CNN reporter Jeremy Diamond shared a screenshot via Twitter of an e-mail sent by a frustrated former Trump supporter, claiming that it was impossible for backers to cancel recurring donations to the Trump campaign: Jeremy Diamond INBOX: Help, I set up a recurring contribution to Trump's campaign & want to cancel it: (cc: @realDonaldTrump) pic.twitter.com/TFOHhdZDlJ @realDonaldTrump pic.twitter.com/TFOHhdZDlJ Jeremy Diamond (@JDiamond1) August 4, 2016 August 4, 2016 Diamond's tweet sparked a number of articles and blog posts stating it was "impossible" to cancel recurring Trump campaign donations, based solely or primarily on the anecdotal, secondhand claim made in that tweet. Among the comments prompted by original tweet sent by Diamond were those left by other purported donors asserting that the claim wasn't exactly accurate: @JDiamond1 @realDonaldTrump Spreading bogus info. When you contribute, you get receipt with an email + tel number to call if you need help. @JDiamond1 @realDonaldTrump M G (@MadaGasp) August 4, 2016 August 4, 2016 @JDiamond1 @realDonaldTrump now please stop spreading false information, its all in the email you receive when you contribute @JDiamond1 @realDonaldTrump Brian (@Brian_with_a_B) August 6, 2016 August 6, 2016 A large number of commenters expressed skepticism about the report, given that the claim was anonymously sourced from a single individual: @JDiamond1 @realDonaldTrump Cheap shot: we all know you can contact your bank or other form of payment you use, to cancel right away. @JDiamond1 @realDonaldTrump Viktor Staudt (@ViktorStaudt) August 4, 2016 August 4, 2016 @JDiamond1 @realDonaldTrump so exactly who was this unknown mystery person that went straight to a journalist? pic.twitter.com/R4h78829CP @JDiamond1 @realDonaldTrump pic.twitter.com/R4h78829CP Patti Hannah (@b6sangel) August 7, 2016 August 7, 2016 We were unable to turn up any reports about the issue that antedated Diamond's tweet. If any Trump donors had previously encountered difficulties canceling their recurring donations, they didn't seem to chatter very much about it on social media prior to 3 August 2016 (and ceasing to support Trump as a candidate is only one reason someone might seek to cancel a recurring payment). Diamond appeared to pass the baton on the story overall, updating followers later with a link to an article published by Mic: The folks at @mic took this ball and ran with it. Here's what they found: https://t.co/eTODFa4f3O https://t.co/cktSrf88Z2 @mic https://t.co/eTODFa4f3O https://t.co/cktSrf88Z2 Jeremy Diamond (@JDiamond1) August 5, 2016 August 5, 2016 Diamond did not provide any further information about the claim, the claimant, or how he verified it before sharing it to Twitter. But Mic attempted to reproduce the problem on 4 August 2016 and gathered more information on the difficulty level of canceling recurring Trump donations. In a series of screenshots the site illustrated their findings, stating it was not possible to delete a stored credit card without replacing it with a separate valid credit card: After investigating, Mic can confirm that there is no easy option to stop recurring donations on Trump's donation site: We set up a recurring donation of $1 and found no button or other obvious way to cancel payments or remove a credit card from the system either on the homepage, the "update card" page, or in your contribution confirmation email. Once you're registered, if you try to change your payment information on Trump's site, you will see no option to remove your credit card only "update" it. Then, when you click on "update card," you see a page that allows you to alter your payment information but you cannot completely delete your credit card. You are forced to replace it with another valid card: Invalid numbers are rejected. One responder to the original tweet then objected to that claim, stating it was impossible to set up a recurring $1 donation: .@JDiamond1 You can't set up a $1.00 recurring amt.What else about this story is BS?@realDonaldTrump pic.twitter.com/kB4TalWOSE @JDiamond1 @realDonaldTrump pic.twitter.com/kB4TalWOSE ValerieNoFux (@OPFergVal) August 7, 2016 August 7, 2016 However, it appears that it is possible to enter any amount as a recurring donation: enter Mic confirmed that if a putative donor set up an account, then it would be possible for that person to cancel a recurring donation made via Trump's web site: It turns out that there is a way to delete your card from the Trump campaign's system, but it seems you must have first registered an account and created a password: If you did not do so, there is no clear way to cancel your payment. Assuming you did create an account and have logged in, to stop your payment you must click the small gray question mark icon in the upper right corner of the donations page. Then you will see [a separate] screen. In order to delete your card, you must click "manage." Then will you be redirected to the website of the Trump campaign's vendor. There you must click "recurring plans," and only then can you cancel your monthly payment; notably, even after you cancel, there is still no obvious way to delete your card number without replacing it with another valid number. Per Mic's screenshots, that vendor was Revv, and we sent an e-mail inquiry to them to clarify whether it was possible to cancel the recurring payments some other way. Revv However, even if the web site interface didn't allow for such a cancellation, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) notes that the the Electronic Fund Transfer Act (EFTA) provides for consumers to cancel unwanted recurring payments: notes If you have regular, automatic deductions from your checking account (to pay for expenses such as insurance premiums or utility bills), the EFTA allows you to stop those payments. First, notify the vendor. Next, tell your bank about your request at least three business days before the money is scheduled to be transferred. Your notice to the bank may be oral, but the institution may require you to provide a written follow-up within 14 days to ensure that no additional payments are made. If you fail to provide a written follow-up, the bank is no longer responsible for stopping future payments. Stopping an automatic, recurring payment on a credit card is different. Start by putting in your request with the vendor. But if the vendor continues to charge your credit card, contact your card issuer. You'll have 60 days to dispute the charge, starting when the card issuer sends you the statement with the charges. While it appears to be atypically difficult to cancel a recurring donation to the Trump campaign, it is certainly not impossible, as individuals who create an account can do so via the web interface. Overall, it seemed the problem related more to the interface of a third-party vendor (Revv) to whom the Trump campaign had outsourced donations and not to the campaign itself. Dennin, James. "Donald Trump's Campaign Website Won't Let Some Cancel Recurring Donations." Mic. 4 August 2016.

NEI

On 3 August 2016, CNN reporter Jeremy Diamond shared a screenshot via Twitter of an e-mail sent by a frustrated former Trump supporter, claiming that it was impossible for backers to cancel recurring donations to the Trump campaign:INBOX: Help, I set up a recurring contribution to Trump's campaign & want to cancel it: (cc: @realDonaldTrump) pic.twitter.com/TFOHhdZDlJ Jeremy Diamond (@JDiamond1) August 4, 2016@JDiamond1 @realDonaldTrump Spreading bogus info. When you contribute, you get receipt with an email + tel number to call if you need help. M G (@MadaGasp) August 4, 2016@JDiamond1 @realDonaldTrump now please stop spreading false information, its all in the email you receive when you contribute Brian (@Brian_with_a_B) August 6, 2016@JDiamond1 @realDonaldTrump Cheap shot: we all know you can contact your bank or other form of payment you use, to cancel right away. Viktor Staudt (@ViktorStaudt) August 4, 2016@JDiamond1 @realDonaldTrump so exactly who was this unknown mystery person that went straight to a journalist? pic.twitter.com/R4h78829CP Patti Hannah (@b6sangel) August 7, 2016The folks at @mic took this ball and ran with it. Here's what they found: https://t.co/eTODFa4f3O https://t.co/cktSrf88Z2 Jeremy Diamond (@JDiamond1) August 5, 2016.@JDiamond1 You can't set up a $1.00 recurring amt.What else about this story is BS?@realDonaldTrump pic.twitter.com/kB4TalWOSE ValerieNoFux (@OPFergVal) August 7, 2016However, it appears that it is possible to enter any amount as a recurring donation:Per Mic's screenshots, that vendor was Revv, and we sent an e-mail inquiry to them to clarify whether it was possible to cancel the recurring payments some other way. However, even if the web site interface didn't allow for such a cancellation, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) notes that the the Electronic Fund Transfer Act (EFTA) provides for consumers to cancel unwanted recurring payments:

FMD_train_1176

The propagation of malware is associated with the 'Be Like Bill' phenomena.

01/28/2016

In January 2016, a Facebook trend most commonly referenced as "Be Like Bill" swept the social network. During that time, users initially posted comics in which a character named "Bill" served as a reinforcer of social media etiquette, before "Be Like Bill" generators enabled users to create personalized versions of the meme. As is often the case with items like "Be Like Bill" that appear seemingly from nowhere and go Facebook-wide, it wasn't long before people became suspicious of this Bill character and his purpose on their News Feeds. Soon after Bill became the meme of the day, a backlash against it began: one that first simply decried the "scolding" nature of the trend, then followed up with rumors that the ubiquitous comic was a vector for malware, information theft, or other undesirable outcomes. Scolding Bill proved so popular and omnipresent that multiple local news outlets carried reports about the potential dangers of creating a "Be Like Bill" meme. Missouri TV station KFVS, Kansas City station KCTV, and Washington, D.C., station WTTG generated concern with coverage about the specific comic, typically lumping it into the general category of "clickbait" and associating it with the risks of all unvetted apps. KFVS, KCTV, and WTTG noted that it's known as "clickbait," and if users haven't read the terms and conditions on the creator's website, the details may shock them. The company originally stated in its privacy terms, "You will allow us to use and edit your content with our service permanently, with no limit and no recovery." KFVS-TV also mentioned that, in some cases, content can contain viruses that can damage computers, misuse Facebook profiles in ways users might not know, or even attempt to steal credit card or bank account numbers. As the above-quoted material stated, Facebook has indeed presented a handy way for bad actors to engage in all sorts of unpleasant activities using compelling content. However, the "in some cases" outcomes described apply to malicious apps in general and not specifically to any known vulnerabilities linked to the "Be Like Bill" meme. Many articles cited existing Better Business Bureau warnings about rogue apps that predated "Be Like Bill" and referenced "clickbait," but the term was applied exceptionally broadly and not specifically to malware. In short, whether an item is clickbait itself has no bearing on its potential to cause harm to computers or accounts, and plenty of clickbait exists solely to drive traffic to various websites. Of additional interest was a widely reproduced excerpt from the Terms of Service of publisher Blobla (which offered a mechanism for customizing "Be Like Bob" memes) that purportedly stated end users agreed to "allow [Blobla] to use and edit your content with our service permanently, with no limit and no recovery." We were unable to verify that such language ever appeared in the agreement in question, and no such wording was in their agreement as of January 27, 2016. On that date, Chicago station WMAQ published an article reporting that the Better Business Bureau (BBB) didn't suggest "Be Like Bill" posed any specific threat to social media users and added that the President and CEO of the Better Business Bureau of Chicago and Northern Illinois, Steve Bernas, had confirmed only that the BBB was looking into the meme (and keeping an eye out for impostors). According to the outlet, Blobla clarified that the generator didn't require Facebook authorizations of the sort generally associated with malware or rogue apps. However, the Better Business Bureau has not yet definitively ruled whether the generated memes pose a risk to users or their computers. The sensation's creator, Bloba, on the other hand, says they don't collect any data from users and their terms are the same as any others seen on Facebook. "First, our game Be Like Bill doesn't require users to authorize a Facebook app," a spokesperson for Bloba wrote in response. "Of course, if users want to share the results on Facebook, they must be logged in. However, we use the Facebook share dialog for users to share their results. It's very common... This doesn't allow us to collect any data from users' Facebook accounts." Blobla's creators also explained that the now-elided, widely cited verbiage ("permanently, no limit and no recovery") was poorly composed and pertained to unrelated functions that might have ended up on their website. "Second, we do not store any information about users on our servers, as stated in our Terms of Service," Bloba continued. "Third, the terms about our right to users' content pertain to posts on our website (a post may be a game like Be Like Bill, or a quiz, or a video...). Because our website has a function for normal users to create a post in other languages, we have removed that term to avoid misunderstanding." On January 29, 2016, BBB communications director Katherine Hutt clarified the bureau's stance on "Be Like Bill," due to the multiple news reports conflating their earlier "clickbait" warnings with that particular meme and generator: "We don't issue warnings about a specific company without investigating first." Finally, outlets devoted to more detailed reporting on online security (such as Sophos' Naked Security blog) haven't issued any warnings about "Be Like Bill" or the popular comic generator. No widespread reports of adverse outcomes have substantiated news affiliate speculation, and the bulk of "Be Like Bill"-themed reports focused on the general ability for malware to spread through apps, not on any reports definitively (or anecdotally) related to that meme specifically. While users might tire of seeing Bill across their feeds, he doesn't pose a threat beyond annoyance-free browsing.

False

As is often the case with items like "Be Like Bill" that appear seemingly from the ether and go Facebook-wide, it wasn't long before folks became suspicious of this Bill character and his purpose on their News Feeds. Soonafter Bill became the meme of the day, a backlash against the meme was started: one that first simply decried the "scolding" nature of the trend, then followed up with rumors that the ubiquitous comic was a vector for malware, information theft, or other undesirable outcomes:Bill proved so popular and omnipresent that multiple local news outlets carried reports about the potential dangers of creating a "Be Like Bill" meme. Missouri TV station KFVS, Kansas City station KCTV (clip below), and Washington, D.C., station WTTGran some concern-generatingcoverage about the specific comic, typically lumping it into the general category of "clickbait" and associating it with the risk of all unvetted apps:KCTV5Many articles cited extantBetter Business Bureau warnings about rogue apps that antedated "Be Like Bill" and referenced "clickbait," but the term was applied exceptionally broadly and not specifically to malware. In short, whether an item is clickbait itself has no bearing on its potential to cause harm to computers or accounts, and plenty of clickbait exists just to drive traffic to various web sites.Of additional interest (in bold) was a widely-reproduced excerpt from the Terms of Service of publisher Blobla's (who offered a mechanism for customizing "Be Like Bob" memes) that purportedly stated end users agreed to "allow [Blobla] to use, edit your content with our service permanently, no limit and no recover." We were unable to verify such language ever appeared in the agreement in question, and no such wording was in the their agreement as of 27 January 2016.On 27 January 2016, Chicago station WMAQ published an article which reported that the Better Business Bureau (BBB) didn't suggest "Be Like Bill" posed any specific threat at all to social media users and added that the President and CEO of the Better Business Bureau of Chicago and Northern Illinois Steve Bernas had confirmed only that the BBB was looking into the meme (and keeping an eye out for impostors).Finally, outlets devoted to more detailed reporting on online security (such as Sophos' Naked Security blog) haven't issued any warnings about "Be Like Bill" or the popular comic generator. No widespread reports of adverse outcomes have substantiated news affiliate speculation, and the bulk of "Be Like Bill"-themed reports focused on the general ability for malware to spread through apps, not any reports definitively (or anecdotally) related to that meme specifically. While users might tire of seeing Bill across their feeds, he doesn't pose a threat to anything more than annoyance-free browsing.

FMD_train_234

Extending current tax rates would average more than $100,000 a year to millionaires and even billionaires.

09/13/2010

Tax cuts passed under the Bush administration have been in place for close to ten years, but they will expire at the end of 2010 if Congress doesn't take action. Add in a weak economy, large government deficits, and an upcoming election, and you've got one of the most pressing policy issues of the year. President Barack Obama's administration wants to see the tax cuts made permanent for individuals who make less than $200,000 a year and couples who make less than $250,000 a year. Tax rates would increase for people who earn more than that. Austan Goolsbee defended that position on This Week with Christiane Amanpour. Goolsbee is one of Obama's top economic officials and was recently selected to chair the Council of Economic Advisers, which counsels the president on economic policy. "Obama has been quite clear," Goolsbee said, "that borrowing $700 billion to extend tax cuts that average more than $100,000 a year to millionaires and even billionaires is the least effective bang for the buck we have." We were interested in that $100,000 number—extending the expiring tax cuts would average more than $100,000 a year for millionaires and even billionaires. The White House pointed us to data from the Ways and Means Committee, the committee in the U.S. House of Representatives charged with writing tax legislation. Democrats on the committee asked the Joint Committee on Taxation for an analysis of extending the expiring tax cuts. The Joint Committee on Taxation, or JCT, is a nonpartisan committee with a professional staff of economists, attorneys, and accountants who conduct research. The JCT crunched the numbers to generate several tables estimating tax revenues if the tax cuts expire and how many taxpayers would be affected. The JCT found that for those with an income of $1 million or more, extending the Bush tax cuts would mean $32.7 billion that the government would not collect in 2011. That amount would apply to 315,000 tax filers. Divide the foregone tax revenues by the number of filers, and you get $103,809, or just over $100,000, as Goolsbee stated. We also checked with the Tax Policy Center, an independent, nonpartisan think tank that generates economic projections similar to those of the JCT. The Tax Policy Center found that the average tax increase for millionaires and above would be $128,832. That's a bit higher than the JCT estimate, but for a complex economic analysis, it's fairly close. The center's numbers also support Goolsbee's statement that extending the tax cuts would average more than $100,000 a year for millionaires and even billionaires. To get the perspective of someone who opposes letting the current tax rates expire, we turned to the conservative Heritage Foundation. J.D. Foster said he didn't argue with the numbers but with Goolsbee's focus on millionaires. Many of those who make more than $200,000 or $250,000 are not millionaires, and those individuals will see a tax increase as well. "If they only intend to raise taxes on millionaires, then they need to change their proposal," Foster said. "I understand it's a convenient rhetorical ploy, but it's factually incorrect." This is a fair point: Goolsbee talked about a $700 billion cost, which is a general estimate for what extending the tax cuts for ten years would cost for all higher earners, not just millionaires. We went back to the analysis and found calculations for what the Bush tax cuts are worth for other high incomes. The JCT found that for those who make between $500,000 and $1 million, the lower rates were worth an average of $17,467 per tax filer, and for those who make between $200,000 and $500,000, the lower rates were worth $7,152 per tax filer. The Tax Policy Center's numbers were similar. So Goolsbee is correct that the expiring tax cuts are worth, on average, more than $100,000 for millionaires and billionaires. However, the proposal the president supports would let tax cuts expire for some people who make high salaries but aren't millionaires, which Goolsbee didn't mention. Therefore, we deduct a tick from the Truth-O-Meter and rate his statement as Mostly True.

True

Tax cuts passed under the Bush administration have been in place for close to ten years, but they will expire at the end of 2010 if Congress doesn't take action. Add in a weak economy, big government deficits, and an upcoming election, and you've got one of the most pressing policy issues of the year.President Barack Obama's administration wants to see the tax cuts made permanent for individuals who make less than $200,000 a year and couples who make less than $250,000 a year. Tax rates would go up for people who make more than that.Austan Goolsbee defended that position onThis Week with Christiane Amanpour. Goolsbee is one of Obama's top economic officials, and was recently selected to chair the Council of Economic Advisers, which counsels the president on economic policy.Obama has been quite clear, Goolsbee said, that borrowing $700 billion to extend tax cuts that average more than $100,000 a year to millionaires and even billionaires is the least effective bang for the buck we have.We were interested in that $100,000 number -- that extending the expiring tax cuts would average more than $100,000 a year to millionaires and even billionaires.The White House pointed us to data from the Ways and Means Committee, the committee in the U.S. House of Representatives charged with writing tax legislation. Democrats on the committee asked the Joint Committee on Taxation for an analysis of extending the expiring tax cuts. The Joint Committee on Taxation, or JCT, is a nonpartisan committee with a professional staff of economists, attorneys and accountants who conduct research.The JCT crunched the numbers to generate several tables estimating tax revenues if the tax cuts expire, and how many taxpayers would be affected. The JCT found that, for those who have income of $1 million or more, extending the Bush tax cuts would mean $32.7 billion that the government would not collect in 2011. That amount would apply to 315,000 tax filers. Divide the foregone tax revenues by the number of filers, and you get $103,809, or just over $100,000, as Goolsbee said.We also checked with the Tax Policy Center, an independent, nonpartisan think tank that generates economic projections similar to those of the JCT. The Tax Policy Center found that theaverage tax increaseto millionaires and up would be $128,832. That's a bit higher than the JCT estimate, but for a complex economic analysis, it's fairly close. The center's numbers also supports Goolsbee's statement that extending the tax cuts would average more than $100,000 a year to millionaires and even billionaires.To get the point of view of someone who opposes letting the current tax rates expire, we turned to the conservative Heritage Foundation. J.D. Foster said he didn't argue with the numbers, but with Goolsbee's focus on millionaires. Many of those who make more than $200,000 or $250,000 are not millionaires, and those people will see a tax increase as well.If they only intend to raise taxes on millionaires, then they need to change their proposal, Foster said. I understand it's a convenient rhetorical ploy, but its factually incorrect.This is a fair point: Goolsbee talked about a $700 billion cost, which is a general estimate for what extending the tax cuts for 10 years would cost for all higher earners, not just millionaires.We went back to the analysis and found calculations for what the Bush tax cuts are worth for other high incomes. The JCT found that for those who make between $500,000 and $1 million, the lower rates were worth an average $17,467 per tax filer, and for those who make between $200,000 and $500,000, the lower rates were worth $7,152 per tax filer. The Tax Policy Center's numberswere similar.So Goolsbee is correct that the expiring tax cuts are worth, on average, more than $100,000 for millionaires and billionaires. But the proposal the president supports would let tax cuts expire for some people who make high salaries but aren't millionaires, which Goolsbee didn't mention. So we deduct a tick from the Truth-O-Meter and rate his statement Mostly True.

FMD_train_511

Hillary Clinton: Supreme Court Exists to 'Change and Shape the Law'

10/10/2016

On 10 October 2016, an meme appeared featuring a photograph of Hillary Clinton accompanied by text of a purported quote from her during from the second presidential debate the night before: The quote was not uttered by Clinton during the any presidential debate. It does not appear in the transcript of the event, nor can Clinton be heard speaking this phrase during the broadcast. transcript broadcast It seems to have originated with a social media user named Rocky Raczkowski, who (according to his post) was not directly quoting Clinton, but was giving his interpretation of what he thought Clinton had said in response to a question about Supreme Court justices: Rocky Raczkowski Raczkowski's interpretation was later shared by Mike Hewitt, a politician and radio show host, who posted the message as if it were a direct quote from Clinton, while darkly hinting at a media so corrupt that they refused to cover the what she had really said: message Of course, the reason that most media sources did not report on this quote is that it is not a quote, but a highly subjective (and inaccurate) interpretation of her words. Here's Clinton's actual response to a question about how she would select a Supreme Court justice, which is nothing like the questionable paraphrase offered by Raczkowski and shared by Hewitt: QUESTION: Good evening. Perhaps the most important aspect of this election is the Supreme Court justice. What would you prioritize as the most important aspect of selecting a Supreme Court justice? RADDATZ: We begin with your two minutes, Secretary Clinton. Thank you. Well, youre right. This is one of the most important issues in this election. I want to appoint Supreme Court justices who understand the way the world really works, who have real-life experience, who have not just been in a big law firm and maybe clerked for a judge and then gotten on the bench, but, you know, maybe they tried some more cases, they actually understand what people are up against. Because I think the current court has gone in the wrong direction. And so I would want to see the Supreme Court reverse Citizens United and get dark, unaccountable money out of our politics. Donald doesnt agree with that. I would like the Supreme Court to understand that voting rights are still a big problem in many parts of our country, that we dont always do everything we can to make it possible for people of color and older people and young people to be able to exercise their franchise. I want a Supreme Court that will stick with Roe v. Wade and a womans right to choose, and I want a Supreme Court that will stick with marriage equality. Now, Donald has put forth the names of some people that he would consider. And among the ones that he has suggested are people who would reverse Roe v. Wade and reverse marriage equality. I think that would be a terrible mistake and would take us backwards. I want a Supreme Court that doesnt always side with corporate interests. I want a Supreme Court that understands because youre wealthy and you can give more money to something doesnt mean you have any more rights or should have any more rights than anybody else. So I have very clear views about what I want to see to kind of change the balance on the Supreme Court. And I regret deeply that the Senate has not done its job and they have not permitted a vote on the person that President Obama, a highly qualified person, theyve not given him a vote to be able to be have the full complement of nine Supreme Court justices. I think that was a dereliction of duty. I hope that they will see their way to doing it, but if I am so fortunate enough as to be president, I will immediately move to make sure that we fill that, we have nine justices that get to work on behalf of our people.

False

The quote was not uttered by Clinton during the any presidential debate. It does not appear in the transcript of the event, nor can Clinton be heard speaking this phrase during the broadcast. It seems to have originated with a social media user named Rocky Raczkowski, who (according to his post) was not directly quoting Clinton, but was giving his interpretation of what he thought Clinton had said in response to a question about Supreme Court justices:Raczkowski's interpretation was later shared by Mike Hewitt, a politician and radio show host, who posted the message as if it were a direct quote from Clinton, while darkly hinting at a media so corrupt that they refused to cover the what she had really said:

FMD_train_723

Does Joel Osteen Own a $325,000 Ferrari?

07/19/2021

In July 2021, a set of photographs supposedly showing a $325,000 Ferrari 458 Italia owned by Joel Osteen, televangelist and megachurch pastor, was widely circulated on social media: While Osteen may own an expensive car (or two), he does not own the vehicle shown in this picture. It should also be noted that reports about Osteen owning a Ferarri 458 Italia have not been verified. In fact, some news outlets that initially published this claim, such as the Houston Chronicle, have since deleted their articles. some news outlets that initially published this claim We have not been able to find any verified reporting that Osteen owns a $325,000 Ferrari. There don't appear to be any photographs of Osteen driving this exotic sports car, and we have not been able to find any statements from Osteen in which he talks about an exotic collection. This rumor appears to be little more than an assumption. Osteen does have a reported net worth in the tens of millions (more on that later) and a large house in Houston, Texas. It certainly seems possible that Osteen has purchased an exotic car (or two), but so far these reports are not verified. As for the photographs above, one (the top right image in the above-displayed meme) was originally posted to an Exotic Cars Flickr page in 2010. A spokesperson for the Exotic Car Life Flickr account told us that the photograph was taken in Coral Gables, Florida down the street from the luxury car dealership The Collection. They told us that they saw the car, which they believed to be a customized order, at one other event and provided us with numerous photographs, none of which featured Osteen. Exotic Cars Flickr page in 2010 The spokesperson said: "I saw the car on another occasion at an event, no Joel Osteen was seen." It should also be noted that this meme features photographs of two different Ferraris. As noted above, one pic shows a custom Ferrari in 2010 in Florida. The other photograph shows a Ferrari in Zurich, Switzerland in 2013. The following video appears to be the source of the second photo: In addition to this video's being taken in Switzerland, not Houston, Texas, where Osteen resides, the driver can be seen toward the end of this video, and it is not Osteen. It's worth nothing that in 2018, an associate pastor at Osteen's Lakewood Church was criticized for buying his wife a $200,000 Ferrari. associate pastor at Osteen's Lakewood Church was criticized for buying his wife a $200,000 Ferrari As these pictures went viral, a number of other claims about Osteen's net worth were circulated on social media. One viral tweet, for example, claimed that Osteen had a net worth of more than $40 million, that he lived in a $10.5 million mansion, and that his Lakewood Church received $4.4 million in PPP Covid-19-relief loans. These claims, in general, are true. However, there's a little nuance that should be noted. Osteen does own a home in Houston that is valued at around $10 million, and his Lakewood Church did receive a $4.4 million PPP loan. Claims about Osteen's net worth, however, are just estimations. We found estimates for Osteen's net worth ranging from$40 to $100 million, which indicates that these are little more than guessing. While we can't determine Osteen's exact net worth, it is safe to say that he's wealthy. around $10 million receive a $4.4 million PPP loan Osteen's net worth $40 100 million, The bulk of Osteen's fortune appears to come from book sales. In addition to being a megachurch pastor and a televangelist, Osteen is also a successful author. In 2006, The New York Times reported that Osteen's 2004 book "Your Best Life Now" sold more than 3 million hardcover copies: New York Times reported Mr. Osteen, a television evangelist, has signed a book deal with Free Press, an imprint of Simon & Schuster, that publishing insiders say is potentially one of the richest for a nonfiction book and could bring the author more than $10 million. Mr. Osteen's contract follows the enormous success of "Your Best Life Now," published in 2004 by Warner Faith, a division of the Time Warner Book Group. More than three million hardcover copies were sold, along with more than one million copies of associated journals, daily devotionals and study guides. Osteen talked about his wealth during an interview with PennLive in 2013: PennLive "I believe we are supposed to be leaders," Osteen said. "That we are supposed to represent Christ. I believe we are supposed to look good and excel at what God called us to do. You have gifts from the inside and you are supposed to excel. It is not that tradition saying you are supposed to be poor and humble. I believe Jesus died so we can have an abundant life and be leaders. I believe that's a part of the ministry that resonates with people." Osteen has repeatedly fought off the label of a prosperity gospel televangelist. "I don't really know what the prosperity gospel is," Osteen said. "The way I define it is that I believe God wants you to prosper in your health, in your family, in your relationships, in your business, and in your career. If that is the prosperity gospel, then I do believe that." Update [20 July 2021]: Added additional information about source photos.

False

While Osteen may own an expensive car (or two), he does not own the vehicle shown in this picture. It should also be noted that reports about Osteen owning a Ferarri 458 Italia have not been verified. In fact, some news outlets that initially published this claim, such as the Houston Chronicle, have since deleted their articles.As for the photographs above, one (the top right image in the above-displayed meme) was originally posted to an Exotic Cars Flickr page in 2010. A spokesperson for the Exotic Car Life Flickr account told us that the photograph was taken in Coral Gables, Florida down the street from the luxury car dealership The Collection. They told us that they saw the car, which they believed to be a customized order, at one other event and provided us with numerous photographs, none of which featured Osteen.It's worth nothing that in 2018, an associate pastor at Osteen's Lakewood Church was criticized for buying his wife a $200,000 Ferrari.Osteen does own a home in Houston that is valued at around $10 million, and his Lakewood Church did receive a $4.4 million PPP loan. Claims about Osteen's net worth, however, are just estimations. We found estimates for Osteen's net worth ranging from$40 to $100 million, which indicates that these are little more than guessing. While we can't determine Osteen's exact net worth, it is safe to say that he's wealthy.The bulk of Osteen's fortune appears to come from book sales. In addition to being a megachurch pastor and a televangelist, Osteen is also a successful author. In 2006, The New York Times reported that Osteen's 2004 book "Your Best Life Now" sold more than 3 million hardcover copies:Osteen talked about his wealth during an interview with PennLive in 2013:

FMD_train_666

There's no real evidence in the last 20 years that growth from tax cuts has made up lost revenue.

04/28/2017

The Trump administration unveiled a one-page list of tax reform principles inspired by the theory that tax cuts can unleash enough economic growth to cover lost revenue. President George H.W. Bush famously derided this as voodoo economics, and present-day critics are no less dismissive of what they see as magical thinking by the White House. The Trump administration will say, "Well, hey, tax cuts are going to create growth, growth is going to create revenue, that's going to offset all this deficit," Rana Foroohar, a CNN economic analyst and Financial Times columnist, told CNN on April 26. However, there is no real evidence in the last 20 years that this has happened. First, the significant changes under the White House proposal include a drop in the business tax rate from 35 to 15 percent for both large and small corporations, a reduction in personal income tax brackets from seven to three (10, 25, and 35 percent), and a doubling of the so-called standard deduction—the amount of personal income not subject to federal income tax—while some other deductions are removed. There isn't much more detail than that, making it difficult to put a price tag on the proposal. The nonpartisan Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget (CRFB) attempted to analyze the potential effect of the one-pager on the debt, making many assumptions along the way. Their best guess, which was quickly criticized by Trump's opponents on TV, was an increase in the debt of $5.5 trillion, or somewhere between $3 trillion and $7 trillion. There are other ways to offset tax cuts besides economic growth: you can raise rates on other taxes, such as through a tax on imports, as House Republicans want. Alternatively, you can limit tax breaks, cut spending, or use some combination of these, and it is certainly possible that the Trump administration will explore these options. A White House fact sheet by chief economic advisor Gary Cohn on April 26 did make a passing reference to eliminating some tax breaks for the wealthy. However, the administration has offered no specifics on how to pay for the cuts, and as of April 20, Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin was still insisting, "The deal will pay for itself." For Trump's tax cuts to pay for themselves, the economy would have to grow by $5.5 trillion, or roughly a sustained 4.5 percent, for the next 10 years, according to the CRFB. That is a mark that any president is unlikely to hit. Trump promised during the campaign to achieve 4 percent growth per year. Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin has since stated that the target is 3 percent growth. In reality, the average annual growth rate since 2001 has been 1.8 percent, according to Vox. Most experts we interviewed concurred with Foroohar that the idea that tax cuts could spur the level of growth needed is not realistic. One economist went further than Foroohar, noting that steep tax cuts may actually impede economic growth. Several experts cautioned that isolating tax cuts as the sole cause of whatever economic conditions follow is more than a little tricky, since good or bad economic conditions can coincide with tax cuts and affect federal revenue. Another caveat is that tax cuts can be manipulated to appear as if they are boosting growth when they are really not. While tax cuts do not fully pay for themselves, they can generate some growth. For instance, a 2005 study by the Congressional Budget Office asked what would happen if Americans received a 10 percent income tax cut. Under the CBO's most optimistic projection, nearly one-third of the tax cut would be offset by additional tax revenue over 10 years. N. Gregory Mankiw, a Harvard University economist and former chairman of the President's Council of Economic Advisers under George W. Bush, shared a similar view. "A reasonable rule of thumb, in my judgment, is that about one-third of the cost of tax cuts is recouped via faster economic growth," Mankiw said. Edward Kleinbard, a professor of law and business at the University of Southern California, stated that smart corporate tax reform could stimulate the economy somewhat—but at a net loss. "A really well-designed corporate tax reform package, including a rate cut, would be accretive to growth," he said, "but not enough to pay for any resulting large-scale deficits." So tax cuts can create some growth, according to the experts. But are there any historical cases of tax cuts producing so much growth that they fully pay for themselves? "I am not aware of any credible evidence (in the U.S.) over the last several decades of a broad-based tax cut paying for itself," said Alan Auerbach, an economist at the University of California, Berkeley. "I don't think this is at all controversial among actual economists." Kleinbard was similarly emphatic: "There is no time in modern history where tax cuts could be said to pay for themselves." According to Kleinbard, the 1981 tax cuts triggered massive federal deficits and were largely reversed within three years. The Tax Reform Act of 1986 was basically revenue neutral, he said, meaning tax cuts were virtually offset by spending cuts. He added that President Bill Clinton's tax hike was followed by robust growth, while the George W. Bush tax cuts led to anemic growth. None of the experts interviewed cited evidence that tax cuts under President Barack Obama produced sufficient growth to pay for themselves either. On the contrary, there is some evidence that tax cuts can be a drag on the economy—like the 2005 CBO study mentioned earlier. When the CBO studied the effects of a hypothetical 10 percent income tax cut for Americans, not all the projections were as rosy as the finding above. Under the CBO's most pessimistic projection, tax cuts would lead to a 3 percent increase in lost revenue over 10 years. Indeed, tax cuts can have a number of adverse effects that may actually impede growth, according to Kleinbard. One example is a phenomenon known as the crowding-out effect. The basic idea is that tax cuts create deficits that cause the government to borrow more money and therefore enter deeper debt, which can make private sector borrowing more expensive. Our ruling: Foroohar said, "There's no real evidence in the last 20 years that growth from tax cuts has made up lost revenue." We searched high and low and found no economic experts who could point us to evidence of tax cuts fully paying for themselves. Neither the modern historical record (using fair benchmarks) nor government analyses we looked at supported the claim that tax cuts create enough growth to eventually offset lost revenue. On the contrary, there is evidence that tax cuts may actually hinder economic growth. We rate Foroohar's statement True.

True

AWhite House fact sheetby chief economic advisor Gary Cohn on April 26 did make a passing reference to nixing some tax breaks for the wealthy. But the administration has offered no specifics on paying for the cuts, and as ofApril 20Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin was still insisting, The deal will pay for itself.Thats a mark that any president is unlikely to hit. Trump promised during the campaign to have4 percent growth per year.Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin has since said thetarget is 3 percent growth. In reality, the average annual growth rate since 2001 has been 1.8 percent,according to Vox.Several experts cautioned that isolating tax cuts as the sole cause of whatever economic conditions are to follow is more than a little tricky, since good or bad economic conditions can coincide with tax cuts and affect federal revenue. Another caveat is that tax cuts can be manipulated to look as if theyre boosting growth when theyre really not -- asweve shownbefore.

FMD_train_1877

Katie Kirkpatrick

03/31/2009

The girl in the picture is Katie Kirkpatrick, she is 21. Next to her, her fianc, Nick, 23. The picture was taken shortly before their wedding ceremony, held on January 11, 2005 in the US. Katie has terminal cancer and spend hours a day receiving medication. In the picture, Nick is waiting for her on one of the many sessions of Chemo to end. In spite of all the pain, organ failures, and morphine shots, Katie is going along with her wedding and took care of every detail. The dress had to be adjusted a few times due to her constant weight loss. An unusual accessory at the wedding was the oxygen tube that Katie used throughout the ceremony and reception as well. The other couple in the picture are Nick's parents. Excited to see there son marrying his high school sweetheart. Katie, in her wheelchair with the oxygen tube, listening a song from her husband and friends At the reception, Katie had to take a few rest breaks. The pain wouldn't allow her to stand up for long periods. Katie died five days after her wedding day. Watching a women so ill and weak getting married and with a smile on her face makes us think..... Happiness is reachable, no matter how long it last. We should stop making our lives complicated. Origins: On Valentine's Day 2002, Katie Kirkpatrick, then a freshman at Rochester College (a small Christian college in Rochester Hills, Michigan) was diagnosed with a malignant brain tumor. Undaunted, Katie strove to keep up with her studies, but she suffered another setback in 2003 when she was diagnosed with "an inoperable lung tumor wrapped around her pulmonary artery." Nonetheless, in 2004 the resilient Katie took part in champion cyclist Lance Armstrong's "Ride for the Roses" cancer fundraiser: fundraiser Dr. Craig Bowman of the Bible faculty spearheaded a campus and area-wide effort that raised $28,000 which made one of Katie's dreams come true: riding with six-time Tour de France winner and fellow cancer survivor Lance Armstrong in his Ride for the Roses cancer fundraiser. Says Katie of Armstrong, "I like his attitude and his perseverance. I admire him for the way he dealt with his cancer, and his attitude: 'You know what, this isn't going to beat me!'" On 15 January 2005, 21-year-old Katie the girl "with a contagious smile and unrelenting optimism" who had been battling cancer for three years married Lapeer County sheriff's deputy Nick Godwin, her high school sweetheart and the love of her life, at Church of Christ in Hazel Park, Michigan. Katie Kirkpatrick Godwin passed away at the McLaren Regional Medical Center in Flint, Michigan, on 20 January 2005, just five days after her wedding. Her husband, Nick, said of the wedding and Katie's passing: "It was wonderful. It was a dream come true. She was the most beautiful angel ever just caring and selfless, and such an inspiration to everyone. She was always smiling no matter what happened, no matter what news she got. She was as close to perfect as they come." She did not let sickness stop her from living, take away the hope or faith that made her believe she had a future. She had a lovely wedding and she had love and she gave love and love doesn't die. And that is how Katie beat cancer. Additional photographs of Katie and her wedding can be viewed on the National Press Photographers Association (NPPA) web site. NPPA Katie's Spa in Lapeer, Michigan (a business which specializes in services to cancer patients), is named in Katie's memory, as is Katie's Wings, a non-profit organization established to help bring assistance to people affected by cancer. Katie's Wings Sadly, the event that likely prompted circulation of this item in March 2009 was the death of Katie's father, David B. Kirkpatrick, who passed away that month after his own battle with cancer. Last updated: 2 April 2009 Morrison, Kara G. "Wedding Blessed Bride's Final Days." The Detroit News. 23 January 2005. Reiz, Rose Mary. "Spa Is Legacy of Lapeer East Grad." The Flint Journal. 9 September 2007. Tunnicliff, Greg and Bryn Mickle . "David 'KP' Kirkpatrick Was Dedicated to Family and Students." The Flint Journal. 20 March 2009.

True

Origins: On Valentine's Day 2002, Katie Kirkpatrick, then a freshman at Rochester College (a small Christian college in Rochester Hills, Michigan) was diagnosed with a malignant brain tumor. Undaunted, Katie strove to keep up with her studies, but she suffered another setback in 2003 when she was diagnosed with "an inoperable lung tumor wrapped around her pulmonary artery." Nonetheless, in 2004 the resilient Katie took part in champion cyclist Lance Armstrong's "Ride for the Roses" cancer fundraiser:Additional photographs of Katie and her wedding can be viewed on the National Press Photographers Association (NPPA) web site.Katie's Spa in Lapeer, Michigan (a business which specializes in services to cancer patients), is named in Katie's memory, as is Katie's Wings, a non-profit organization established to help bring assistance to people affected by cancer.

FMD_train_1416

Was Walt Disney Born in Robinson, Illinois?

07/24/2004

We can't all be famous, but many people who aren't have tried the next best thing: associating themselves with someone famous. Others, denied the opportunity even to hobnob with anyone of renown, have taken the process a step further and manufactured such associations themselves. A particularly prevalent genre of "brush with fame" legends involves those who claim to have had chance encounters with notable personages during their formative years, contributing something—an idea, a suggestion, or maybe just a helping hand—that had a lasting impact and aided those later-famous people in becoming successful in some artistic, scientific, or political endeavor. After all, the early lives of people who later become famous are often not well documented, making it difficult to dispute a claimant's tale of a chance encounter way back when. Not surprisingly, Walt Disney is the subject of several such legends, one of which pertains to the site of his birth and the origin of his given name. In 1982, the Robinson Argus newspaper, based in Robinson, Illinois, published a local resident's recollection of the putative circumstances surrounding Walt's birth: "So many great people were born in Robinson! And now we must add Walt Disney to the list." The Argus is indebted to Doris Davis and Ada York for the surprising information that the famous Walt Disney was actually born in Robinson. On Friday, February 12, Ada provided the following information to Doris Davis, who in turn brought it to the Argus on Monday of that week. This is February 12, 1982, at Cotillion Ridge, and this is Ada talking to Doris Davis: "In 1925-26, I worked for Mr. George Walter on West Plum Street. This was a time when Walt Disney was coming into great popularity. He told me that several people knew that Walt Disney was born in Robinson, and I asked him how he developed that knowledge. He said that he owned the brickyard at the time and that they were migrating through Robinson back to Chicago and ran out of money while in this town. Mr. Walter gave him a job, and he got a room over what is now the Rembrandt Studio, and their baby was due at any time. When the baby was born, it was a boy, and they named him Walter for Mr. Walter, who had been so kind to them and gave Mr. Disney work to enable him to support his wife and baby son." Doris: "Later, you heard an interview?" Ada: "Yes! Edward R. Murrow interviewed Walt Disney, and he asked him where he was born. Walt Disney said, 'Well, the record shows that I was born in Chicago, but actually I was born in a little town 200 miles south—Robinson!' So that sort of tied the ends together!" It's a charming story, but the logical holes in its premise and timeline are numerous: Every significant piece of Disney biography states that Walt was born in an upstairs bedroom of his parents' house in Chicago. If Walt had publicly stated, to a news reporter as prominent as Edward R. Murrow, that he was actually born somewhere else, how is it that this fact has somehow eluded every Disney biographer to the point that none of them so much as mention it? And if Walt both knew and publicly proclaimed that he was really born in Robinson, why did he nonetheless maintain in his autobiography (published under his daughter's name) that he was indeed born in Chicago? Walt Disney's parents could not have been "migrating back to Chicago" just before his birth in 1901, as they had been living in Chicago continuously since 1889. Even if Elias Disney, Walt's father, had some reason to travel away from Chicago in late 1901, it is extremely unlikely (given the rigors of travel in those days) that he would have taken a heavily pregnant wife along with him except under the most exigent of circumstances (and there is no record of any such circumstances affecting the Disney family in 1901). The account quoted above states that a brickyard owner in Robinson gave Elias Disney work immediately after Walt's birth "to enable him to support his wife and baby son." By the time Walt came along, the Disneys already had three children—who was taking care of them? Surely Mr. and Mrs. Disney had not left their three young sons behind somewhere to fend for themselves, so why does this recollection fail to mention anyone but Walt? Why in the world would the Disneys, who already had a permanent home in Chicago (in a house built by Elias himself), have been traipsing around the countryside with three children in tow and Mrs. Disney about to give birth to a fourth? (Again, there is no record of the Disneys having left their three eldest children in someone else's care for an extended period of time just before Walt's birth.) The statement that Walt Disney was "coming into great popularity" in 1925-26 (a claim made to explain why the narrator clearly remembered a story she'd been told over fifty years earlier—obviously she wouldn't have found the tale so memorable if Walt Disney wasn't already famous when she heard it) is a bit off the mark: the debut of the character who made the name 'Disney' a household word, Mickey Mouse, was still several years in the future, and even Disney's first successful animated character, Oswald the Lucky Rabbit, would not first appear until late 1927. Disney had moderate success in the mid-1920s with his Alice in Cartoonland series (short silent films that mixed live action and animation), but he was hardly a nationally known figure in 1926. (As a point of comparison, we note that although Disney began working in Los Angeles in early 1923, his name appeared in the pages of the Los Angeles Times but once prior to 1929.) Wherever Walt may have been born (and no matter what the circumstances of his birth), his given name was demonstrably not the result of a spur-of-the-moment decision by his parents to honor someone who had aided them at the time of Walt's birth in 1901. As the following birth record demonstrates, the Disneys had already selected "Walter" as a name for one of their sons as far back as 1890: Walt Disney, of course, was not born until 1901—this certificate, which documents a birth on December 30, 1890, records the arrival of one of Walt's older brothers, Raymond Arnold Disney. Evidently, Mr. and Mrs. Disney considered naming one of their earlier children "Walter" to the extent that that name was listed on the birth certificate, but they later changed their minds and named him "Raymond" instead. The important point, however, is that this certificate documents that the Disneys had the name "Walter" in mind for one of their sons a full eleven years before Walt was born. So, we leave off where we began, by noting that people sometimes manufacture their own brushes with greatness, as was evidently the case here. To mangle a familiar phrase: "Some are born great, some achieve greatness, and some fabricate greatness out of whole cloth."

False

The statement that Walt Disney was "coming into great popularity" in 1925-26 (a claim made to explain why the narrator clearly remembered a story she'd been told over fifty years earlier obviously she wouldn't have found the tale so memorable if Walt Disney wasn't already famous when she heard it) is a bit off the mark: the debut of the character who made the name 'Disney' a household word, Mickey Mouse, was still several years in the future, and even Disney's first successful animated character, Oswald the Lucky Rabbit, would not first appear until late 1927. Disney had moderate success in the mid-1920s with his Alice in Cartoonland series (short silent films which mixed live action and animation), but he was hardly a nationally-known figure in 1926. (As a point of comparison, we note that although Disney began working in Los Angeles in early 1923, his name appeared in the pages of the Los Angeles Times but once prior to 1929.)

FMD_train_721

Was a Half-Human, Half-Lion Hybrid Creature Found in Indonesia?

10/20/2017

A series of creepy images purportedly showing a half-human, half-lion hybrid appeared in mid-October 2017, and quickly made the usual rounds on social media: These images were originally posted along with a piece of Indonesian text claiming that this creature was the result of a human mating with a lioness: text claiming Telah ditemukan bayi hasil hubungan manusia dan singa betina.... Dunia sudah mao kiamat....Ketik amin dan bagikan... The baby has been found to be the result of a human relationship with the lioness...The world is doomed...Type in Amen and share it... This is not the first time that we have come across images purportedly showing a half-human, half-animal hybrid. In every case, we found that either the images or the attached claims were faked in one way or another. For instance, a "human-dog hybrid" was actually asculpture, a "gorilla-human" was a doctored image, and a "goat-person" was actually just a deformed goat. In the case of this particular image, the human-lion is a silicone doll. sculpture image deformed Social media user Octavia Mulia told Kumparan.com that the photographs had been posted by her sister and that they were originally shared in jest. When the images went viral, Mulia found it necessary to explain that these photographs actually showed a silicone doll and not a real human-lion hybrid (text translated via Google and edited for clarity): Octavia Mulia Kumparan.com Hasilnya, foto tersebut bukanlah bayi sungguhan, tetapi hanya sebuah boneka. "Itu namanya silicon doll. Jadi kakak aku bikin ginian (unggahan di Facebook) buat bercandaan doang sama teman-teman toys lovernya," kata Octavia saat dikonfirmasi kumparan, Jumat (13/10/2017). Octavia dan kakaknya tidak menyangka unggahan ini akan viral di Facebook dan banyak orang yang percaya. Padahal awalnya hanya untuk bercanda. Kakak saya hanya bikin postnya saja buat joke satir sama teman-teman komunitasnya. Tapi ternyata terus tembus 5,5 ribu share karena orang pada percaya," kata Octavia. Menurut Octavia, kakaknya mendapatkan foto boneka itu dari rekannya sesama penggemar mainan. Keduanya bertemu dalam forum Toyslover Planet 12. The photograph is not a real baby, but just a doll. "It's a silicon doll my sister uploaded to Facebook to share with her friends who love toys," confirmed Octavia, Friday (13/10/2017). Octavia and her sister did not expect this upload to go viral on Facebook and that so many people would believe it. Initially, it was intended as a joke. "My sister made a post just to joke with her friends, but it kept going with 5.5 thousand shares because people believed it," said Octavia. According to Octavia, her sister got the doll photo from her fellow toy fans. They met in the Toyslover Planet 12 forum. These images show a silicon doll that was created by Italian artist Laira Maganuco. These images were featured on her Etsy page in a listing for a "baby Licantropo," or baby werewolf, doll. Maganuco also posted images showing the creation of this "baby Licantropo" to her Facebook page: featured Facebook The images were originally shared with the claim that this creature was the result of a human mating with a lioness. Although scientists are experimenting with various chimeras, it is generally thought that creating human-animal hybrids is virtually impossible: impossible In general, two types of changes prevent animals from interbreeding. The first includes all those factorscalled pre-zygotic reproductive isolating mechanismsthat would make fertilization impossible. After so many generations apart, a pair of animals might look so different from one another that theyre not inclined to have sex. If the animals do try to get it on despite changed appearances, incompatible genitalia or sperm motility could pose another problem: A human spermatozoon may not be equipped to navigate the reproductive tract of a chimpanzee, for example. The second type of barrier includes post-zygotic reproductive isolating mechanisms, or those factors that would make it impossible for a hybrid animal fetus to grow into a reproductive adult. If a human were indeed inclined and able to impregnate a monkey, post-zygotic mechanisms might result in a miscarriage or sterile offspring. The further apart two animals are in genetic terms, the less likely they are to produce viable offspring. At this point, humans seem to have been separate from other animals for far too long to interbreed. We diverged from our closest extant relative, the chimpanzee, as many as 7 million years ago. (For comparison, our apparent tryst with the Neanderthals occurred less than 700,000 years after we split off from them.) Bosch, Torie. "We Mated with Neanderthals. Can We Breed With Other Animals, Too?" Slate. 14 November 2006. Kumparan. "Fakta Di Balik Foto Bayi Hasil Perkawinan Manusia Dengan Singa." 13 October 2017.

False

These images were originally posted along with a piece of Indonesian text claiming that this creature was the result of a human mating with a lioness:This is not the first time that we have come across images purportedly showing a half-human, half-animal hybrid. In every case, we found that either the images or the attached claims were faked in one way or another. For instance, a "human-dog hybrid" was actually asculpture, a "gorilla-human" was a doctored image, and a "goat-person" was actually just a deformed goat. In the case of this particular image, the human-lion is a silicone doll. Social media user Octavia Mulia told Kumparan.com that the photographs had been posted by her sister and that they were originally shared in jest. When the images went viral, Mulia found it necessary to explain that these photographs actually showed a silicone doll and not a real human-lion hybrid (text translated via Google and edited for clarity):These images show a silicon doll that was created by Italian artist Laira Maganuco. These images were featured on her Etsy page in a listing for a "baby Licantropo," or baby werewolf, doll. Maganuco also posted images showing the creation of this "baby Licantropo" to her Facebook page:The images were originally shared with the claim that this creature was the result of a human mating with a lioness. Although scientists are experimenting with various chimeras, it is generally thought that creating human-animal hybrids is virtually impossible:

FMD_train_758

Says Mitch McConnell pushed the Wall Street bailout through the U.S. Senate and called it the Senate at its finest.

08/14/2013

A 46-year-old wealthy investment manager in Kentucky is mounting a Republican primary challenge to the state's senior senator, Minority Leader Mitch McConnell. Matt Bevin comes from the tea party wing of the GOP. Early polls suggest Bevin has a long way to go before he could unseat McConnell, but Kentucky voters sent libertarian favorite Sen. Rand Paul to Washington, and Bevin has the money to get his message to party activists. The two candidates have begun trading attack ads. The latest from Bevin ties McConnell to the financial rescue measures passed by Congress as the economy headed into a tailspin in 2008. Here’s the key text from Bevin's ad: Announcer: After pushing the Wall Street bailout through the U.S. Senate, Mitch McConnell bragged (video clip of McConnell) This has been the Senate at its finest. Announcer: And what are fact-checkers saying about Mudslinging Mitch's latest attacks on conservative Matt Bevin? Misleading (image from Washington Post) Doesn't add up (image from local Fox News) Like Obama campaign attacks (image from Washington Post) After 30 years in Washington, voting for one bailout after another, slinging mud is all Sen. McConnell has left. The ad plays to anti-government sentiment among people who see Washington's multibillion-dollar intervention in 2008 as a gross overreach of public power and a favor to the financial elite. We will examine this specific claim the ad makes to link McConnell to specific actions. Did McConnell push the bailout, formally known as the Troubled Asset Relief Program or TARP, through the Senate? To answer that, we have to go back to September and October 2008. As the housing market bubble burst, the web of investments that bound just about every financial player to each other threatened a global freeze on lending. On Sept. 29, 2008, three days before the Senate vote on TARP, two leading voices from the conservative think tank, the Heritage Foundation, described the situation. In The bailout package: Vital and acceptable, Edwin Meese, President Ronald Reagan's attorney general, and Stuart Butler wrote: Some key parts of the credit market are on the verge of gridlock, resulting not just in the collapse of major financial institutions but also in credit disruption that is severely weakening the long-term prospects of non-financial companies. And while this is currently most visible on Wall Street and in the financial sector, it is only a matter of time before the fallout hits Main Street, with potentially devastating economic effects for typical American households. President George W. Bush was pressing for the passage of a $700 billion bailout. So were GOP presidential nominee John McCain and the Democratic nominee, Barack Obama. In late September, an effort to get a bill through the House of Representatives had just failed. The action shifted to the Senate where McConnell played a key role in negotiations. In a floor speech right before the Senate voted, McConnell took credit for the package and urged his fellow Republicans to approve the emergency intervention. After extensive consultation between the majority leader and myself and the leaders in both parties here in the Senate, we believe we have crafted a way to go forward and to get us back on track, McConnell said. This is the only way to get the right kind of solution for the American people. The Senate passed the TARP on a vote of 74 to 25, with 40 Democrats, one independent, and 33 Republicans, including McConnell, voting in favor. Nine Democrats and 15 Republicans voted against it. On the night the bill passed, McConnell joined Republicans and Democrats in a quick press conference to mark the moment. This has been the Senate at its finest, McConnell said. In the years that I've been here, I can't recall a single time when, in this close proximity to an election, both sides have risen above the temptation to engage in partisan game playing, if you will, to address an issue of great magnitude. We should note that part of the compromise that produced TARP included a provision to release the money in two installments. When a vote came for the second infusion of cash, in January 2009, McConnell joined 32 Republicans and nine Democrats in a failed effort to oppose it. McConnell said he voted for the first installment on the condition that it be used to prevent a systemic economic collapse but didn't like that part of it was used to help the auto industry. The current (Bush) administration used these funds for the auto industry, a move that I opposed. Now Congressional Democrats are urging more of the same, McConnell said in a statement. The American people still don't have assurances that this money will not be wasted or misused to play favorites. According to a recent Treasury report, of the $420.61 billion spent under TARP, including the government's stake in the insurer American International Group, $420.49 billion has been returned to the government. Our ruling Bevin said that McConnell pushed the Wall Street bailout through the Senate. The record shows that McConnell actively supported emergency government intervention in the financial markets and spoke openly of playing a key role in crafting compromise legislation. However, to say that he pushed the bill through the Senate downplays that other political leaders, including the Republican president and the party's presidential nominee, also pressed to get the measure passed. The ad also ignores that in January 2009, there was a second bailout funding vote, and on that one, McConnell voted no. Still, McConnell worked hard to get the initial bailout through the Senate. We rate the claim Mostly True.

True

The two candidates have begun trading attack ads. The latest from Bevin ties McConnell to the financial rescue measures passed by Congress as the economy headed into a tailspin in 2008. Heres the key text fromBevins ad:To answer that, we have to go back to September and October 2008. As the housing market bubble burst, the web of investments that bound just about every financial player to each other threatened a global freeze on lending. On Sept. 29, 2008, three days before the Senate vote on TARP, two leading voices from the conservative think tank, the Heritage Foundation, described the situation. In The bailout package: Vital and acceptable, Edwin Meese, President Ronald Reagans attorney general, and Stuart Butler wrote:In late September, an effort to get a bill through the House of Representatives had just failed. The action shifted to the Senate where McConnell played a key role in negotiations. In afloor speechright before the Senate voted, McConnell took credit for the package and urged his fellow Republicans to approve the emergency intervention.The Senatepassed the TARPon a vote of 74 to 25, with 40 Democrats, one independent and 33 Republicans including McConnell voting in favor. Nine Democrats and 15 Republicans voted against it.On the night the bill passed, McConnell joined Republicans and Democrats in a quickpress conferenceto mark the moment.We should note that part of the compromise that produced TARP included a provision to release the money in two installments. When a vote came for the second infusion of cash, in January 2009,McConnell joined 32 Republicansand nine Democrats in a failed effort to oppose it.The current (Bush) administration used these funds for the auto industry, a move that I opposed. Now Congressional Democrats are urging more of the same, McConnell said in astatement. The American people still don't have assurances that this money will not be wasted or misused to play favorites.According to arecent Treasury report, of the $420.61 billion dollars spent under TARP including the governments stake in the insurer American International Group, $420.49 billion has been returned to the government.

FMD_train_648

Purchasing SpaceX shares prior to its public offering is a fraudulent tactic employed by misleading online posts.

10/10/2022

On Oct. 10, 2022, a paid ad on Facebook promoted a fake investment opportunity with the words, "How To Buy SpaceX Stock Before It Goes Public." The ad showed a picture of SpaceX CEO Elon Musk and directed users to chat with a person on Messenger, who then told users to visit a WhatsApp group chat named "Stock Learning Group 28." But none of this was legitimate. It was all a scam to steal users' money. Stock Learning Group 28 The full scam post that promised a way to "buy SpaceX stock before it goes public" read as follows: Bullish on the future of space travel? See how to invest in SpaceX before it goes Public! We help you pre-buy stocks in the latest up-and-coming companies, before most retail investors. Getting in on the best companies before they go public is how you can get the returns like recent IPOs such as: AirBnB - 130% return in 7 months.Palantir - 226% return in 10 months.Snowflake - 331% return in 10 months. We do one thing very well.....get you access to the most popular companies before the public market has a chance. Click the Learn More button now and well show you how to invest in SpaceX before the public This post appeared to follow the same playbook we had seen before with numerous crypto scams. In those scams, users were also led from one social media platform to another, where they were told that their money would be invested in a special crypto opportunity. However, it was all a lie. Just like the scam post about SpaceX, some of the crypto scams featured photos of Musk as a way of trying to create trust. crypto scams featured photos of Musk The Facebook account that hosted the ads showed up as a personal profile and not a page. It was named Tut Pro 1 38801324. The profile picture showed an image that said "Half Price Books," a company that had absolutely nothing to do with the scam. We asked the account about the strange profile photo. They responded, "This event is sponsored by Mr. Nino, a senior stock analyst. Join Mr. Nino's stock research group now and receive a stock book when you join the group." The crypto scams we covered in the past also claimed to feature a specialist who could help deliver on the scam's promise. In the crypto scams, the scammers called this person "the teacher." We asked the user if this "Mr. Nino" was "the teacher." The account responded, "Yes." If the strange account name weren't enough of a red flag, the profile also once featured two seemingly random pictures of young girls. According to TinEye.com, a handy reverse image search website, at least one of the photos was traced to websites that were managed in Vietnam. This may have indicated that the scam was being operated from Southeast Asia. TinEye.com reverse image search As for the reality of SpaceX going public in the future, CNBC previously reported that Musk told employees the company was not likely to go public until 2025 or later. reported Evon, Dan. Snopes Tips: A Guide To Performing Reverse Image Searches. Snopes.com, 22 Mar. 2022, https://www.snopes.com/articles/400681/how-to-perform-reverse-image-searches/. Sheetz, Michael. Elon Musk Says an IPO of SpaceXs Starlink Satellite Internet Business Is Still 3 or 4 Years Away. CNBC, 7 June 2022, https://www.cnbc.com/2022/06/07/spacex-starlink-ipo-elon-musk-says-offering-is-3-or-4-years-away.html. TinEye Reverse Image Search. https://tineye.com/. Tut Pro 1 38801324. Facebook, https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100084130714561. On Oct. 18, 2022, we added a note that said a real company named Half Price Books had nothing to do with the scam.

False

On Oct. 10, 2022, a paid ad on Facebook promoted a fake investment opportunity with the words, "How To Buy SpaceX Stock Before It Goes Public." The ad showed a picture of SpaceX CEO Elon Musk and directed users to chat with a person on Messenger, who then told users to visit a WhatsApp group chat named "Stock Learning Group 28." But none of this was legitimate. It was all a scam to steal users' money.This post appeared to follow the same playbook we had seen before with numerous crypto scams. In those scams, users were also led from one social media platform to another, where they were told that their money would be invested in a special crypto opportunity. However, it was all a lie. Just like the scam post about SpaceX, some of the crypto scams featured photos of Musk as a way of trying to create trust.If the strange account name weren't enough of a red flag, the profile also once featured two seemingly random pictures of young girls. According to TinEye.com, a handy reverse image search website, at least one of the photos was traced to websites that were managed in Vietnam. This may have indicated that the scam was being operated from Southeast Asia.As for the reality of SpaceX going public in the future, CNBC previously reported that Musk told employees the company was not likely to go public until 2025 or later.

FMD_train_629

Did Pelosi Use $15,000 Worth of Pens to Sign Articles of Impeachment?

01/17/2020

On Jan. 15, 2020, U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi signed the articles of impeachment against President Donald Trump. The signing ceremony was historic it was only the third time in U.S. history that a president has been impeached. And, according to critics, the event was bit unusual because Pelosi used multiple pens to sign the documents and then handed the writing utensils out as souvenirs. A rumor soon started to circulate on social media positing that the pens Pelosi had used had cost an obscene amount of money. One Twitter user, for instance, claimed that each pen Pelosi used cost $2,025. A message on Facebook held that Pelosi had used a total of $15,000 worth of pens to sign these documents. This number was exaggerated even further by another Facebook user who claimed that each pen cost $15,000, and that the signing ceremony used a total of $450,000 pens: claimed Facebook claimed The most prominent claim, and one that was re-shared verbatim by several different accounts, stated: "Pelosi uses $15,000.00 worth of bullet pens to impeach the president. President Trump uses $1.99 Sharpie to sign $2 billion trade deal with China. That's the difference in a business man and a worthless professional." re-shared verbatim several different While this claim was widespread, it was not supported by evidence. We have encountered no news reports, budget statements, or any other credible information to support the claim that Pelosi used $15,000 worth of pens (or $450,000 worth of pens or $2,025 per pen) to sign the articles of impeachment against Trump. Furthermore, these claims appear to have originated with random social media users who would not have been privy to this sort of information. As these users appear to have been making this information up out of whole cloth, it isn't surprising that the alleged cost of these pens varies from one claim to the next. Drew Hammill, Pelosi's deputy chief of staff, told us that the pens Pelosi used to sign the articles of impeachment cost just under $15 apiece, and that they were the same type of pen used to sign other pieces of legislation. At $15 a piece, that means the total cost for these pens was about $450, well under the $15,000 (or $450,000) amount claimed in those baseless social media posts. Does Trump use a $2 Sharpie to sign legislation? In 2017, the Trump administration placed an order with long-time pen supplier A.T. Cross for 150 "Century II" pens to be used for signing executive orders. A.T. Cross has been supplying pens to the White House since at least the 1970s. While the cost of these pens vary by model, the Century II pens that Trump used at the start of his administration (this model was also used during President Barack Obama's administration) cost a little over $100 a piece at retail. placed an order However, Trump has since switched from the Century II pen to a Sharpie pen. While Sharpie pens can certainly be purchased in the $2 range, Trump doesn't use a Sharpie that you can purchase at a school-supply store. The Commander-in-Chief reportedly uses a custom Sharpie with his signature inscribed down the side. You can see an image of the pen Trump uses to sign executive orders here. custom Sharpie here We reached out to the White House and Newell Brands, the company that manufacturers Sharpies, for more information on Trump's pen. While we can't say exactly how much Trump spends per pen, it seems reasonable to assume that this custom pen is worth more than a $2 generic Sharpie, but well under the $100 pens used at the start of his administration. The "Official Donald J. Trump Fine Point Markers" available via the Trump campaign shop are sold for $15 for a five-pack (which works out to $3 piece). Trump campaign shop Is it unusual to use multiple pens to sign important legislation? In addition to claiming that Pelosi used obscenely expensive pens to sign the articles of impeachment against Trump, many social media users were upset that the House Speaker used multiple writing utensils and then handed them out as souvenirs to mark the occasion. However, this isn't an unusual practice. In fact, on the same day Pelosi handed out the impeachment pens to various lawmakers, Trump performed a similar ritual in the Oval Office after signing a trade deal with China. The photograph above is available via Getty Images with the following caption: "WASHINGTON, DC - JANUARY 15: U.S. President Donald Trump, accompanied by U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer (2nd L) and Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin (R), hands out pens to Senators after he and Chinese Vice Premier Liu He, signed phase 1 of a trade deal between U.S. and China, in the East Room at the White House, on January 15, 2020 in Washington, DC. Phase 1 is expected to cut tariffs and promote Chinese purchases of U.S. farm, and manufactured goods while addressing disputes over intellectual property. (Photo by Mark Wilson/Getty Images)" Getty Images Time Magazine explained that this tradition using multiple pens to sign a document and then to give those pens to various people involved dates back to at least the 1930s when Franklin D. Roosevelt was in office: explained The pen used to sign historic legislation itself becomes a historical artifact. The more pens a President uses, the more thank-you gifts he can offer to those who helped create that piece of history. The White House often engraves the pens, which are then given as keepsakes to key proponents or supporters of the newly signed legislation. When Lyndon Johnson signed the Civil Rights Act in 1964, he reportedly used more than 75 pens ... and gave one of the first ones to Martin Luther King Jr. Senators Hubert Humphrey and Everett McKinley Dirksen also received pens for their aid in shuttling the bill through Congress. And in 1996, President Clinton gave the four pens he used to sign the Line-Item Veto bill which allowed Presidents to veto individual sections of legislation rather than the entire thing to those most likely to appreciate the bill's impact: Gerald Ford, Jimmy Carter, Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush. The U.S. Senate also provided souvenir pens in 1999 during the impeachment trial of Bill Clinton. According to a contemporary report in the Akron Beacon, senators used silver Parker Vector pens (worth about $10 a piece) to sign the oath book after they were sworn in and were allowed to keep the pens as a memento: Unfortunately, the pens used during Clinton's trial contained a typo (the term "United States Senator" on the pen was misspelled "Untied States Senator") and had to be replaced. replaced Did Pelosi Use $15,000 Worth of Pens to Sign the Articles of Impeachment? In summary, no evidence exists to support the claim that Pelosi used $15,000 worth of pens to sign the articles of impeachment. This claim originated with random social media accounts and was not supported with documentation. Furthermore, Pelosi's chief of staff refuted the claim, saying the pens cost just under $15 a piece. While some may find it objectionable to hand out souvenir pens after signing such a grave document, it isn't unusual. The tradition of using multiple pens to sign important documents, and then giving those pens away to the people involved, can be traced back decades. Klein, Betsy. "'Trump Sticks With Tradition for Presidential Pen Choice." CNN 27 January 2017. Hanbury, Mary. "'Make it Look Rich': Trump Told Sharpie to Create a Custom Pen For Him to Sign Important Documents." Business Insider 16 November 2018. O'Rourke, Ciara. "No, Nancy Pelosis Impeachment Pens Didnt Cost $2,025 Each." Politifact. 17 January 2020. Akron Beacon. "Pens Ink Spot in History." 8 January 1999. Suddath, Claire. "Why Did Obama Use So Many Pens to Sign the Health Care Bill?" Time Magazine. 24 March 2010. Correction [18 January 2020]: The markers available via the Trump campaign store are sold in packs of 5, not individually as originally stated.

False

A rumor soon started to circulate on social media positing that the pens Pelosi had used had cost an obscene amount of money. One Twitter user, for instance, claimed that each pen Pelosi used cost $2,025. A message on Facebook held that Pelosi had used a total of $15,000 worth of pens to sign these documents. This number was exaggerated even further by another Facebook user who claimed that each pen cost $15,000, and that the signing ceremony used a total of $450,000 pens:The most prominent claim, and one that was re-shared verbatim by several different accounts, stated: "Pelosi uses $15,000.00 worth of bullet pens to impeach the president. President Trump uses $1.99 Sharpie to sign $2 billion trade deal with China. That's the difference in a business man and a worthless professional." In 2017, the Trump administration placed an order with long-time pen supplier A.T. Cross for 150 "Century II" pens to be used for signing executive orders. A.T. Cross has been supplying pens to the White House since at least the 1970s. While the cost of these pens vary by model, the Century II pens that Trump used at the start of his administration (this model was also used during President Barack Obama's administration) cost a little over $100 a piece at retail. However, Trump has since switched from the Century II pen to a Sharpie pen. While Sharpie pens can certainly be purchased in the $2 range, Trump doesn't use a Sharpie that you can purchase at a school-supply store. The Commander-in-Chief reportedly uses a custom Sharpie with his signature inscribed down the side. You can see an image of the pen Trump uses to sign executive orders here.We reached out to the White House and Newell Brands, the company that manufacturers Sharpies, for more information on Trump's pen. While we can't say exactly how much Trump spends per pen, it seems reasonable to assume that this custom pen is worth more than a $2 generic Sharpie, but well under the $100 pens used at the start of his administration. The "Official Donald J. Trump Fine Point Markers" available via the Trump campaign shop are sold for $15 for a five-pack (which works out to $3 piece). The photograph above is available via Getty Images with the following caption: "WASHINGTON, DC - JANUARY 15: U.S. President Donald Trump, accompanied by U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer (2nd L) and Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin (R), hands out pens to Senators after he and Chinese Vice Premier Liu He, signed phase 1 of a trade deal between U.S. and China, in the East Room at the White House, on January 15, 2020 in Washington, DC. Phase 1 is expected to cut tariffs and promote Chinese purchases of U.S. farm, and manufactured goods while addressing disputes over intellectual property. (Photo by Mark Wilson/Getty Images)"Time Magazine explained that this tradition using multiple pens to sign a document and then to give those pens to various people involved dates back to at least the 1930s when Franklin D. Roosevelt was in office:Unfortunately, the pens used during Clinton's trial contained a typo (the term "United States Senator" on the pen was misspelled "Untied States Senator") and had to be replaced.

FMD_train_855

Did Facebook Executive Jeff Rothschild Say 'We Need a Third World War'?

05/18/2018

Jeffrey J. Rothschild, an American businessman now in his mid-sixties, is a successful engineer, entrepreneur, and former Facebook vice president whose net worth, according to Forbes, exceeds $3 billion. He is also, if online conspiracy theorists are to be believed, a thought leader in a CIA-backed New World Order plot to exterminate most of the world's population and enslave the survivors. In Internet memes circulating since 2013, Rothschild is quoted as saying a third world war will be required to accomplish these goals. Much as it may disappoint anti-Semitic conspiracy theorists, however, Forbes states that despite his great personal wealth, Jeff Rothschild isn't related to the esteemed banking family whose patriarch was Mayer Amschel Rothschild (1744-1812) of Frankfurt, Germany. Jeff Rothschild's father, William B. Rothschild, inherited a rubber import business from his father, Marcus Rothschild, whose name appears nowhere in the Mayer Rothschild family tree. Although Jeff Rothschild did speak at a conference of Chinese and American entrepreneurs and investors in January 2013 (at which the above photo was taken), the event took place in Santa Clara, California (not China), and there is no record of him saying anything about a New World Order, a third world war, or a globalized feudal system. Nor have we been able to find such references in any other public statements made by Jeff Rothschild over the past two decades. This utter lack of evidence hasn't stopped anyone from promulgating these falsehoods, however. We came across a similar quote shared by someone using the Twitter handle "truther monkey" in 2014: "Jeff Rothschild gave this speech recently in China to some of the world's richest people ... please share .. pic.twitter.com/dPCqyyo8KT." Though their precise points of origin are uncertain, we traced both quotes to a 3 August 2013 post on a now-defunct "underground anarchist" blog called Anarchadia. Crucially, the anonymous author of the post cited no sources authenticating the statements. "Where is the evidence he actually said these things?" asked someone in the comments section of the page. "Where is the evidence he didn't?" was the response—a low evidentiary bar indeed. As is the case in so much conspiratorial discourse, the very existence of the quotes, if real, would be self-contradictory anyway. By definition, the Illuminati conduct their business in absolute secrecy, yet we find them, time and time again (going all the way back to the fictitious 1903 Protocols of the Elders of Zion), allegedly revealing their entire subversive agenda in public. If that's as secretive as they can be, we have nothing to fear from our supposed Illuminati overlords.

False

Jeffrey J. Rothschild, an American businessman now in his mid-sixties, is a successful engineer, entrepreneur, and former Facebook vice president whose net worth, according to Forbes, exceeds $3 billion.He is also, if online conspiracy theorists are to be believed, a thought leader in a CIA-backed New World Order plot to exterminate most of the world's population and enslave the survivors. In Internet memes making the rounds since 2013, Rothschild is quoted as saying a third world war will be required to accomplish these goals:Much as it may disappoint anti-Semitic conspiracy theorists, however, Forbes says that despite his great personal wealth Jeff Rothschild isn't related to the august banking family whose patriarch was Mayer Amschel Rothschild (1744-1812) of Frankfurt, Germany. Jeff Rothschild's father, William B. Rothschild, inherited a rubber import business from his father, Marcus Rothschild, whose name appears nowhere in the Mayer Rothschild family tree.And although Jeff Rothschild did speak at a conference of Chinese and American entrepreneurs and investors in January 2013 (at which the above photo was taken), the event took place in Santa Clara, California (not China), and there is no record of him saying anything about a New World Order, a third world war, or a globalized feudal system. Nor have we been able to find such references in any other public statements uttered by Jeff Rothschild over the past two decades.This utter lack of evidence hasn't stopped anyone from promulgating these falsehoods, however. We ran across a similar quote shared by someone using the Twitter handle "truther monkey" in 2014:Jeff Rothschild gave this speech recently in China to some of the world's richest people ... please share .. pic.twitter.com/dPCqyyo8KT truther monkey (@Thedyer1971) April 4, 2014Though their precise points of origin are uncertain, we traced both quotes to a 3 August 2013 post on a now-defunct "underground anarchist" blog called Anarchadia. Crucially, the anonymous author of the post cited no sources authenticating the statements.As is the case in so much conspiracist discourse, the very existence of the quotes, if real, would be self-contradictory anyway. By definition, the Illuminati conduct their business in absolute secrecy, yet we find them, time and time again (going all the way back to the fictitious 1903 Protocols of the Elders of Zion), allegedly revealing their entire subversive agenda in public.

FMD_train_809

By 2022, just the interest payment on our debt will be greater than the defense of our country.

05/10/2018

The hotly contested West Virginia primary for a U.S. Senate seat is now over. But it didnt take more than a few hours for the general election to start. Sen. Joe Manchin, D-W.Va., appeared on West Virginia radio host Hoppy Kerchevals show, the morning after election night. In the general election, Manchin faces Republican state Attorney General Patrick Morrisey in what most observers see as a competitive race. Manchin portrayed himself as a fiscal conservative both as governor and in the Senate in hisinterviewwith Kercheval. He expressed concern about the rising federal debt, which exceeds $21 trillion in the broadest measurement. By 2022, just the interest payment on our debt will be greater than the defense of our country, Manchin said. Is Manchin right? We found that hes at least certainly close. You may not realize this, but as a nonprofit news organization, we depend on and answer to you. Your support directly impacts our abilility to provide objective, factual reporting on issues that matter.Donate now to our Spring Campaign and go on the record as saying facts matter! In 2017, the last year for which complete data is available, defense spending stood at $590 billion. Net interest on the debt stood at $263 billion, according to the Congressional Budget Office, the nonpartisan budget analysis arm of Congress. So defense spending is currently more than twice as big as net interest. However, net interest is expected to grow faster than defense spending over the next decade. Thats according to CBOs most recentBudget and Economic Outlookreport, which projects a variety of budget categories 10 years into the future. (See Fig. 2.1here.) Between 2018 and 2028, CBO projects, both defense and interest will rise, with interest overtaking defense spending in fiscal year 2023. In 2023, defense spending will be $679 billion and net interest will reach $702 billion. The gap will only grow from there. So CBO has it one year later than Manchin said. That said, things could change between now and then and CBOs assumptions are not the only way to make these projections. CBOs projections assume that defense spending will return to tighter levels in 2020, after the current spending bill expires, said Todd Harrison, director of defense budget analysis at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. However, Congress has regularly raised the spending limits since they were first imposed in 2011. And if Congress acts as it has in the past, that would change the calculations. However, CBO does not specify the amounts under this alternative assumption, so that scenario is too speculative to consider. Manchin said, By 2022, just the interest payment on our debt will be greater than the defense of our country. The closest official estimate we could find says that net interest will pass defense spending in 2023, or one year later than Manchin said. But using a different set of unofficial assumptions, it could be different. We rate his statement Mostly True.

True

Manchin portrayed himself as a fiscal conservative both as governor and in the Senate in hisinterviewwith Kercheval. He expressed concern about the rising federal debt, which exceeds $21 trillion in the broadest measurement.You may not realize this, but as a nonprofit news organization, we depend on and answer to you. Your support directly impacts our abilility to provide objective, factual reporting on issues that matter.Donate now to our Spring Campaign and go on the record as saying facts matter!Thats according to CBOs most recentBudget and Economic Outlookreport, which projects a variety of budget categories 10 years into the future. (See Fig. 2.1here.)

FMD_train_114

Rephrase this as "Macy Neighs"

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

True

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

FMD_train_1142

Was the Revolving Door Invented by a Man Who Disliked Holding Open Doors for Women?

10/27/2017

Since the middle of the last century, revolving doors have been a quietly ubiquitous feature of modern cities around the world. But do they have their origins in one man's neurotic attitude toward holding doors open for women? The most often-cited example of this legend is a 2013 article in Slate by Roman Mars, of the design podcast 99% Invisible. Slate The story goes like this: Theophilus Van Kannel hated chivalry. There was nothing he despised more than trying to walk in or out of a building, and locking horns with other men in a game of oh you first, I insist. But most of all, Theophilus Van Kannel hated opening doors for women. He set about inventing his way out of social phobia. In the accompanying podcast episode, Mars warned: "Keep in mind that with all these origin stories, when they sound a little too much like stories, they're probably not completely true." David McCall, writing in the Australian Design Review four years later, also traced the invention to Van Kannel's purported misogyny: writing The story goes that he invented the revolving door because he simply hated holding doors open for people, especially women. It has also been reported that Kannel [sic] was a man without a family. These two facts may not be unrelated. The earliest version of the story that we could find was a 2008 post by Jaime Morrison on the art and design blog The Nonist, which went into considerable detail about the origins of Van Kannel's aversion to chivalry, tracing it back to a public spanking from his mother and attributing his invention to his wife's insistence that he hold open doors for her at all times. post It seems that when Van Kennel [sic] was a boy, still in the care of his mother but just on the cusp of cultural manhood, he found the lingering rules of chivalry rather bothersome. In particular he refused to accept that he was expected to open the door for women and allow them to cross the threshold before him. A silly sort of quirk to our minds, certainly, but it was taken seriously enough by his mother that after numerous warnings and threats she eventually felt compelled to take action. Van Kennel [sic] family histories have it that at some point in his twelfth year she administered a savage bare-bottomed spanking, during a salon in the familys drawing room, in full and explicit view of 37 local mothers and daughters...Had this been the only episode the world may have never had a revolving door to shuffle through. As it so happens, however, Theophilus Van Kennel [sic] married a woman who, though beautiful and slyly clever, had an odd and stubborn quirk of her own. Young Abigail Van Kennel, it seems, refused to pass from one room of their apartments to another without the assistance of Theophilus. That blog post contains the tongue-in-cheek disclaimer that "...All untruths are, I assure you, my own. Ill leave it to you to sort out which is which"; and cites just one source, an essay by the MIT professor James Buzard -- which makes no mention of Van Kannel's now-legendary misogyny. essay Indeed, despite extensive archival research, we did not find any evidence to back up the persistent rumor that Theophilus Van Kannel invented and refined the revolving door because of a neurotic aversion to holding doors open for women and others. In fact, we found several pieces of evidence which severely undermine the credibility of this claim. In July 1882, an H. Bockhacker received a patent in Berlin for a "Thr ohne Luftzug" ("draftless door") whose design is essentially that of a revolving door. patent European Patent Office Six years later, on 7 August 1888, Theophilus Van Kannel of Philadelphia, Pennsylvania received Patent #387,571 for his "Storm Door Structure." Patent #387,571 U.S. Patents Office/Google In his patent application, Van Kannel wrote: It will be evident that a storm door structure of the character described possesses numerous advantages over a hinged-door structure of the usual character, for, as the door fits snugly in the casing, it is perfectly noiseless in its operation and effectually prevents the entrance of wind, snow, rain, or dust either when it is closed or when persons are passing through it. Moreover, the door cannot be blown open by the wind, as the pressure is equal on both sides of the center of motion. Van Kannel subsequently patented several refinements and improvements to the revolving door, founded the Van Kannel Revolving Door Company, and died in New York City on Christmas Eve, 1919, at the age of 78. refinements died Undated photograph of Theophilus Van Kannel. He was born in a log cabin in Coshocton County, Ohio, on 21 October 1841, to Swiss immigrant parents. Throughout his life, he was a prolific inventor. A 1988 publication of his autobiography and journal, housed in the Library of Congress, lists 49 patents, but the book's editor writes that Van Kannel might have actually put his name to "about 75" of them. autobiography and journal Over the years, Theophilus invented a cherry stoner, cider mill, water hydrant, shipping tag, gas machine check-valve, a sewing machine, an "apparatus for scalding vegetable or fruit," and many more. He was also the inventor and owner of the Witching Waves ride at a Coney Island amusement park. He married Amanda Clayton, of Chester, Illinois and in November 1867 the couple had a daughter named Lulu. This refutes David McCall's suggestion that Van Kannel's alleged misogyny was due to the fact that he did not have a family. He did. The fact that Van Kannel's wife was named Amanda also severely undermines The Nonist's colorful stories about his wife "Abigail," who "refused to pass from one room of their apartments to another." In fact, Theophilus Van Kannel's two-volume, almost 500-page autobiography and journal does not contain any evidence of any neurosis relating to women, nor any social phobias of any kind. What it does reveal is a multi-talented young man, somewhat sober and straight-laced, who struggled for many years with debt and an artificial leg, but enjoyed a fairly healthy social life, combined with a consistent dedication to his work. He wrote frequently to his mother, regularly visited his sister and her family, and spoke lovingly about his female relatives. (His journal entry on 30 January 1864 reads: "Letter from my sister requesting me to write an obituary for her husband. Sent $5 to mother.") Another entry suggests Van Kannel understood and honored the Victorian norms of chivalry, without any reservations. 28 September 1861 (aged 19): ...I received permission to buy some window blinds for the schoolhouse. While in the post office a very old lady came in to send off a letter, but she had no money to pay for the stamp. She asked the postmaster, Mr Bowman, to credit her, but he refused. I then bought ten cents' worth of stamps and sent her letter. She was a stranger to me... As he grew into his 20s, Van Kannel's journal shows him courting young women in Cincinnati, Ohio, all the while following the rules of chivalry and decorum. 26 February 1863 (aged 21): We all went to the church again this evening to practice our parts for the exhibition, and all showed great improvement. For the first time I mustered up enough courage to ask a young lady for her company home, and she very readily accepted. 1875 photograph of Theophilus Van Kannel with his wife Amanda and daughter Lulu. Nothing in his journal suggests the kind of "social phobia" or misogyny involved in the many stories told about him 150 years later. He attended church every Sunday, taught children, attended school with men and women, was an active member of debating societies, met friends for dinner and drinks (although he disliked drunkenness), and occasionally escorted young women home or to the theater. His interests and inventions were eclectic. By 1867 he was already developing a type of door spring, and so it's not at all surprising that he would turn his mind to the innovation that eventually became the revolving door. Swinging doors let in drafts, making it difficult to control the temperature of a building, especially one with heavy footfall like a bank or train station. It is in keeping with the pattern of Van Kannel's professional life that he would have identified this problem, and attempted to solve it using his gift for engineering. His invention of the revolving door does not require a psychological motivation. Nor were we able to find one, despite reading hundreds of pages of archival material and the journal of Theophilus Van Kannel himself. We looked at several news and feature articles about Van Kannel, some dating to the early 20th century. Not one mentioned Van Kannel's now-mythical misogyny or aversion to chivalry -- until The Nonist post, the veracity of which is extremely questionable. We contacted the 99% Invisible podcast, but we did not receive a reply by publication time. In October 2018, we received an email from Jaime Morrison, creator of the Nonist blog and author of the 2008 article about Theophilus Van Kannel and the invention of the revolving door. Morrison told us that he had written about Van Kannel's now-legendary misogyny as no more than a joke which he was disappointed to find had been taken seriously by others: I just wanted to confirm that yes, the piece was in fact a humor piece, and that yes the chivalry aspect of the story was a total fabrication...When I wrote the piece I assumed that the absurdity of the idea would be self-evident, and even hedged by including the disclaimer which [you quoted]. Alas, that old chestnut about assumptions proved its inherent wisdom yet again. Van Kannel, Harvey E.; Fox Marshall, Joanne. "T. Van Kannel, The Inventor: His Autobiography and Journal, Vol. 1-2." Library of Congress. 1988. Bisset, Colin. "Design File with Colin Bisset - the Revolving Door." Radio National/ABC (Australia.) 15 March 2014. Hrala, Josh. "The Revolving Door Was Invented to Put an End to Chivalry." Modern Notion. 15 May 2015. McCall, David. "In a Spin: the History of Revolving Doors." Australian Design Review. 24 July 2017. Morrison, Jaime. "The Secret History of the Revolving Door." The Nonist. Unknown publication date. Buzard, James. "Perpetual Revolution." Massachusetts Institute of Technology/Archive.org. 29 July 2005. Mars, Roman. "Why Don't People Use Revolving Doors?" 99% Invisible/Slate. 7 November 2013. Bockhacker, H. "Patentschrift No. 18349. Thr Ohne Luftzug." Kaiserliches Patentamt (Germany)/European Patent Office. 8 July 1882. Van Kannel, Theophilus. "Patent No. 387,571 - Storm Door Structure." U.S. Patents Office/Google. 7 August 1888. New York Tribune. "Death Notice - Theophilus Van Kannel." New York Tribune. 26 December 1919. Updated [23 October 2018]: The verdict on this fact check has been changed from "Legend" to "False" after the author of a 2008 blog post -- the earliest source of the claim -- came forward to confirm that he had fabricated it as a joke.

False

The most often-cited example of this legend is a 2013 article in Slate by Roman Mars, of the design podcast 99% Invisible.David McCall, writing in the Australian Design Review four years later, also traced the invention to Van Kannel's purported misogyny:The earliest version of the story that we could find was a 2008 post by Jaime Morrison on the art and design blog The Nonist, which went into considerable detail about the origins of Van Kannel's aversion to chivalry, tracing it back to a public spanking from his mother and attributing his invention to his wife's insistence that he hold open doors for her at all times.That blog post contains the tongue-in-cheek disclaimer that "...All untruths are, I assure you, my own. Ill leave it to you to sort out which is which"; and cites just one source, an essay by the MIT professor James Buzard -- which makes no mention of Van Kannel's now-legendary misogyny. In July 1882, an H. Bockhacker received a patent in Berlin for a "Thr ohne Luftzug" ("draftless door") whose design is essentially that of a revolving door. European Patent OfficeSix years later, on 7 August 1888, Theophilus Van Kannel of Philadelphia, Pennsylvania received Patent #387,571 for his "Storm Door Structure." U.S. Patents Office/GoogleVan Kannel subsequently patented several refinements and improvements to the revolving door, founded the Van Kannel Revolving Door Company, and died in New York City on Christmas Eve, 1919, at the age of 78. Undated photograph of Theophilus Van Kannel.A 1988 publication of his autobiography and journal, housed in the Library of Congress, lists 49 patents, but the book's editor writes that Van Kannel might have actually put his name to "about 75" of them. 1875 photograph of Theophilus Van Kannel with his wife Amanda and daughter Lulu.

FMD_train_1456

No, Dominion Voting Systems is not owned by Joe Biden's nephew.

12/14/2020

Voting in the 2020 U.S. Election may be over, but the misinformation keeps on ticking. Never stop fact-checking. Follow our post-election coverage here. here On Dec. 11, 2020, a Twitter user posted a new permutation of a conspiracy theory about Dominion Voting Systems, the technology firm that provided voting systems in multiple U.S. jurisdictions in the November 2020 election, and which has also been the target of a disinformation campaign falsely claiming its systems were used to perpetrate widespread voter fraud. technology firm falsely claiming One of the narratives in the election fraud conspiracy theory holds that voting machines provided by Dominion switched votes from ballots cast for U.S. President Donald Trump to his challenger, Joe Biden, who is now president-elect. Trump has refused to accept his electoral loss, and has perpetuated the lie that Dominion machines were used en masse to flip votes. perpetuated Hence, more than a month after Biden was declared winner of the election, conspiracy theories continued to flourish. In this case, a Twitter user falsely claimed that Dominion is owned by a member of Biden family, namely his nephew. But the tweet in question is nothing but a patchwork of misleading screenshots and assumptions, based on people sharing a common surname. We cropped the user's name out below: falsely claimed The screenshots in the meme above contain what appear to be the professional biographies of two men, Stephen Owens and R. Kevin Owens, neither of which mentions Dominion. The meme included in the tweet points to President-elect Biden's sister and campaign manager Valerie Biden Owens, with the alleged clincher being that Stephen Owens, a co-founder of Staple Street Capital, an investment firm that owns 75% stake in Dominion, shares a surname. However, "Owens" is a common last name, so that hardly serves as proof at all. co-founder owns Valerie and her husband, John T. Owens, have three children, none named Stephen. A spokesperson for Staple Street confirmed in an email to Snopes that Stephen Owens has no relation to the Biden family. three children And although the meme includes mention of R. Kevin Owens, an attorney who is related to Valerie's husband, we see no connection between this person and Dominion. related In other iterations of this conspiracy theory, the voting systems company has been falsely linked to deceased Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez, as well as various Democratic politicians, including U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, California U.S. Sen. Dianne Feinstein, and the Clinton Foundation, the charitable foundation run by former President Bill and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. Hugo Chavez including Trump's own administration has undermined his post-election disinformation blitz by stating the November 2020 election was "the most secure in American history." undermined "There is no evidence that any voting system deleted or lost votes, changed votes, or was in any way compromised," the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, which is a component of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, said in a Nov. 12, 2020, statement. statement Updated to note that a Staples Street representative confirmed Stephen Owens isn't related to the Bidens.

False

Voting in the 2020 U.S. Election may be over, but the misinformation keeps on ticking. Never stop fact-checking. Follow our post-election coverage here.On Dec. 11, 2020, a Twitter user posted a new permutation of a conspiracy theory about Dominion Voting Systems, the technology firm that provided voting systems in multiple U.S. jurisdictions in the November 2020 election, and which has also been the target of a disinformation campaign falsely claiming its systems were used to perpetrate widespread voter fraud.One of the narratives in the election fraud conspiracy theory holds that voting machines provided by Dominion switched votes from ballots cast for U.S. President Donald Trump to his challenger, Joe Biden, who is now president-elect. Trump has refused to accept his electoral loss, and has perpetuated the lie that Dominion machines were used en masse to flip votes.Hence, more than a month after Biden was declared winner of the election, conspiracy theories continued to flourish. In this case, a Twitter user falsely claimed that Dominion is owned by a member of Biden family, namely his nephew. But the tweet in question is nothing but a patchwork of misleading screenshots and assumptions, based on people sharing a common surname. We cropped the user's name out below:The meme included in the tweet points to President-elect Biden's sister and campaign manager Valerie Biden Owens, with the alleged clincher being that Stephen Owens, a co-founder of Staple Street Capital, an investment firm that owns 75% stake in Dominion, shares a surname. However, "Owens" is a common last name, so that hardly serves as proof at all.Valerie and her husband, John T. Owens, have three children, none named Stephen. A spokesperson for Staple Street confirmed in an email to Snopes that Stephen Owens has no relation to the Biden family.And although the meme includes mention of R. Kevin Owens, an attorney who is related to Valerie's husband, we see no connection between this person and Dominion.In other iterations of this conspiracy theory, the voting systems company has been falsely linked to deceased Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez, as well as various Democratic politicians, including U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, California U.S. Sen. Dianne Feinstein, and the Clinton Foundation, the charitable foundation run by former President Bill and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.Trump's own administration has undermined his post-election disinformation blitz by stating the November 2020 election was "the most secure in American history.""There is no evidence that any voting system deleted or lost votes, changed votes, or was in any way compromised," the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, which is a component of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, said in a Nov. 12, 2020, statement.

FMD_train_1048

If we choose Obamacare expansion, 600,000 will lose eligibility for their subsidies, of which 257,000 would be forced into Medicaid.

04/30/2015

Even before the Florida House adjourned early, Speaker Steve Crisafulli clearly laid the blame for the session's budget impasse on Medicaid expansion. In an essay printed by the Tampa Bay Times, Crisafulli wrote that the Senate had partnered with the Obama administration to demand the expansion. However, the House believed that this move would drag people into a costly system that didn't work. Under federal law, other low-income Floridians have access to health care subsidies to buy private insurance for less than the average cost of a wireless phone bill, said Crisafulli, R-Merritt Island. In fact, if we choose Obamacare expansion, 600,000 will lose eligibility for their subsidies, of which 257,000 would be forced into Medicaid. Estimates say the expansion would cover more than 800,000 people, many of whom are currently uninsured. We wondered where Crisafulli was getting his numbers. This subject can make heads spin pretty easily, so before we begin, let's review a few basics about the Affordable Care Act. The law's intent was to expand coverage to the uninsured through two different methods. The first was to provide subsidies to people who needed help buying insurance through HealthCare.gov or a new state marketplace. The second method was to expand Medicaid, a state-federal insurance program for the very poor. Medicaid expansion ended up being optional for the states, thanks to a 2012 Supreme Court ruling. This is what the Florida House and Senate are arguing about. The Senate wants to expand Medicaid so that recipients end up buying heavily subsidized insurance. The House doesn't want to expand Medicaid at all. Crisafulli's numbers are based on how many Floridians would qualify for the expansion, which would be extended to all adults up to 138 percent of the federal poverty level (100 percent is currently $11,770 for an individual and $24,250 for a family of four). Technically, the calculation is actually 133 percent under the law, but a 5 percent deduction is added on top of that. If a state doesn't expand Medicaid, people who make between 100 and 400 percent of the poverty level can receive subsidies to buy insurance in a marketplace. These are the subsidies Crisafulli is referring to. However, if you qualify for Medicaid, you're not eligible for help paying premiums. His argument is that if the state extends the program, the people between 100 and 133 percent of the federal poverty level (he's not citing the full 138, you'll note) will lose their subsidies to buy policies, and the House simply won't let that happen. Crisafulli is using estimates from the 2015-16 fiscal year by the Florida Office of Economic and Demographic Research, which we examined ourselves. That projection indicates there are about 609,000 people in the 100 to 133 percent of the poverty level range, and a little more than 351,000 of them have some form of insurance. They obtain it through employers, Medicare, or some other form of government assistance program, or they buy insurance on their own (subsidized or not). Those people could enroll in Medicaid if they wanted to. More than 257,000 have no insurance at all, and these are the individuals Crisafulli claims will be forced into Medicaid. His office confirmed he meant they would be left without subsidies and would not earn enough to buy policies, making Medicaid their only option. The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services and health policy experts largely agreed that the numbers were plausible, but there are some points they said Crisafulli is sidestepping. Foremost is the idea that 257,000 people would be forced to join the program. There is no law that mandates you must use Medicaid if you qualify, and not everyone who is currently eligible enrolls. Ben Sommers, a health policy and economics professor at Harvard, stated that it's pretty tough for Crisafulli to imply that those quarter-million people would be upset by suddenly qualifying for Medicaid. "Giving uninsured people Medicaid is pretty popular among uninsured people," Sommers said. There aren't any public opinion surveys I've seen in which low-income adults don't generally support the Medicaid expansion. Crisafulli neglects to mention that there are many Floridians who currently don't qualify for either Medicaid or federal subsidies, an estimated 669,000 people whose income is below 100 percent of the federal poverty level. Those uninsured Floridians account for 18 percent of all Americans in the so-called coverage gap—second only to Texas. They would all benefit from Medicaid expansion by gaining coverage. Finally, Crisafulli argues that expanding Medicaid under Obamacare would unfairly take away subsidies that Floridians need to buy their own insurance. Those subsidies are a feature of the very same Affordable Care Act he criticizes. Crisafulli stated, "If we choose Obamacare expansion, 600,000 will lose eligibility for their subsidies, of which 257,000 would be forced into Medicaid." Crisafulli is using incendiary language to describe state projections about Medicaid expansion. The state estimates that about 609,000 Floridians would lose access to subsidies to buy insurance under an expansion. About 257,000 of those people would be uninsured, likely because they're too poor to buy their own. The rest could enroll in Medicaid if they wanted to. Therefore, his numbers can be considered accurate. However, experts tell us that saying those people would be forced into the program isn't accurate. Many of the very poor would likely see becoming eligible for Medicaid as a benefit. We rate the statement Mostly True.

True

In an essayprinted by theTampa Bay Times, Crisafulli wrote the Senate had partnered with the Obama administration to demand the expansion. But the House believed the move would drag people into a costly system that didnt work.Crisafullis numbers are based on how many Floridians would qualify for the expansion, which would be extended to all adults up to 138 percent of the federal poverty level (100 percent is currently$11,770 for an individual and $24,250 for a family of four). Technically the calculation is actually 133 percent under the law, but a 5 percent deduction is added on top of that.Crisafulli neglects to mention there are many Floridians who right nowdont qualify for either Medicaid or federal subsidies, an estimated 669,000 people whose income is below 100 percent of federal poverty level. Those uninsured Floridians account for 18 percent of all Americans in the so-called coverage gap -- second only to Texas. They would all benefit from Medicaid expansion by gaining coverage.

FMD_train_536

There are 3.6 million jobs sitting vacant, in part because there arent enough qualified applicants to fill them.

03/14/2013

Rep. Virginia Foxx, R-N.C., recently took to the House floor to tout abillshes sponsoring that would change the structure of job training programs. She warned that the economy faces a paradox -- despite historically high unemployment rates, many jobs are going vacant.There are 3.6 million jobs sitting vacant, in part because there arent enough qualified applicants to fill them, Foxx said in the March 12, 2013,speech.To check Foxxs claim, we turned to data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the federal governments scorekeeper on employment data.We easily found the source of her 3.6 million figure. It comes from a monthly survey called the Job Openings and Labor Turnover Survey, or JOLTS. Themost recent seasonally adjusted dataat the time of Foxxs speech covered January 2013. It showed that there were just under 3.7 million job openings in January, which was up slightly from 3.6 million in December 2012.So Foxx essentially got the number right. However, her use of the term sitting vacant and her warning about a shortage of qualified applicants suggests that employers are having trouble filling these 3.6 million jobs. A close look at the survey reveals it doesnt actually support that thesis.The bureaus official definition of a job opening is a specific position of employment to be filled at an establishment that satisfy these conditions: there is work available for that position, the job could start within 30 days, and the employer is actively recruiting for the position.But there are always job openings -- even in a healthy economy. In a phenomenon known as churn, people change jobs. Just because their old job is unoccupied when the BLS takes its monthly data snapshot doesnt necessarily mean that the employer is having trouble filling the job. Rather, the employer could simply be going through the process of hiring, with the job filled a month later.The data from this survey has important limitations, said Steven J. Davis, an economist at the University of Chicago Booth School of Business, because it provides little information about the distribution of vacancy durations and no direct information about the reason why some job openings take a long time to fill.In some ways, vacancies are actually a hallmark of a healthy economy. Job openings often arise either because someone leaves one job for a better one, or because a company is hiring new workers. Both are positive signs. If you look at the monthly December job opening totals going back a decade, the years just prior to the recession had the most job openings, while the years during and immediately after the recession hit had the least job vacancies:2012:3.6 million2011:3.5 million2010:2.9 million2009:2.5 million2008:3.2 million2007:4.0 million2006:4.4 million2005:3.9 million2004:3.5 million2003:2.9 millionBut while the number Foxx used doesnt provide much support for her claim, other evidence, both anecdotal and statistical, suggests that she has a point that theres a problem with unfilled jobs today.The most solid evidence for a lengthening of job vacancies comes from astudyby Davis, R. Jason Faberman and John C. Haltiwanger. It found that the time before a vacancy is filled has expanded from 15 days in 2009 to 23 today. As a result, the job vacancy rate and the unemployment rate, which historically have moved in tandem,began to divergeduring the most recent recession and have not yet returned to their historical pattern.Why is this happening? Foxxs office provided links to avarietyofnewsreportsthatsuggesta mismatch between applicants job skills and the ones employers are seeking. Economists agree that that is part of the issue, particularly with high-skill jobs. But its probably not the only reason.For instance, there appears to be a hiring paralysis among employers who are acting with unusual caution because they are uncertain whether the economy will remain strong rather than stagnating, according to economists and hiring professionals quoted in theNew York Timesearlier this year. This has sometimes led to employers piling on extra tests and rounds of interviews as a way of stalling, experts told theTimes.Our rulingFoxx said, There are 3.6 million jobs sitting vacant, in part because there arent enough qualified applicants to fill them. Shes right that there are 3.6 million vacancies and she's right that there aren't enough qualified job applicants, but she wrong to link the two because that statistic doesnt take into account how long a job has been open. Still, there is strong evidence that the duration of job vacancies has grown since the onset of the most recent recession, and the skills mismatch Foxx cites is likely part of the reason. We rate her claim Mostly True.

True

Rep. Virginia Foxx, R-N.C., recently took to the House floor to tout abillshes sponsoring that would change the structure of job training programs. She warned that the economy faces a paradox -- despite historically high unemployment rates, many jobs are going vacant.There are 3.6 million jobs sitting vacant, in part because there arent enough qualified applicants to fill them, Foxx said in the March 12, 2013,speech.To check Foxxs claim, we turned to data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the federal governments scorekeeper on employment data.We easily found the source of her 3.6 million figure. It comes from a monthly survey called the Job Openings and Labor Turnover Survey, or JOLTS. Themost recent seasonally adjusted dataat the time of Foxxs speech covered January 2013. It showed that there were just under 3.7 million job openings in January, which was up slightly from 3.6 million in December 2012.So Foxx essentially got the number right. However, her use of the term sitting vacant and her warning about a shortage of qualified applicants suggests that employers are having trouble filling these 3.6 million jobs. A close look at the survey reveals it doesnt actually support that thesis.The bureaus official definition of a job opening is a specific position of employment to be filled at an establishment that satisfy these conditions: there is work available for that position, the job could start within 30 days, and the employer is actively recruiting for the position.But there are always job openings -- even in a healthy economy. In a phenomenon known as churn, people change jobs. Just because their old job is unoccupied when the BLS takes its monthly data snapshot doesnt necessarily mean that the employer is having trouble filling the job. Rather, the employer could simply be going through the process of hiring, with the job filled a month later.The data from this survey has important limitations, said Steven J. Davis, an economist at the University of Chicago Booth School of Business, because it provides little information about the distribution of vacancy durations and no direct information about the reason why some job openings take a long time to fill.In some ways, vacancies are actually a hallmark of a healthy economy. Job openings often arise either because someone leaves one job for a better one, or because a company is hiring new workers. Both are positive signs. If you look at the monthly December job opening totals going back a decade, the years just prior to the recession had the most job openings, while the years during and immediately after the recession hit had the least job vacancies:2012:3.6 million2011:3.5 million2010:2.9 million2009:2.5 million2008:3.2 million2007:4.0 million2006:4.4 million2005:3.9 million2004:3.5 million2003:2.9 millionBut while the number Foxx used doesnt provide much support for her claim, other evidence, both anecdotal and statistical, suggests that she has a point that theres a problem with unfilled jobs today.The most solid evidence for a lengthening of job vacancies comes from astudyby Davis, R. Jason Faberman and John C. Haltiwanger. It found that the time before a vacancy is filled has expanded from 15 days in 2009 to 23 today. As a result, the job vacancy rate and the unemployment rate, which historically have moved in tandem,began to divergeduring the most recent recession and have not yet returned to their historical pattern.Why is this happening? Foxxs office provided links to avarietyofnewsreportsthatsuggesta mismatch between applicants job skills and the ones employers are seeking. Economists agree that that is part of the issue, particularly with high-skill jobs. But its probably not the only reason.For instance, there appears to be a hiring paralysis among employers who are acting with unusual caution because they are uncertain whether the economy will remain strong rather than stagnating, according to economists and hiring professionals quoted in theNew York Timesearlier this year. This has sometimes led to employers piling on extra tests and rounds of interviews as a way of stalling, experts told theTimes.Our rulingFoxx said, There are 3.6 million jobs sitting vacant, in part because there arent enough qualified applicants to fill them. Shes right that there are 3.6 million vacancies and she's right that there aren't enough qualified job applicants, but she wrong to link the two because that statistic doesnt take into account how long a job has been open. Still, there is strong evidence that the duration of job vacancies has grown since the onset of the most recent recession, and the skills mismatch Foxx cites is likely part of the reason. We rate her claim Mostly True.

FMD_train_1296

Wegmans $80 Coupon Scam

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_14

The stock market does better when you have a Democratic president in the White House.

08/04/2015

Does the stock market boom under Democratic presidents? Hillary Clinton said so during a town hall in Nashua, N.H., on July 28, 2015. "You know the evidence is pretty clear that under Democratic presidents, going a ways back, people do better," Clinton said at around 5:30 in this video. "And not only working people, middle-class people. Even the stock market does better when you have a Democratic president in the White House." We wondered: Is it true that the stock market performs better under a Democratic president? We took a closer look. Scrutinizing the stock ticker, there have been a couple of studies addressing this question, and they all agree: For whatever reason, going back more than a century, the stock market has done better under Democratic presidents than Republican presidents. A 2012 report by CMC Markets, an international financial firm, found that since 1900, the United States stock markets have posted an average annual return of 15.31 percent under Democratic presidents, compared to just 5.43 percent under Republicans. Another study from 2012 by Adviser Perspectives newsletter, using somewhat different methodology, found that since 1900, the Dow Jones Industrial Average has gained 8.7 percent annually under a Democratic president, compared to 5.7 percent under Republicans. Calculations by The Economist found that the Barclays U.S. equity index gained a cumulative 300 percent under Democratic presidents between 1929 and 2011, compared to about zero under Republican presidents. To bring the data up to date, we checked in with Sam Stovall, the chief investment strategist at S&P Equity Research in New York. He had previously found a significant Democratic advantage in stock market gains through 2012. From 1901 through July 31, 2015, Stovall found that the stock market gained 8.7 percent under Democratic presidents, compared to 5.3 percent under Republican presidents. The same pattern held in Stovall's data since the end of World War II; in fact, it was even more pronounced. Since 1945, the markets gained 11.2 percent under Democratic presidents and 6.3 percent under Republican presidents. And it wasn't just the stock market that showed better performance under Democratic presidents, according to a July 2014 paper by Princeton University economists Alan Blinder and Mark Watson. They found a performance gap between the parties that was startlingly large over a wide variety of economic metrics. The U.S. economy not only grows faster, according to real GDP and other measures, during Democratic versus Republican presidencies, but it also produces more jobs, lowers the unemployment rate, generates higher corporate profits and investment, and achieves higher stock market returns, Blinder and Watson wrote. Indeed, it outperforms under almost all standard macroeconomic metrics. What does this mean? Multiple studies show that Clinton's claim is numerically correct. But what, if anything, can we conclude from it? Experts said it's best not to go overboard in drawing conclusions about White House control and stock market performance. Here are some of the reasons why. A lot of this stems from luck and timing. Republicans are burdened by having Herbert Hoover on their presidential roster. The stock market decline was so quick and deep under Hoover that it continues to hinder the party's stock market performance all these decades later. Meanwhile, starting at such a low point was a huge help to his Democratic successor, Franklin D. Roosevelt. In fact, if you remove Hoover from the GOP column, the average monthly return for Republicans improves significantly, from a 0.38 percent average monthly return to a 0.61 percent monthly return. The Hoover-free GOP number is within striking distance of the Democratic mark of 0.73 percent, said Lawrence J. White, a professor at New York University's Stern School of Business. White doesn't argue that it's fairest to remove Hoover from the GOP's calculation. Rather, he said, it's a reminder that relatively small changes due at least in part to unlucky timing can have big effects on the end result. Partisan labels are only somewhat helpful. What matters is the relationship of policy to the stock market, not partisan labels, said Dan Mitchell, an economist with the libertarian Cato Institute. Economic policy under Bill Clinton was far more market-oriented than it was under either Bush or Nixon. A good stock market is harder to define than one might think. For instance, a healthy year-over-year increase in the stock market may sound good, but if it comes with high volatility throughout the year, that can be a lot less pleasant for investors, said Tom Arnold, a professor of finance at the University of Richmond Robins School of Business. Meanwhile, down markets are buying opportunities, and up markets are selling opportunities for the purpose of cashing in on profits, possibly from securities purchased in a down market, Arnold said. Better performance in one market is usually at the cost of another market. Market results don't align neatly with presidential terms. The stock market makes an anticipatory assessment of a president and his policies shortly after his election—or even before the election, White said. So the market's anticipation of what an incoming president will do occurs during the last few months of the incumbent's presidency. He noted that this factor was even stronger prior to 1936, when the new president was inaugurated on March 4, leaving four months of stock market anticipation in the previous president's column. A president is only one factor in determining stock market performance. Perhaps most importantly, experts urge caution in ascribing too much credit to a president for how the stock market performs during his watch. Often—including now, during a period of strong stock market gains—Congress is held by the opposing party. Meanwhile, the Federal Reserve, which plays a crucial role in the economy by directing the nation's monetary policy, operates independently once appointments are made by the president and confirmed by Congress. Additionally, a host of other factors that a president can't control, including technological advances and international economic trends, also play a role. In their paper, Blinder and Watson focus on two factors as most important in determining economic performance. One is the presence or absence of an energy price shock—something that, unfortunately for the GOP, hit during the presidencies of Richard Nixon, Gerald Ford, and George W. Bush, compared to just once under a Democrat, Jimmy Carter. The other factor they pointed to is what economists call total factor productivity, defined as the portion of economic output not explained by the amount of inputs used in production. Think of it as the economy's special sauce, or its extra bang for the buck. Although it's unclear why, Democratic presidents have benefited from higher total factor productivity, most clearly during the technology boom under Bill Clinton, which produced significant productivity gains. Hillary Clinton's campaign emphasized to PolitiFact that she didn't say that the president is the only factor that influences stock market results. Still, our experts agreed that while the numbers to back up her claim are clear, the meaning and significance of those numbers should be taken with a grain of salt. "I wouldn't place much weight on it, one way or the other," White said. Our ruling: Clinton said that the stock market does better when you have a Democratic president in the White House. The numbers back her up, but it's worth noting that luck, timing, and several other factors in the broader economy also play a role in determining stock market performance. The statement is accurate but needs clarification or additional information, so we rate it Mostly True.

True

You know the evidence is pretty clear that under Democratic presidents, going a ways back, people do better, Clinton said,at around 5:30 in this video. And not only working people, middle class people. Even the stock market does better when you have a Democratic president in the White House.A2012 report by CMC Markets, an international financial firm, found that since 1900, the United States stock markets have posted an average annual return of 15.31 percent under Democratic presidents, compared to just 5.43 percent under Republicans.Anotherstudyfrom 2012 by Adviser Perspectives newsletter, using somewhat different methodology, found that since 1900, the Dow Jones Industrial Average has gained 8.7 percent annually under a Democratic president, compared to 5.7 percent under Republicans.AndcalculationsbyThe Economistfound that the Barclays U.S. equity index gained a cumulative 300 percent under Democratic presidents between 1929 and 2011, compared to about zero under Republican presidents.To bring the data up to date, we checked in with Sam Stovall, the chief investment strategist at S&P Equity Research in New York. He hadpreviously founda big Democratic advantage in stock market gains through 2012.And it wasnt just the stock market that chalked up better performance under Democratic presidents, according toa July 2014 paperby Princeton University economists Alan Blinder and Mark Watson. They found a performance gap between the parties that was startlingly large over a wide variety of economic metrics.The U.S. economy not only grows faster, according to real GDP and other measures, during Democratic versus Republican presidencies, it also produces more jobs, lowers the unemployment rate, generates higher corporate profits and investment, and turns in higher stock market returns,Blinder and Watson wrote. Indeed, it outperforms under almost all standard macroeconomic metrics.The other factor they pointed to is what economists call total factor productivity,defined asthe portion of economic output not explained by the amount of inputs used in production. Think of it as the economys special sauce, or its extra bang for the buck. Although its unclear why, Democratic presidents have benefited from higher total factor productivity, most clearly during the technology boom under Bill Clinton, which produced significant productivity gains.

FMD_train_227

We have more scientists and engineers per square mile than anywhere in the world.

09/06/2012

New Jersey has long held the title of the most densely populated state in the country. However, the Garden State has an even more prestigious ranking, according to a recent advertisement placed by Choose New Jersey in the Wall Street Journal. The July 30 ad states in part: "New Jersey has a rich tradition of bringing the world some very big thinking. In fact, we have more scientists and engineers per square mile than anywhere in the world, making ours one of the most highly skilled and educated workforces available." That's quite a claim for any state to make, so for this fact check, we are focusing only on the statistic about scientists and engineers. It seems Choose New Jersey's calculations add up. Let's look at how Choose New Jersey, a nonprofit group that markets the state to attract businesses and jobs, arrived at their statistic. Choose New Jersey is part of the Partnership for Action, the Business Action Center, and the state Economic Development Authority. Melissa Hensley, chief marketing officer for the group, said they compared geographic and employment data from four organizations: the Census Bureau's American Community Survey, the CIA's World Fact Book 2012, the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, and the National Science Board. All of it came down to an apples-to-apples comparison to the extent possible between a state and a country, Hensley said. The Census Bureau's Population Reference Bureau listed New Jersey as having 260,655 scientists and engineers in 2010. That number, divided by New Jersey's total land area of 8,722.58 square miles, equals 29.88 scientists and engineers—the highest number among all states and a list of 37 countries. "I read somewhere that New Jersey is the most densely populated state in the U.S., so I guess you could extrapolate from that that there are more scientists per square mile than anywhere else," Brian Bell, a spokesman for the California Institute of Technology, said in an email. "Although Massachusetts might give N.J. a run for its money. California has lots of smart people, but we have huge deserts and lots of empty space too." Bell's guess is accurate. Massachusetts has the second highest number of scientists and engineers, at 23.47 per square mile, followed by Maryland, at 20.97. California is 10th on the list. A similar calculation was used for other countries by measuring the number of researchers—a broader term that includes scientists and engineers—per 1,000 employed people. Breaking that figure down and comparing it against country size, we determined that Israel tops the international list, with 5.10 scientists and engineers per square mile (Choose New Jersey's calculations were adjusted to consider countries in square miles instead of kilometers). Rounding out the top three are Japan, at 4.46, and Belgium, at 3.16. If both lists are put together, New Jersey and 11 other U.S. states lead the world in the number of engineers and scientists per square mile before Israel joins the rankings. The numbers reflect what we regularly hear from businesses considering locating or expanding in New Jersey—that if a company is looking to benefit from a high concentration of very skilled talent, New Jersey is a prime location, Hensley said in response to our findings. Our ruling: Choose New Jersey stated in an advertisement that we have more scientists and engineers per square mile than anywhere in the world, making the state's workforce one of the most skilled and highly educated. Choose New Jersey used a variety of data to reach its conclusion, from the U.S. Census Bureau to the CIA World Fact Book and more. PolitiFact New Jersey vetted the calculations and found that the Garden State does top the world in the number of scientists and engineers per square mile: 29.8. We rate this statement True. To comment on this story, go to NJ.com.

True

To comment on this story, go toNJ.com.

FMD_train_351

McMoose

02/16/2005

Claim: Photograph shows a moose poking its snout into a McDonald's drive-through window in Madawaska, Maine. REAL PHOTOGRAPH; INACCURATE DESCRIPTION Example: [Collected on the Internet, 2005] MEET McMOOSE, PHOTOGRAPHED OUTSIDE MADAWASKA, (AROOSTOOK COUNTY), MAINE, ACROSS THE ST. JOHN RIVER FROM EDMUNSTON, NEW BRUNSWICK, CANADA Origins: The town of Madawaska, Maine, has at least one McDonald's restaurant, and moose are known to inhabit the area, but the critter pictured above poking his snout into a drive-through window actually hails from an area Madawaska several thousand miles away. This photograph appeared in the 2004 pictorial wildlife book Moose Views, where it was credited to Steve Kaufman and said to capture a curious moose at a McDonald's in the city of Homer, Alaska, not Madawaska, Maine. Moose Views Homer Coincidentally, Homer, Alaska, was the setting for a series of McDonald's commercials aired in conjunction with the 1990 Super Bowl, based on the conceit that folks so far away from the rest of us couldn't care less who won a match-up between football teams from San Francisco and Denver. Unless, of course, McDonald's piqued their interest by offering different low-priced specials depending upon who won the game: Last updated: 9 May 2015 Moose Views

NEI

Origins: The town of Madawaska, Maine, has at least one McDonald's restaurant, and moose are known to inhabit the area, but the critter pictured above poking his snout into a drive-through window actually hails from an area This photograph appeared in the 2004 pictorial wildlife book Moose Views, where it was credited to Steve Kaufman and said to capture a curious moose at a McDonald's in the city of Homer, Alaska, not Madawaska, Maine.

FMD_train_1253

Did Oregon Officials Say 'Showing Work' in Math Class Is White Supremacism?

02/22/2021

In early 2021, Snopes became aware of online reports alleging that the Oregon Department of Education (ODE) stated that the practice of students documenting how they solve math problems perpetuated white supremacism. Among the web pages circulating this claim was a February 15 article on conservative commentator Ben Shapiro's media website, The Daily Wire. It read: "A mathematics guide sent out to Oregon schools tells educators that asking students to show their work in math class is a form of white supremacy." Examples of classroom actions that allegedly perpetuate white supremacy include asking students to show their work, focusing on getting the right answer, tracking student success, and grading students. A separate web page by Fox News titled "Oregon promotes teacher program that seeks to undo 'racism in mathematics'" also made this assertion, while users of social media sites, including Twitter and Reddit, debated the accuracy of such reports or circulated their allegations about the state department's instructions to educators as fact. We learned that the rumor's source was a February 5 newsletter from ODE to math teachers across the state that included links to additional teaching resources. See the below-displayed screenshot of a portion of the public bulletin, which Snopes confirmed the authenticity of via ODE's Director of Communications, Mark Siegel. In other words, a portion of the ODE-sponsored newsletter promoted a virtual learning seminar designed by an outside entity, Pathway to Equitable Math Instruction, which aimed to equip middle school math teachers with ideas to address documented performance gaps between white and English-speaking students and all other students, according to the bulletin and our correspondence with Siegel. The Oregon newsletter included links to the home page of the so-called "Pathway to Equitable Math Instruction" project, as well as to register for the course. Siegel stated in an email to Snopes, "The materials contained in the [newsletter] are drawn from both internal and external sources, and the inclusion of external materials does not necessarily indicate Oregon Department of Education endorsement." More than 30 people from agencies across California and other states, such as San Diego State University, the Los Angeles County of Education, and UnboundEd (a hub of training resources for teachers), designed the ODE-advertised project "Pathway to Equitable Math Instruction," according to an online pamphlet listing collaborators. In addition to the online teaching classes featured in the ODE newsletter, the initiative's website hosts several PDFs to which middle school teachers anywhere can refer if they are interested in working toward the project's goal: dismantling racism in math classes. One such report, totaling 82 pages, stated more than halfway through: In other words, a resource on the website for "Pathway to Equitable Math Instruction," which ODE called a partner in the newsletter, indeed stated that "white supremacy culture shows up in math classrooms" when educators require students to show their work because the mandate does not necessarily help students process information. Instead, the PDF encouraged teachers to offer a variety of ways for students to demonstrate their question-answering process, including through verbal discussions or multimedia projects that do not use written words or numbers. We reached out to several of the project's collaborators for their comments on The Daily Wire and Fox News' framing of the above-described advice for middle school math teachers, and we heard back from Joanne Rossi Becker, a math and statistics professor at San Jose State University. Becker said that while she did not author the report—she served as a reviewer of its materials—the recommendation aimed to encourage educators to allow students to explain their thinking in ways other than writing, such as through conversations, graphs, or videos. "Overall, the document is well done and has cogent recommendations for teachers and other educators to ameliorate implicit bias and racism," Becker wrote in an email to Snopes. To be clear, while the ODE newsletter promoted a course designed by the project to eliminate racial and language gaps in teaching, as well as a link to a homepage, it did not include a link to or mention the above-displayed PDF specifically. Siegel told Snopes that ODE did not directly instruct educators in terms of specific instructional practices; rather, an optional resource was shared to support teacher conversations to examine their actions, beliefs, and values around teaching mathematics. The department is supportive of conversations in the larger context of identifying beliefs and practices that perpetuate educational harm on Black, Latinx, and multilingual students, denying them full access to the world of mathematics. The authors of this resource described this larger idea using the term white supremacy. The term "showing the work" in this resource refers to a single approach identified by the teacher. Although a single answer may be expected, students could arrive at correct answers using a variety of approaches, such as grouping physical objects (Legos, blocks), diagrams of problems, writing it out, video explanations, and spreadsheets. Put another way, the department said it supports the project's goal to help students of color and multilingual students perform better in math class, as well as its recommendation to allow classes a variety of ways to explain how they solve problems. "Neither ODE nor the course has made claims that math content itself is racist," Siegel wrote. "The system of mathematics education, including policy, graduation requirements, standards, instruction, course sequences, and assessments, must be evaluated through an equity stance to disrupt inequitable outcomes we currently experience." In sum, it is true that a project designed by dozens of school administrators and scholars stated that expanding options for math students to explain their processes for answering questions could help close racial and language gaps in teaching, addressing existing "white supremacy culture." However, it was false to frame that recommendation as a mandatory directive from ODE to teachers or to suggest that the department itself claimed the standard idea of "showing work" is a form of white supremacy. For those reasons, we rate this claim a "Mixture" of truth and misleading information.

NEI

Among web pages circulating the claim was a Feb. 15 article on conservative commentator Ben Shapiro's media website, The Daily Wire. It read:A separate web page by Fox News titled, "Oregon promotes teacher program that seeks to undo 'racism in mathematics'," also made the assertion, while users of social media sites including Twitter and Reddit debated the accuracy of such reports, or circulated their allegations about the state department's instructions to educators as fact.We learned the rumor's source was a Feb. 5 newsletter from ODE to math teachers across the state that included links to additional teaching resources. See the below-displayed screenshot of a portion of the public bulletin, of which Snopes confirmed the authenticity via ODE's Director of Communications Mark Siegel.In other words, a portion of the ODE-sponsored newsletter promoted a virtual learning seminar designed by an outside entity Pathway to Equitable Math Instruction that aimed to equip middle school math teachers with ideas to curb documented performance gaps between white and English-speaking students and all other students, according to the bulletin and our correspondence with Siegel.The Oregon newsletter included links to the home page of the so-called "Pathway to Equitable Math Instruction" project (on which we elaborate below), as well as to register for the course. Siegel said in an email to Snopes:More than 30 people from agencies across California and other states such as San Diego State University, the Los Angeles County of Education and UnboundEd (a hub of training resources for teachers) designed the ODE-advertised project "Pathway to Equitable Math Instruction," according to an online pamphlet listing collaborators.In addition to the online teaching classes featured in the ODE newsletter, the initiative's website hosts several PDFs to which middle school teachers anywhere can refer if they are interested in working toward the project's goal: dismantling racism in math classes. One such report, totaling 82 pages, stated more than halfway through:

FMD_train_292

We aren't the only state cutting back on public television.

02/14/2012

The prospect of clipping the wings of Big Bird arose on February 5 when Richard Licht, Governor Chafee's director of administration, appeared on ABC6's "On the Record" with Buddy Cianci. The host, former Providence Mayor Vincent "Buddy" Cianci, was grilling Licht about Chafee's proposal to eliminate funding for Channel 36, now known as Rhode Island PBS, the state's only public television station. Chafee's proposed budget, crafted to close a projected shortfall of $120 million to $125 million, would cut off funding to the station after December 31, 2012. "CIANCI: What have you got against 'Sesame Street'?" "LICHT: I love Sesame Street. I have grandchildren, and I always watched it with all four of my children. Tough times make for tough choices." "CIANCI: But 'Sesame Street'? My God." "LICHT: Hopefully, Channel 36 will be aggressive and find some good charitable sponsors to help support this." "CIANCI (facetiously): Especially in this economy, they're going to just fork over $800,000." "LICHT: We aren't the only state cutting back on public television. It's not anything we're happy about, and again, that's something that might be reversed if better revenue estimates come in, but the facts are, tough times mean tough choices." We were interested in whether Licht was correct that other states are cutting back on public television and, if so, how many. We called the governor's office to ask for Licht's source. Meanwhile, we spoke to David Piccerelli, president of Rhode Island PBS. "The proposal is to fund us through December 31, 2012, and then shut off funding altogether," he said. In the current fiscal year, the state contributes $922,000 to RIPBS's total budget of $2.9 million, which is 31 percent. Another 27 percent comes from the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, which helps fund stations throughout the United States. (The CPB itself has been repeatedly threatened with the cutoff of federal funds by conservatives.) The remaining 42 percent comes from fundraising. Piccerelli noted that about 85 cents out of every dollar raised is from individual donors, while corporate support accounts for no more than 15 cents, down from close to 30 cents on the dollar around 2004-2005, before the Rhode Island economy took a downturn. Piccerelli mentioned that some states have been cutting back their support; Chafee's office sent us information confirming that. Last June, New Hampshire Public Television eliminated 20 full-time positions and cut staff salaries by as much as 10 percent after losing $2.7 million in state funding, or about 30 percent of its budget. At the same time, New Jersey Governor Chris Christie, backed by the state legislature, eliminated funding for New Jersey public television, which resulted in the 40-year-old New Jersey Network being taken over by WNET in New York, and NJN's nine radio licenses being sold to stations in New York and Philadelphia. Stacey Karp, director of communications for the Association of Public Television Stations, stated that four other states—Florida, Missouri, Pennsylvania, and South Carolina—have also eliminated funding. For details, she referred us to Skip Hinton, president of the National Educational Telecommunications Association, a professional association that represents stations in every state. He informed us that 38 states were providing direct support to public broadcasting in 2007, but that number has now decreased to 32. "Of the 32, most have seen pretty significant reductions in state funding over the last four years," he said. At least one state—Illinois—has increased its contribution to public television, boosting funding by 16 percent last year after cuts in previous years. Our ruling: Richard Licht, Chafee's director of administration, stated, "We aren't the only state cutting back on public television." It turns out he is correct. Five states have eliminated funding, and others have cut their contributions. We rate his statement as true. (Get updates from PolitiFactRI on Twitter. To comment or offer your ruling, visit us on our PolitiFact Rhode Island Facebook page.)

True

The prospect of clipping the wings of Big Bird came up Feb. 5 when Richard Licht, Governor Chafees director of administration, made an appearance on ABC6s On the Record with Buddy Cianci.The host, former Providence Mayor Vincent Buddy Cianci was grilling Licht on Chafees proposal to eliminate funding for Channel 36, now known as Rhode Island PBS, the states only public television station.Chafee's proposed budget, crafted to close a projected shortfall of $120 million to $125 million, would cut off funding to the station after Dec. 31, 2012.CIANCI: What have you got against 'Sesame Street'?LICHT: I love Sesame Street. I have grandchildren and I always watched it with all four of my children. Tough times make for tough choices.CIANCI: But 'Sesame Street'? My God.LICHT: Hopefully, Channel 36 will be aggressive, go out and find some good charitable sponsors to help support this.CIANCI (facetiously): Especially in this economy, they're going to just fork over $800,000.LICHT: We aren't the only state cutting back on public television. It's not anything that we're happy about and, again, that's something that might be reversed [if better higher revenue estimates come in], but the facts are, tough times, tough choices.We were interested in whether Licht was correct that other states are cutting back on public television and, if so, how many.We called the governor's office to ask for Licht's source.Meanwhile, we talked to David Piccerelli, president of Rhode Island PBS.The proposal is to fund us through December 31 of 2012 and then shut off funding altogether, he said. In the current fiscal year, the state contributes $922,000 to RIPBS's total budget of $2.9 million. That's 31 percent.Another 27 percent comes from the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, which helps fund stations throughout the United States. (The CPB itself has been repeatedly threatened with the cutoff of federal funds by conservatives.)The remaining 42 percent comes from fundraising. Piccerelli said about 85 cents out of every dollar raised is from individual donors. Corporate support accounts for no more than 15 cents, down from close to 30 cents on the dollar around 2004-2005, before the Rhode Island economy took a faceplant.Piccerelli said some states HAVE been cutting back their support; Chafee's office sent us information confirming that.Last June,New Hampshire Public Television eliminated20 full-time workers and cut staff salaries by as much as 10 percent after it lost $2.7 million in state funding, or about 30 percent of its budget.At the same time, New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, backed by the state legislature,eliminated funding for New Jersey public television, which resulted in the 40-year-old New Jersey Network being taken over by WNET in New York and NJN's nine radio licenses being sold to stations in New York and Philadelphia.Stacey Karp, director of communications for the Association of Public Television Stations, said four other states -- Florida, Missouri, Pennsylvania and South Carolina -- have also eliminated funding. For details, she sent us to Skip Hinton, president of theNational Educational Telecommunications Association, a professional association that represents stations in every state.He told us that 38 states were providing direct support to public broadcasting in 2007. It's now down to 32.Of the 32, most have seen pretty significant reductions in state funding over the last four years, he said.At least one state -- Illinois -- increased its contribution to public television, boosting funding by 16 percent last year, following cuts in previous years.Our rulingRichard Licht, Chafee's director of administration, said, We aren't the only state cutting back on public television.Turns out, hes right. Five states have eliminated funding and others have cut their contributions.We rate his statementTrue.(Get updates fromPolitiFactRI on Twitter. To comment or offer your ruling, visit us on ourPolitiFact Rhode Island Facebookpage.)

FMD_train_314

Since the stimulus package was passed, Ohios lost over 100,000 more jobs.

10/11/2010

PolitiFact has rapped Rob Portman for certain claims made during his U.S. Senate campaign. Weve credited Portman, too, for truthful statements. Thats the nature of the Truth-O-Meter: We play it as it lays.Which brings us to Portmanslatest television ad.In the 30-second spot, Portman points to out-of-control federal spending, dangerous deficits and an economic stimulus plan that he says isnt working. Since the $800 billion stimulus passed, Ohios lost over 100,000 more jobs, Portman says in the commercial.The claim about the stimulus program not working has been batted about repeatedly. The White House said when the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act passed in February 2009, that unemployment would peak at 8 percent. Yet it is now 9.6 percent nationally, and 10.7 percent in Ohio.A number of economists say that even more jobs would have been lost were it not for the government spending to stimulate the economy. TheCongressional Budget Offices last quarterly evaluationsaid the stimulus increased national employment by 1.4 million to 3.3 million jobs. There have been mistakes, missteps and gaffes documented in the spending programs, however, and Portman and other Republicans say the spending was poorly focused. This central question will be for historians and economists in the future to settle.Were merely taking note of Portmans claim because of this: He uses a lower number -- 100,000 jobs lost in Ohio since the stimulus passed -- than he used previously. When he put the figure at 150,000 in June,the Truth-O-Meter ruled it Half True-- because only 127,900 jobs had actually been lost, judging by the most widely accepted measure.That was based on Bureau of Labor Statistics figures through May, the most current at the time. The numbers come from surveys of employers and are adjusted as the data becomes more complete. Using updated data, BLS now shows the post-stimulus job losses in Ohio came to 130,000 for the period Portman claimed in his earlier statement..But now its October and Portman is using a lower figure when he speaks. As he said in his newest ad, and repeated during an Oct. 8 debate at the City Club of Cleveland, since the stimulus bill passed, Ohios lost over 100,000 more jobs.Yet heres the thing: Portmans rhetoric might actually be too cautious now. As measured by the latest BLS figures, which go through August and are preliminary, Ohio has 149,200 fewer jobs now than when the stimulus passed. Thats exquisitely close to 150,000.What happened?The state steadily lost jobs through 2009 but the numbers started improving early in the year, continuing through May. The summer saw a retraction, however, reducing Ohios employment count by a total of 19,200 jobs during June, July and August.So Portman was accurate and then some with his recent, more cautious statement. The Half True ruling nevertheless stands for his June claim, because PolitiFact doesnt believe in fortune-telling and Portmans numbers were in fact off when he made that statement.But we give credit where credit is due. So the Truth-O-Meter takes a turn to the right and rules on Portmans newest claim: True. Comment on this item.

True

PolitiFact has rapped Rob Portman for certain claims made during his U.S. Senate campaign. Weve credited Portman, too, for truthful statements. Thats the nature of the Truth-O-Meter: We play it as it lays.Which brings us to Portmanslatest television ad.In the 30-second spot, Portman points to out-of-control federal spending, dangerous deficits and an economic stimulus plan that he says isnt working. Since the $800 billion stimulus passed, Ohios lost over 100,000 more jobs, Portman says in the commercial.The claim about the stimulus program not working has been batted about repeatedly. The White House said when the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act passed in February 2009, that unemployment would peak at 8 percent. Yet it is now 9.6 percent nationally, and 10.7 percent in Ohio.A number of economists say that even more jobs would have been lost were it not for the government spending to stimulate the economy. TheCongressional Budget Offices last quarterly evaluationsaid the stimulus increased national employment by 1.4 million to 3.3 million jobs. There have been mistakes, missteps and gaffes documented in the spending programs, however, and Portman and other Republicans say the spending was poorly focused. This central question will be for historians and economists in the future to settle.Were merely taking note of Portmans claim because of this: He uses a lower number -- 100,000 jobs lost in Ohio since the stimulus passed -- than he used previously. When he put the figure at 150,000 in June,the Truth-O-Meter ruled it Half True-- because only 127,900 jobs had actually been lost, judging by the most widely accepted measure.That was based on Bureau of Labor Statistics figures through May, the most current at the time. The numbers come from surveys of employers and are adjusted as the data becomes more complete. Using updated data, BLS now shows the post-stimulus job losses in Ohio came to 130,000 for the period Portman claimed in his earlier statement..But now its October and Portman is using a lower figure when he speaks. As he said in his newest ad, and repeated during an Oct. 8 debate at the City Club of Cleveland, since the stimulus bill passed, Ohios lost over 100,000 more jobs.Yet heres the thing: Portmans rhetoric might actually be too cautious now. As measured by the latest BLS figures, which go through August and are preliminary, Ohio has 149,200 fewer jobs now than when the stimulus passed. Thats exquisitely close to 150,000.What happened?The state steadily lost jobs through 2009 but the numbers started improving early in the year, continuing through May. The summer saw a retraction, however, reducing Ohios employment count by a total of 19,200 jobs during June, July and August.So Portman was accurate and then some with his recent, more cautious statement. The Half True ruling nevertheless stands for his June claim, because PolitiFact doesnt believe in fortune-telling and Portmans numbers were in fact off when he made that statement.But we give credit where credit is due. So the Truth-O-Meter takes a turn to the right and rules on Portmans newest claim: True.Comment on this item.

FMD_train_909

Did Country Singer Joe Diffie Die from Lung Cancer?

04/20/2020

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 March 2020, country music fans were saddened by the news that "Pickup Man" singer Joe Diffie had died from complications of COVID-19, the coronavirus disease. While fans of the singer mourned the loss, some social media users attempted to obfuscate the cause of Diffie's death to further an unfounded claim that hospitals were inflating reported death counts from COVID-19 in order to increase funding. news claim One such social media post racked up more than 100,000 shares within a week: post Another person claimed that Diffie had actually died from lung cancer, not COVID-19: There is no truth to these claims. Country musician Joe Diffie did not die from lung cancer, and the hospital did not alter the cause of death. Diffie published a statement to his Facebook page on March 27, 2020, announcing that he had been diagnosed with COVID-19: statement announcing A few days later, on March 29, his Facebook page was updated again with a statement announcing that he had died due to complications from the disease: statement GRAMMY-winning country music legend Joe Diffie passed away today, Sunday, March 29 from complications of coronavirus (COVID-19). His family requests privacy at this time. In addition to these official updates from Diffie's social media pages, his wife, Tara, also disputed the claim that the singer died from lung cancer. On April 18, she took to Instagram writing that he "did NOT HAVE LUNG CANCER." She further explained that the confusion may have started because Diffie's father, also named Joe, had died from lung cancer a few years prior: Instagram my husband @officialjoediffie did NOT HAVE LUNG CANCER. his father passed, same name, November 2018 to stage IV lung cancer. STOP STARTING FAKE NEWS. Ive seen multiple posts and its upsetting to all of us. @officialjoediffie The social media posts falsely claiming that the musician the died from lung cancer, not COVID-19, attempted to downplay a disease that, as of this writing, has killed nearly 170,000 people dead worldwide, including at least 40,000 in the United States. In addition, these posts are also causing the Diffie family pain and going against the wishes of the late singer. 40,000 When Diffie was first diagnosed with COVID-19, he told his fans to "to be vigilant, cautious and careful during this pandemic." Betts, Stephen. "Joe Diffie, Nineties Countrys Pickup Man, Dead at 61 From Coronavirus." Rolling Stone. 29 March 2020. Betts, Stephen and Patrick Doyle. "John Prine, One of Americas Greatest Songwriters, Dead at 73." Rolling Stone. 7 April 2020. CMT. "Joe Diffie Confirms Hes Tested Positive for Coronavirus." 27 March 2020.

False

Snopes is still fighting an infodemic of rumors and misinformation surrounding the COVID-19 pandemic, and you can help. Find out what we've learned and how to inoculate yourself against COVID-19 misinformation. Read the latest fact checks about the vaccines. Submit any questionable rumors and advice you encounter. Become a Founding Member to help us hire more fact-checkers. And, please, follow the CDC or WHO for guidance on protecting your community from the disease. In March 2020, country music fans were saddened by the news that "Pickup Man" singer Joe Diffie had died from complications of COVID-19, the coronavirus disease. While fans of the singer mourned the loss, some social media users attempted to obfuscate the cause of Diffie's death to further an unfounded claim that hospitals were inflating reported death counts from COVID-19 in order to increase funding. One such social media post racked up more than 100,000 shares within a week:Diffie published a statement to his Facebook page on March 27, 2020, announcing that he had been diagnosed with COVID-19:A few days later, on March 29, his Facebook page was updated again with a statement announcing that he had died due to complications from the disease:In addition to these official updates from Diffie's social media pages, his wife, Tara, also disputed the claim that the singer died from lung cancer. On April 18, she took to Instagram writing that he "did NOT HAVE LUNG CANCER." She further explained that the confusion may have started because Diffie's father, also named Joe, had died from lung cancer a few years prior:my husband @officialjoediffie did NOT HAVE LUNG CANCER. his father passed, same name, November 2018 to stage IV lung cancer. STOP STARTING FAKE NEWS. Ive seen multiple posts and its upsetting to all of us. The social media posts falsely claiming that the musician the died from lung cancer, not COVID-19, attempted to downplay a disease that, as of this writing, has killed nearly 170,000 people dead worldwide, including at least 40,000 in the United States. In addition, these posts are also causing the Diffie family pain and going against the wishes of the late singer.

FMD_train_606

Research performed by economists has shown no consistent, positive impact on jobs, income or tax revenues arising from stadiums or sports franchises.

03/07/2015

Debate has begun over a proposal by the new owners of the Pawtucket Red Sox to move the team to Providence, where they want to build a new riverfront stadium. The project is still in the planning phase, but the owners have said they intend to ask for some financial support from the state and the city, including possibly getting the state-owned land for the stadium for free. But would a new stadium be worth the price tag? Rhode Islands Republican National Committeeman Steve Frias says no. Ina Feb. 24, 2015 commentaryin The Providence Journal, he said giving away the valuable land, which was freed up by the relocation of Route 195, would be a mistake. Research performed by economists has shown no consistent, positive impact on jobs, income or tax revenues arising from stadiums or sports franchises, Frias argued. We thought that claim was worth checking out. When we contacted him, he immediately referred us toa 2008 summary of research in the fieldby economistsDennis Coatesof the University of Maryland, Baltimore County, andBrad Humphreysof West Virginia University. The authors reviewed more than 40 academic studies, spanning nearly two decades, that examined public subsidies for professional sports teams. Their findings were clear. There now exists almost 20 years of research on the economic impact of professional sports franchises and facilities on the local economy, they wrote, reporting that studies published in peer-reviewed economic journals show there is almost no evidence that professional sports franchises and facilities have a measurable economic impact on the economy. And that's for major-league teams. In this case, we're talking about a minor league team, said Humphreys when we contacted him by phone. For example, he and Coates found no difference in economic impact between the years when teams were playing their regular schedules and five time periods when they didn't, due to strikes. And in a subsequent analysis, they found that having postseason games did not affect real per-person income in a city. Money may shift from one part of the economy to another, but there's no net benefit. The evidence is overwhelming,Coates and Humphreys wrote. Economists reach the nearly unanimous conclusion that tangible economic benefits generated by professional sports facilities and franchises are very small; clearly far smaller than stadium advocates suggest and smaller than the size of the subsidies. They also noted that in 2005, when a random group of economists was asked if they agreed or disagreed with the statement, Local and state governments in the U.S. should eliminate subsidies to professional sports franchises, 28 percent agreed and 58 percent strongly agreed. That's a whopping 86 percent. Only 5 percent disagreed. There are special-interest reports that claim an economic benefit and contend that every dollar invested in a sports franchise generates a specific amount of money, Humphreys said, but those are never published in reputable journals because you can make them say whatever you want them to say by tinkering with the assumptions that influence how the numbers are crunched. We posed the question to other experts, including Rick Eckstein, professor of sociology at Villanova University and author of Public Dollars, Private Stadiums: The Battle over Building Sports Stadiums. There are absolutely no publicly subsidized stadiums and arenas that generate enough direct or indirect tax increases to balance the initial (and ongoing) public outlay, he said in an email. In fact, some research suggests that sports stadiums actually decrease economic activity and tax revenue in areas where they are built, said Eckstein. However, strategically placed stadiums and arenas can sometimes ride existing redevelopment trends, but they are never the cause of these trends. Coates and Humphreys said there are several reasons to explain a lack of economic benefit. In many cases -- and this would be particularly true in Rhode Island -- the state would simply be transferring the economic activity from one city to another. And even if more people went to see the Sox in a new stadium, when people spend to go to a ballgame, local entertainment spending on sports increases and local entertainment spending on other activities like movies, bowling, etc. decreases. There are other costs people need to weigh, they wrote. For every individual who derives enjoyment from the presence of the sports franchises in the community, there are likely to be other individuals who are uninterested in sports or even resent being taxed to subsidize an activity they have no use for. And the money used to subsidize a move might be better spent for other public projects with higher social rates of return than a stadium such as construction and maintenance projects, or even reducing taxes. Supporters of public support for professional sports teams often point to intangible benefits, such as boosting civic pride. But that argument is beyond the scope of this item. So here's the box score. Steven Frias said, Research performed by economists has shown no consistent, positive impact on jobs, income or tax revenues arising from stadiums or sports franchises. It appears that he belted this one out of the park. We rate his claimTrue. (If you have a claim youd likePolitiFact Rhode Islandto check, email us at[email protected]. And follow us on Twitter: @politifactri.)

True

Rhode Islands Republican National Committeeman Steve Frias says no. Ina Feb. 24, 2015 commentaryin The Providence Journal, he said giving away the valuable land, which was freed up by the relocation of Route 195, would be a mistake.When we contacted him, he immediately referred us toa 2008 summary of research in the fieldby economistsDennis Coatesof the University of Maryland, Baltimore County, andBrad Humphreysof West Virginia University.We rate his claimTrue.(If you have a claim youd likePolitiFact Rhode Islandto check, email us at[email protected]. And follow us on Twitter: @politifactri.)

FMD_train_693

Was there a government shutdown in Australia that led to the dismissal of all members of Parliament?

02/14/2019

On the heels of the longest federal government shutdown in United States history, and on the potential precipice of another shutdown in February 2019, Facebook users started to share a meme about how the country of Australia handled their own government shutdown back in 1975: The text of the meme stated: "In 1975 Australia had a government shutdown. In the end, all the members of Parliament were fired and then elections were held to restart from scratch. They haven't had another shutdown since." This meme is largely accurate. Australia's government was effectively shutdown due to a budget impasse in October 1975, the prime minister was dismissed, both houses of Parliament were dissolved, and a new election was held. Since then, Australia has not had another government shutdown. However, Australia's constitutional crisis in 1975, often referred to as "The Dismissal," was a bit more complicated than portrayed in this meme. Furthermore, the meme is often offered up on social media as a solution to government shutdowns in the United States, but Australia's government doesn't function in the same manner as the U.S. government. Some of the key differences that enabled "The Dismissal" to occur in Australia is that the country is both a representative democracy and a constitutional monarchy, which means that despite Australia's having elected officials, the head of state in Australia is still the Queen of the United Kingdom and the other Commonwealth realms, as represented by the governor-general). While the Queen rarely exercises her power and is often viewed as a mere figurehead in Australia, the monarch (and in turn the governor-general) is afforded some powers in the country's constitution. During the constitutional crisis of 1975, Governor-General Sir John Kerr used his constitutional authority to dismiss Prime Minister Gough Whitlam. constitutional monarchy Australia's constitution also permits a "double dissolution" procedure to resolve deadlocks between the House and Senate: The Australian Constitution gives almost identical powers to the House of Representatives and the Senate. A bill (proposed law) must be agreed to by both houses in order to become law. The drafters of the Constitution saw the possibility of a deadlock occurring between the two houses, in which there may be disagreement over a bill. Section 57 of the Constitution provides a mechanism to resolve the disagreement, by dissolving both houses of Parliament and calling an election to let the voters decide what the outcome will be. The double dissolution mechanism only relates to a bill that originates in the House of Representatives. While the viral meme states that members of parliament were "fired" due to the government shutdown, that isn't exactly accurate. Both houses of parliament were dissolved, so all of the seats in the House and Senate went up for election again. The "fired" lawmakers therefore still had a chance to retain their seats by winning them back in a subsequent election. In 1975, Prime Minister Whitlam and the Australian Labor Party (ALP) held a majority in the House of Representatives, but the Opposition controlled the Senate. When the two parties failed to pass appropriations bills to fund the government, Governor-General Kerr dismissed the prime minister and commissioned Malcom Fraser of the Liberal Party as the caretaker prime minister. Fraser then passed an appropriations bill, and Kerr dissolved Parliament, setting up a double dissolution election to be held the following month. Here's a summary of what took place from the Australian Broadcast Corporation: Australian Broadcast Corporation The Dismissal of the Whitlam Government by the Governor-General, on November 11, 1975, still stands as the most dramatic and controversial event in Australias political history. The decision of the Governor-General, Sir John Kerr, to dismiss the Labor Prime Minister, Gough Whitlam, and install the Liberal Opposition Leader, Malcolm Fraser, as caretaker prime minister, on condition that he called an election, was a sensational development that ended a three-week parliamentary stand-off. The crisis began on October 15, when the Opposition parties announced they would block the governments Supply Bills in the Senate, as a means of forcing the government to an election. Whitlam refused to call an election and three weeks of parliamentary debate and public campaigning convulsed the political system. On November 11, Whitlam sought a half-Senate election from the Governor-General. Kerr rejected the advice and dismissed Whitlam. He commissioned Malcolm Fraser as caretaker prime minister. Fraser immediately secured the passage of Supply through the Senate and recommended a double dissolution of the parliament. The election was held on December 13, 1975. The Fraser-led Coalition won the largest victory in Australias federal history. The Parliament of Australia website provided some additional context to this historic event: context Several weeks later, and after intense negotiations and a third attempt to enact the appropriation bills, the new Governor-General took the extraordinary and unprecedented step of acting at his own initiative to invoke his power under sec. 62 of the Constitution: There shall be a Federal Executive Council [in practice, the Government] to advise the GovernorGeneral in the government of the Commonwealth, and the members of the Council shall be chosen and summoned by the GovernorGeneral and sworn as Executive Councillors, and shall hold office during his pleasure. (emphasis added) Governor-General Kerr dismissed the Whitlam Government, even though it still enjoyed majority support in the House of Representatives to which, by constitutional convention, it was responsible. To replace it, Kerr appointed a caretaker Liberal Government with Fraser as prime minister. In justifying his decision, the Governor-General argued that, in the Australian system, the confidence of both Houses on supply is necessary to ensure its provision: When ... an Upper House possesses the power to reject a money bill including an appropriation bill, and exercises the power by denying supply, the principle that a government which has been denied supply by the Parliament should resign or go to an election must still applyit is a necessary consequence of Parliamentary control of appropriation and expenditure and of the expectation that the ordinary and necessary services of Government will continue to be provided. (quoted in Odgers Australian Senate Practice 2001: 104) In this position the Governor-General was supported by the Chief Justice, who wrote that: the Senate has constitutional power to refuse to pass a money bill; it has power to refuse supply to the Government of the day... a Prime Minister who cannot ensure supply to the Crown, including funds for carrying on the ordinary services of Government, must either advise a general election (of a kind which the constitutional situation may then allow) or resign. (quoted in Odgers Australian Senate Practice 2001: 105) Not surprisingly, the two houses reacted very differently. The Senate acted almost instantaneously to pass the stalled appropriation bills. The House agreed to a motion expressing its lack of confidence in the newly-designated prime minister and requesting the Speaker to ask the Governor-General to have Whitlam again form a government. But before the Speaker was allowed to deliver this message, the Governor-General declared, at Frasers request and by pre-arrangement, a double dissolution of both houses. As Solomon put it: In the 1975 double dissolution, the Governor-General had to dismiss a Prime Minister (who controlled a majority in the House of Representatives) and appoint another (who lacked the confidence of that House) to find an advisor who was prepared to recommend to him the course he wished to adoptnamely the dissolution of both Houses of Parliament under section 57. (Solomon 1978: 169) While some Americans may look at Australia's constitutional crisis of 1975 as a "solution" to modern U.S. government shutdowns, "The Dismissal" remains one of the most controversial events in Australia's history: Australia.gov.au. "How Government Works." Retrieved 14 February 2019. AustralianPolitics.com. "Comparing the American and Australian Political Systems." Retrieved 14 February 2019. Whitlamdismissal.com. "What Happened." Retrieved 14 February 2019. Barnett, Bronwyn. "The Dismissal: Through the News Camera Lens." National Film and Sound Archive of Australia. Retrieved 14 February 2019. Fisher, Max. "The Crisis of 1974-75." Parliament of Australia. Retrieved 14 February 2019. ABC.Net.Au. "The Dismissal, Australia's Constitutional Crisis." Retrieved 14 February 2019. Fisher, Max. "Australia Had a Government Shutdown Once. In the End, the Queen Fired Everyone in Parliament." The Washington Post. 1 October 2013.

True

Some of the key differences that enabled "The Dismissal" to occur in Australia is that the country is both a representative democracy and a constitutional monarchy, which means that despite Australia's having elected officials, the head of state in Australia is still the Queen of the United Kingdom and the other Commonwealth realms, as represented by the governor-general). While the Queen rarely exercises her power and is often viewed as a mere figurehead in Australia, the monarch (and in turn the governor-general) is afforded some powers in the country's constitution. During the constitutional crisis of 1975, Governor-General Sir John Kerr used his constitutional authority to dismiss Prime Minister Gough Whitlam.Here's a summary of what took place from the Australian Broadcast Corporation:The Parliament of Australia website provided some additional context to this historic event:

FMD_train_192

Reductions in public broadcasting funding in 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_943

Was there a 1933 article stating that Hitler would not cause disruption in Germany?

02/09/2020

In perhaps one of the worst miscalculations in modern political history, Adolf Hitler was appointed chancellor of Germany in January 1933 in the hopes that he could successfully form a coalition government amidst a collection of competing minority parties (including his own Nazi Party) and that the worst impulses of Hitler and the Nazis could be "controlled" or "tamed" once they bore responsibility for leading the national government (rather than criticizing others' administration of it). But shortly after Hitler's swearing-in as chancellor on January 30, 1933, the Nazis began to systematically suspend civil liberties and eliminate political opposition, with the passage of the Enabling Act two months later effectively establishing Hitler's government as a legal dictatorship that could issue decrees without the involvement of the German parliament (Reichstag) or president. One example of the naiveté that held sway in Germany at that time caught the attention of Americans in February 2020, in the wake of impeachment proceedings against U.S. President Donald Trump. That example took the form of a snippet from a purported 1933 Wall Street Journal article that was widely circulated via social media: This article did in fact appear in the February 2, 1933, edition of the Wall Street Journal (WSJ). Under the headline "Berlin Views Hitler Calmly," the report from the WSJ's Berlin bureau briefly referenced contemporaneous assessments of Hitler—that "there is usually wide discrepancy between the speeches of opposition politicians and the actions of the group when it gains power," that Hitler would not "disrupt the nation's affairs," and that it was "not believed" Hitler would "accomplish a change in the constitution"—and that a rise in stock prices indicated public confidence in these assessments: Rise in Stocks Reflects Confidence He Will Not Disrupt Nation's Affairs Berlin is settling down to pass judgment on political developments. Politicians, economists, and bankers declare there is usually wide discrepancy between the speeches of opposition politicians and the actions of the group when it gains power. Consequently, it is not believed that Hitler will accomplish a change in the constitution or that [Reich Minister of Economics Alfred] Hugenberg will bring about a general reduction of interest rates. The government wants to obtain an adjournment of the Reichstag for several months, but it is questionable whether the Centre [Party] will approve of such action. After calmly dismissing the threat that Hitler posed (and which would come to pass in just a few short months), the article provided a short summary of the "considerable gains in stocks" that supposedly indicated good times were ahead under the new government—including, ironically, a rise in the price of stock in I.G. Farben, the German chemical company that manufactured the Zyklon B gas later used to kill millions of Jews during the Holocaust: I.G. Farben The Börse closed with considerable gains in stocks. Rhenish Coal advanced 7, Mannesmann Tube 5, I.G. Farben 4, and Rhine-Westphalia Electric 4. Bonds registered average losses of 2 points. Common stocks were favored as being less susceptible to talk of devaluing the currency or of other inflationary experiments. Furthermore, profits are expected to increase for many industries from expanded public works projects. The Wall Street Journal. "Berlin Views Hitler Calmly." 1 February 1933 (p. 12)

True

But shortly after Hitler's swearing-in as chancellor on Jan. 30, 1933, the Nazis began to systematically suspend civil liberties and eliminate political opposition, with the passage of the Enabling Act two months later effectively establishing Hitler's government as a legal dictatorship that could issue decrees without the involvement of the German parliament (Reichstag) or president.After calmly dismissing the threat that Hitler posed (and which would come to pass in just a few short months) the article provided a short summary of the "considerable gains in stocks" that supposedly indicated good times were ahead under the new government -- including, ironically, a rise in the price of stock in I.G. Farben, the German chemical company that manufactured the Zyklon B gas later used to kill millions of Jews during the Holocaust:

FMD_train_863

Austin is burdened by the fastest-growing tax increases of any major city in the nation.

11/28/2014

An activist expressed elation after Austin voters rejected a $1 billion rail-and-roads proposition, stating that the rail component of the plan would have been a financial headache. Jim Skaggs, founder of Citizens Against Rail Taxes, told the Austin Monitor for a Nov. 5, 2014, news story that the rail costs would have been imposed on a community already burdened by the fastest-growing tax increases of any major city in the nation. Mark Nathan, a consultant for Let's Go Austin, which advocated for the proposition, asked us to verify Skaggs' claim. To our inquiry, Skaggs said by email that he believes he learned of Austin's dubious status from an Austin Business Journal story. "I do not have time to research it at the moment," Skaggs wrote on Nov. 5, 2014. City spokeswoman Melissa Alvarado said by email that the city does not track taxes in other jurisdictions. Alvarado also pointed us to a city chart showing its property tax rate mostly sliding from 1993 through 2009 and increasing or holding steady since: Source: Austin, Texas, Approved Budget 2013-14, Volume 1, page 19 (downloaded Nov. 24, 2014). Alvarado continued, "Please keep in mind the city is only one taxing jurisdiction. There's also the county, school district, health district, and more, depending on where exactly someone lives." She also noted that appraisals are a factor for taxes, not just the tax rate, and mentioned that the 2015 tax rate is the same as the 2014 rate. Indeed, surging property values are a driver of local government revenues, as the Austin American-Statesman has noted; an April 2014 news story quoted Travis County's chief appraiser, Marya Crigler, stating that taxable residential values—a home's market value minus property-tax exemptions—were up an average of 8 percent for 2014. Changes in those values, the story said, influence government spending plans. Our search for a breakdown of changes in taxes among U.S. cities led us to analyst James Quintero of the conservative-leaning Texas Public Policy Foundation, who pointed out by email that since 2008, according to a graph in the city of Austin's proposed fiscal 2015 budget, Austin residents have experienced a larger increase in their share of income paid in city property taxes than residents of Dallas, Fort Worth, San Antonio, or Houston. Specifically, Quintero said, the percentage of median family income spent on property tax bills for median-value homes in the Austin area represented a little less than 1.1 percent in fiscal 2008. In fiscal 2014, that figure had increased to just under 1.5 percent, representing an increase of 0.4 percent. The other major Texas cities demonstrated smaller increases over the same period. Skaggs claimed that Austin's tax increases were the highest among major cities nationally. We turned to Beverly Kerr, lead researcher for the Greater Austin Chamber of Commerce, who sifted through information compiled by the Cambridge, Mass.-based Lincoln Institute of Land Policy. The institute, which focuses on property valuation and taxation policy, urban planning and development, land economics, and property rights, annually issues a 50-state property-tax comparison study. Kerr, drawing from the latest study issued in March 2014 by the center and the Minnesota Center for Fiscal Excellence, emailed us charts indicating that numerous cities had significant property tax hikes in recent years and that, by one measure, Austin ranked close to No. 1 nationally in its increases compared with the most populous cities. One institute analysis looked at how much revenue per resident different cities have taken in. Our takeaways: From 2006 to 2011, per-person property tax revenue collected in Austin by all local government units (including school districts, the city, and the county) decreased by 4 percent, as measured in constant 2011 dollars. However, per-person revenue from city property taxes alone increased by 6 percent; Austin ranked 35th among the 50 largest cities for that rate of increase. Higher rates of increase were recorded by cities including Philadelphia, Houston, Dallas, New York, San Francisco, San Jose, Los Angeles, and Chicago, which experienced a 60 percent spike in per-person property tax revenue. Over a longer span, from 2001 to 2011, Austin ranked 27th nationally for its 26 percent increase in per-person revenue from city property taxes. The Texas capital was outpaced in percentage growth by cities including San Antonio, Houston, Dallas, Fort Worth, New York, and Los Angeles. Austin experienced a 2 percent increase in per-person revenue from all taxes from 2006 to 2011, ranking 25th in this regard. Its increase trailed hikes occurring in the more populous cities of San Jose, Dallas, Houston, Philadelphia, and Los Angeles. Another institute breakdown highlighted by Kerr shows Austin ranking among cities with the greatest increases in taxes on a median-valued home. Our snapshots: From 2009 to 2013, Austin's effective tax rate on a median-priced home increased from 1.93 percent to 2.22 percent; that bump amounted to the 11th-greatest increase (0.29 points) among the 50 biggest cities. As of that year, Phoenix, Philadelphia, Jacksonville, and Chicago were the more populous cities than Austin that ranked higher by this indicator. In this instance, the effective rate is not the rate by which a government unit can generate the revenue it raised the year before. Rather, the study defines the effective rate as the total tax on a median-priced home divided by its total value, which takes into account variations in assessment rates and value exemptions across localities. While Austin's effective tax rate in 2013 was ahead of its rate in 2009, it was less than the 2.44 percent rate of 2005. In 2013, property taxes on a median-value Austin home ran $1,049 ahead of those taxes on such a home in 2005, up nearly 26 percent. That percentage increase placed Austin 10th nationally in this regard, behind Portland, San Jose, Denver, Philadelphia, Oklahoma City, Tulsa, Albuquerque, Columbus, and Cleveland—and only San Jose, Portland, and Philadelphia had greater dollar increases than Austin. Among the 15 largest cities at that time, Austin ranked third behind San Jose and Philadelphia for the percent change in net tax from 2005 to 2013. Over a shorter period, from 2009 to 2013, Phoenix, San Jose, San Francisco, San Diego, New York, and Jacksonville experienced greater increases in net property tax on a median-value home. (Dallas, Chicago, San Antonio, Los Angeles, Philadelphia, Houston, and Indianapolis had smaller increases.) Our ruling: Skaggs claimed that Austin has the fastest-growing tax increases of any major U.S. city. Among the nation's largest cities, Austin appears to have had the third-fastest growth in its property-tax bite on a median-valued home from 2005 to 2013. It seems reasonable to speculate that local taxpayers feel the pinch. However, Skaggs did not provide, nor did we find, evidence of Austin ranking first in tax growth among the country's major cities. We rate the statement False.

False

Jim Skaggs, founder ofCitizens Against Rail Taxes, told the Austin Monitor for a Nov. 5, 2014,news story, that the rail costs would have been imposed on a community already burdened by the fastest-growing tax increases of any major city in the nation.We hunted unsuccessfully for such a story while to our nudge, a city spokeswoman, Melissa Alvarado,said by emailthe city does not track taxes in other jurisdictions. Alvarado also pointed us to a city chart showing its property tax rate mostly sliding from 1993 through 2009 and increasing or holding steady since:Source:Austin, Texas, Approved Budget 2013-14, Volume 1,page 19 (downloaded Nov. 24, 2014)Indeed, surging property values are a driver in local government revenues, theAustin American-Statesmanhas noted; of late, an April 2014 news story quoted Travis Countys chief appraiser, Marya Crigler, saying taxable residential values a homes market value minus property-tax exemptions were up an average of 8 percent for 2014. Changes in those values, the story said, influence government spending plans.Our search for a breakdown of changes in taxes among U.S. cities led us to analyst James Quintero of the conservative-leaning Texas Public Policy Foundation, who pointed out by email that since 2008, according to a graph in the city of Austinsproposed fiscal 2015 budget, Austin residents have experienced a bigger burst in their share of income paid in city property taxes than residents of Dallas, Fort Worth, San Antonio or Houston.We turned to Beverly Kerr, lead researcher for the Greater Austin Chamber of Commerce, who sifted information compiled by the Cambridge, Mass.-basedLincoln Institute of Land Policy. The institute, which focuses on property valuation and taxation policy, urban planning and development, land economics and property rights, annually issues a 50-state property-tax comparison study.Kerr, drawing fromthe latest study, issued in March 2014 by the center and the Minnesota Center for Fiscal Excellence, emailed us charts indicating numerous cities had significant property tax hikes in recent years and also that by one gauge, Austin ranked close to No. 1 nationally in its increases compared with the most-populous cities.Click here formoreon the six PolitiFact ratings and how we select facts to check.

FMD_train_838

Bomb-Sniffing Dogs Killed in Kuwait?

06/23/2016

In June 2016, a series of photographs purportedly showing dozens of dead bomb-sniffing dogs circulated on social media, along with the claim that the animals were killed by Eastern Securities after their contract with the Kuwait National Petroleum Company was cancelled: claim Eastern Securities or E Sec was awarded a contract with Kuwait National Petroleum Company (KNPC) to provide explosive detection dogs for their oil rigs. When KNPC canceled the contract with Eastern Securities, they were left with 140+ dogs that no longer had a job and were costing them money to feed and house them. Instead of being responsible with the working dogs and finding them homes, Eastern Securities chose the most cost-effective way of dealing with the unemployed working dogs, euthanasia. It is unknown at this time exactly how the dogs were killed or even if the remaining 90 are still alive. The images were first posted by Missy Skye, the founder of My Cats And Dogs in Kuwait, a non-profit dedicated to helping stray animals. The images received wider attention when they were posted to the Instagram page of Kuwait Animal Rescue Unit on 19 June 2016. According to these social media posts, 24 dogs were killed in the 17 June incident: Missy Skye My Cats And Dogs in Kuwait Instagram There was an extremely sad and horrifying animal abuse/massacre incident at a security company based in Kuwait on June 17, 2016 in Kuwait. Due to their contract being revoked, they slaughtered 24 of their US K9 dogs whom were trained by USK9 dog training facility which is located in Louisiana, USA. This security company is an American company which worked with Kuwait National Petroleum Company (KNPC). KNPC paid 3000KD (equivalent of $9900)/month to the security company for each dog. Early this morning, a brave lawer, Esmail Al Misri, representing the workers from Nepal at the security company and an avid animal lover, advocate, and rescuer, Mimi Maamoun, went to file a complain at Mina Abdullha police station against the security company. The environment police and municipality registered the case. There are another 91 dogs remaining at the security company. While they abused the dogs by having them on duty for 24 hours without rest, their foreign workers would not dare to speak up and raise any issues with the company as they were also being mistreated and abused. At this point, we as animal lovers in kuwait, USA, and other countries, we need to advocate all the animals by spreading the news and be the voice for these poor animals. We must help save the remaining animals! PLEASE NO DONATION IS NEEDED from/to any individuals or organizations. I will keep you posted as soon as I obtain further information. The reasons the dogs were killed and who is ultimately responsible for their deaths remains unclear. The Kuwait National Petroleum Company denied that they had anything to do with the killings, and unconfirmed sources told the Kuwait Times that the animals had been put down for humane reasons. A local animal rights activist, Mimi Mamoun, disputed that account: disputed The Kuwait National Petroleum Company (KNPC) issued a statement denying any link with the reported execution of sniffer dogs that were supposed to be used by the company according to deal with a local contractor. KNPC official spokesman Khaled Al-Asousi expressed regret in a statement to KUNA that the contractor put the animals to death. Reports on social media suggested that at least 24 dogs had been euthanatized due to the cancellation of a contract and unpaid salaries. Unconfirmed sources said that the animals were sick and had been put to death for humane reasons. But local animal rescuer and activist, Mimi Mamoun has disputed this account. The dogs were not sick, only two, three I heard; in fact my Filipino friend who handles the dogs told me that the dogs were healthy and only a few of them were old but they killed them to punished the handlers who has filed complaints at the Ministry of Social Affairs and Labor (shoun) for nonpayment of salaries, she said. The dog training company USK9 Unlimited also commented on the incident, releasing a statement saying that they had not sold any dogs or trained any handlers for Eastern Security since 2009, and that they played no part in the recent mass euthanasia: statement SK9 RESPONSE ABOUT THE KUWAIT INCIDENT: There is a lot of confusion over a story about the alleged massacre of dogs by a Kuwaiti Security company "Eastern Security" (ES), in the country of Kuwait. TO BE VERY CLEAR: USK9 HAD NO PART OF SUCH AN INHUMANE ACT. If if this alleged massacre of dogs is validated, our position shall be one of absolute condemnation of such a gross and vile act against defenseless animals. At USK9, we are true animal lovers and have always believed and treated each and every dog as "man's best friend". To see these type pictures simply makes all of us here sick to our stomachs. USK9 has NOT sold any dogs nor trained any handlers for "Eastern Security" since 2009. Since that time, many other dog suppliers/trainers have sold dogs to ES and we have no way of determining who those suppliers are. We are hopeful that an investigation into the matter will reveal and hold all parties responsible for this tragedy accountable to the fullest extent of the law in Kuwait. USK9 is making every effort to monitor this story as it unfolds through a contact in Kuwait, but we have no way of validating information. We have made a firm demand that the authorities investigate this alleged incident and protect any animals that may be in danger if this incident is determined to be one of animal cruelty and abuse. We have see some media publications in recent days that suggest that the incident is in fact being investigated and we remain hopeful that the remaining dogs will be protected and safe. USK9 will defend itself vigorously against any story or social media postings that depict a false representation that USK9 was even the least bit involved in this alleged incident in Kuwait or is somehow responsible for the alleged incident. Eastern Securities confirmed that 24 dogs had been killed but denied they were responsible fpr the canine deaths. In an e-mailed statement, the company claimed that the dogs had been killed by a rival company in an act of "sabotage": On June 17, 2016, Eastern Securities, one of the premier private contactors providing K-9 security in Kuwait and other Middle East countries, found out, via a social media post, that 24 of its dogs had been killed. In what is developing into a case of corporate sabotage, a veterinarian technician, who worked for the agency where Eastern Securities leases its kennels, went to the kennels in the middle of the night, euthanized 24 dogs, photographed and sent pictures to a competitor of Eastern Securities, that have been since been leaked on the internet. Eastern Securities immediately launched an investigation and during the interrogation of both the veterinarian technician and the K-9 manager, an admission was made that Eastern Securities had nothing to do with the killing of the dogs. Criminal charges were filed against this depraved killer, who put down the dogs and an investigation continues to ascertain and bring to justice the names of additional culprits that helped commit this heinous crime. Eastern Securities has spent years building a reputation as one of the best providers of K-9 security in the Middle East. It is the reason government agencies and top corporations trust us. Taking care of our animals has always been and will always be one of our top priorities. To be targeted by our competitors in such a vile and ruthless manner is a despicable display of greed. We are asking that this case be prosecuted to the fullest extent and are working with the Kuwaiti government to ensure those responsible are held accountable and something this horrific never happens again. We will not stop until all those involved are brought to justice, said Bill Baisey, CEO of Eastern Solutions Group, the parent company of Eastern Securities. Facts to Know: A veterinarian technician, who worked for the kennels where Eastern Securities leased space, went to kennels at 3:00am on June 17, 2016 and killed 24 dogs. Pictures of the dogs being killed were sent to competitors of Eastern Securities. The technician immediately admitted his premeditation and commission of his crime and specifically confirmed the absence of any involvement or wrongdoing by Eastern Securities. The case continues to be under investigation by the Kuwaiti government and criminal charges against the technician were filed.

NEI

In June 2016, a series of photographs purportedly showing dozens of dead bomb-sniffing dogs circulated on social media, along with the claim that the animals were killed by Eastern Securities after their contract with the Kuwait National Petroleum Company was cancelled:The images were first posted by Missy Skye, the founder of My Cats And Dogs in Kuwait, a non-profit dedicated to helping stray animals. The images received wider attention when they were posted to the Instagram page of Kuwait Animal Rescue Unit on 19 June 2016. According to these social media posts, 24 dogs were killed in the 17 June incident:The reasons the dogs were killed and who is ultimately responsible for their deaths remains unclear. The Kuwait National Petroleum Company denied that they had anything to do with the killings, and unconfirmed sources told the Kuwait Times that the animals had been put down for humane reasons. A local animal rights activist, Mimi Mamoun, disputed that account:The dog training company USK9 Unlimited also commented on the incident, releasing a statement saying that they had not sold any dogs or trained any handlers for Eastern Security since 2009, and that they played no part in the recent mass euthanasia:

FMD_train_1940

Half of all Americans have less than $10,000 in their savings account.

04/09/2015

U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders, speaking in Austin, bemoaned widening income differences between the countrys very rich and the rest of us. And in his remarks at aSouth Austin union hall, the Vermont independentmulling a runfor the 2016 Democratic presidential nomination also warned about American failures to save money. Heres something not talked about, something that can make us all very, very nervous, Sanders said. Half of all Americans have less than $10,000 in their savings account. And you know what that means and you know why people are so stressed out? If you have less than $10,000, he said, that means an automobile accident, a divorce, a serious illness, a crisis of one kind or another can drive you into bankruptcy and financial disaster. Is he right that half of us have less than $10K in savings? Sanders backup To our inquiry, a Sanders spokesman, Jeff Franks, said by email that Sanders relied on an April 2014USA Todaynews storyquoting a survey indicating 52 percent of U.S. workers had said they had less than $10,000 in total savings and investments, such as a 401(k) or IRA, that could be used for retirement. It did not include their homes or defined benefit plans, such as traditional pensions that could be used for retirement Specifically, the story said, 36 percent of workers said they had less than $1,000 in such savings and investments with another 16 percent of workers reporting $1,000 to $9,999 in such savings and investments. Those results came from a telephone survey of 1,000 workers and 501 retirees by the nonprofit Employee Benefit Research Institute and Greenwald and Associates. Next, we spotted a chart on the institutes website drawn from the same 2014 Retirement Confidence Survey. The 52 percent of workers reporting less than $10,000 in savings and investments in 2014 is up from 39 percent in 2009, the chart shows. Of course, workers isnt all of us. We called the Washington, D.C.-based institute,which saysit was founded in 1978 to deliver unbiased information on employee benefit plans so that decisions affecting the system may be made based on verifiable facts. By phone, researcher Craig Copeland told us that overall, 51 percent of survey respondents, meaning retirees and others, had less than $10,000 in financial savings. Also by phone, Ruth Helman of Greenwald and Associates, which helped do the survey, paused at the senators wording. Strictly speaking, their savings account isnt correct. Its total savings wherever it may be, under the mattress or wherever, Helman said. Federal Reserve Bank We wondered if there were other ways of looking at savings. Several experts urged us to contact the Federal Reserve Bank, which conducts a survey focused on consumer finances every three years.Its latest survey, drawing on data collected in 2013, resulted in a chart pointed out by Copeland indicating that the median value of financial savings outside of a pension or home reported by the nearly 95 percent of families who had bank accounts or stocks, bonds and other financial assets that year was $21,200, down from $23,000 in the boards 2010 survey. SOURCE:Report,Changes in U.S. Family Finances from 2010 to 2013: Evidence from the Survey of Consumer Finances,Federal Reserve Bulletin, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, September 2014 Copeland said that given that more than 5 percent of families reported no such financial assets, its reasonable to speculate that families overall had median financial savings of less than $20,000. We also asked reserve board officials to analyze the senators savings accounts statement. By phone, William Emmons and Bryan Noeth, both employed by the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, raised questions. For instance, why not count a familys home or pension as part of its savings? Reminder: The institute, with its focus on savings for retirement, set aside these asset categories. Emmons said: People do count on their housing equity, not only in retirement, but before that. Beyond that, the pair said, its not always meaningful to focus on money held in savings accounts, which are a single wealth indicator. A savings account isnt where everybody holds their money, Noeth said. The two said a potentially superior way to gauge how Americans are faring, savings-wise, would be to consider net worth meaning family assets compared to debts. An agency manager, Adriene Dempsey, emailed usa spreadsheetshowing that according to the boards 2013 survey, 26 percent of U.S. families had less than $10,000 in net worth--a tick worse than the 25 percent of families according to its 2010 study. In 2013, half of American families had about $81,500 in net wealth or more, according to the spreadsheet. Total assets for a family include financial assets, such as bank accounts, mutual funds and securities plus tangible assets, including real estate, vehicles and durable goods, according to aFebruary 2015 essayby the St. Louis Fed.Weve elaborated on this here. So by the net-worth metric, more families are better off than if one focused on financial savings alone. We ran this net worth angle past the institutes Coleman, who reminded by email that its survey (relied on by Sanders) took into account financial assets, not just savings accounts. Our ruling Sanders said: Half of all Americans have less than $10,000 in their savings account. Some clarification went missing here: A 2014 survey indicated about half of American adults had less than $10,000 in savings and investments, such as a 401(k) or IRA, that could be used for retirement; those results encompassed more than savings accounts. 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

And in his remarks at aSouth Austin union hall, the Vermont independentmulling a runfor the 2016 Democratic presidential nomination also warned about American failures to save money. Heres something not talked about, something that can make us all very, very nervous, Sanders said. Half of all Americans have less than $10,000 in their savings account.To our inquiry, a Sanders spokesman, Jeff Franks, said by email that Sanders relied on an April 2014USA Todaynews storyquoting a survey indicating 52 percent of U.S. workers had said they had less than $10,000 in total savings and investments, such as a 401(k) or IRA, that could be used for retirement. It did not include their homes or defined benefit plans, such as traditional pensions that could be used for retirementOf course, workers isnt all of us. We called the Washington, D.C.-based institute,which saysit was founded in 1978 to deliver unbiased information on employee benefit plans so that decisions affecting the system may be made based on verifiable facts. By phone, researcher Craig Copeland told us that overall, 51 percent of survey respondents, meaning retirees and others, had less than $10,000 in financial savings.Several experts urged us to contact the Federal Reserve Bank, which conducts a survey focused on consumer finances every three years.Its latest survey, drawing on data collected in 2013, resulted in a chart pointed out by Copeland indicating that the median value of financial savings outside of a pension or home reported by the nearly 95 percent of families who had bank accounts or stocks, bonds and other financial assets that year was $21,200, down from $23,000 in the boards 2010 survey.SOURCE:Report,Changes in U.S. Family Finances from 2010 to 2013: Evidence from the Survey of Consumer Finances,Federal Reserve Bulletin, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, September 2014The two said a potentially superior way to gauge how Americans are faring, savings-wise, would be to consider net worth meaning family assets compared to debts. An agency manager, Adriene Dempsey, emailed usa spreadsheetshowing that according to the boards 2013 survey, 26 percent of U.S. families had less than $10,000 in net worth--a tick worse than the 25 percent of families according to its 2010 study. In 2013, half of American families had about $81,500 in net wealth or more, according to the spreadsheet.Total assets for a family include financial assets, such as bank accounts, mutual funds and securities plus tangible assets, including real estate, vehicles and durable goods, according to aFebruary 2015 essayby the St. Louis Fed.Weve elaborated on this here.Click here formoreon the six PolitiFact ratings and how we select facts to check.

FMD_train_264

Inheritance of a common family name

02/09/2004

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

False

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

FMD_train_1663

The average student loan debt in Texas is over $22,000...the cost of an average size pickup truck. But unlike car owners, students are not allowed to refinance their loans at lower rates.

06/09/2014

U.S. Rep. Pete Gallego invoked pickup trucks to frame his case for making it easier for college students and young graduates to refinance student loans. The average student loan debt in Texas is over $22,000, the Texas Democrat wrote in a May 14, 2014, email blast. That also happens to be the cost of an average-sized pickup truck! But here's what’s truly alarming: students are not allowed to refinance their loans at lower rates—the same way car owners can, Gallego wrote. Democratic-sponsored legislation would provide federal aid so students and graduates stuck with high-interest rates could repay their loans at the lower rates Congress approved for new student loans in 2013. However, a May 16, 2014, National Journal news story called the proposal a long shot in the Senate, where Republicans were described as likely to resist higher taxes on the wealthy to pay for the refinancing measure. Gallego's statement piqued our curiosity. By email, Gallego's campaign manager, Anthony Gutierrez, told us the congressman's average student loan debt figure came from a news story posted online May 8, 2014, on the GovBeat blog of The Washington Post. That story stated that more than a million Americans would graduate this year with substantial student loan debt, a conclusion it attributed to the National Conference of State Legislatures. The graduates will have an average of $26,500 in student loans, the Post story said, joining the tens of millions of other adults who collectively hold more than $1 trillion in student loan debt. That burden is largest, on average, in many Northeastern and Mid-Atlantic states, a few Southeastern states, and California. An accompanying U.S. map shows more than 20 states, including Texas, where the average student loan debt is between $22,000 and $25,000. The Post credited these conclusions to the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, using data from the third quarter of 2012. We ventured to a webpage for the reserve bank, where its entry on student loan debt led us to a research paper published in 2012 and revised in April 2013 by the Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City. According to the revised paper, student loan debt increased dramatically over the last several years, from about $346 billion in the fourth quarter of 2004 to $996 billion in the fourth quarter of 2012, a surge of nearly 14 percent a year. By comparison, the report said, total credit card debt was $679 billion and auto debt was $783 billion. The report states that increasing levels of debt were driven largely by growth in the number of borrowers rather than growth in average debt levels of borrowers. The report indicated that in the fourth quarter of 2012—a few months after the period analyzed in the Post's chart—the median borrower holding student loan debt owed $13,924. The average amount of student loan debt across all consumers with student loan debt was $24,699. That’s the latest available calculation, Bill Medley, spokesman for the Kansas City Fed, told us by email. Next, did Gallego accurately capture the price of an average-sized pickup? Gutierrez informed us that the campaign researched average used truck prices on the Cars Direct website. He pointed us to an April 5, 2012, article on the site showing suggested retail prices for five 2010 and 2007 models. These prices are for a base model pickup truck with standard options and no additional accessories, the article stated. According to the story, the average manufacturer's suggested retail price for a 2010 two-door Ford F-150 was $22,355, and the average for a 2010 Dodge Ram 1500 was $21,510—prices close to the $22,000-plus cited by Gallego. However, the Cars Direct article listed estimated prices for two 2010 models at less than $22,000. It also listed the price for another 2010 truck as nearly $6,000 higher. But Gallego priced used pickups; we looked on Edmunds.com, which compiles car and truck prices, for manufacturer's suggested retail prices for model-year 2013 and 2014 pickups. According to the site, the price for a basic Ford F-150 regular cab starts at $24,070 (2013 model) and $24,735 (2014). A Toyota Tacoma regular cab starts at $17,625 (2013) and $18,125 (2014), the site says. Finally, are students really not allowed to refinance college loans? Gutierrez pointed out news articles, including a Feb. 20, 2013, Time magazine piece stating that, unlike other consumers who have taken advantage of reduced interest rates to refinance purchases, student borrowers have been restricted because Congress—not the free market—sets the interest rate on the vast majority of student debt. Additionally, because these loans are not secured by collateral, private lenders are loath to undercut the federal government's terms. The Time story noted that student loan debt was at $1 trillion, and of that, the federal government backed $864 billion. Also, most of the debt was being carried at an interest rate higher than 6 percent, a figure Time attributed to a Feb. 13, 2013, report from the left-leaning Center for American Progress. That’s almost twice the rate of an average 30-year mortgage, Time said. By telephone, Heather Jarvis, a North Carolina attorney specializing in student loan law, stated that some graduates may be able to refinance student loans at lower rates through private lenders, though she noted this would only happen in cases of substantial income. (Car owners, in contrast, have four-wheeled collateral.) By email, Jarvis said refinancing federal loans with a private loan is risky. The borrower gives up important protections that accompany federal loans (like flexible repayment and discharge provisions). Students repaying federally backed loans, Jarvis said, are effectively barred from refinancing opportunities because federal law makes no provision for the government to make such offers. Also by phone, Brian Stewart of the Center for American Progress—which has urged the Democratic-backed action—said it’s possible but difficult to refinance student loans with private lenders while there’s no way for students to get the federal government to refinance a government-backed loan. Stewart, a spokesman for Generation Progress, a center project focused on young adults, said the center has been researching student loan issues for about two years.

True

Democratic-sponsored legislationwould provide federal aid so students and graduates stuck with high interest rates could repay the loans at the lower rates Congress approved for new student loans in 2013, though a May 16, 2014 National Journalnews storycalled the proposal a long shot in the Senate, where Republicans were described as likely to resist higher taxes on the wealthy to pay for the refinancing wrinkle.By email, Gallegos campaign manager, Anthony Gutierrez told us the congressmans average student-loan debt figure came from anews storyposted online May 8, 2014, on the GovBeat blog ofThe Washington Post. That story said more than a million Americans would graduate this year with substantial student loan debt, a conclusion it attributed to the National Conference of State Legislatures.ThePostcredited these conclusions to the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, using data from the third quarter of 2012. We ventured to a web page for the reserve bank where its entry on student loan debt led us to aresearch paper, published in 2012 and revised in April 2013, by the Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City.Gutierrez told us the campaign researched average used truck prices on the Cars Direct website. He pointed us to an April 5, 2012,articleon the site showing suggested retail prices for five 2010 and 2007 models. These prices are for a base model pickup truck with standard options and no additional accessories, the article said.But Gallego priced used pickups; we looked on Edmunds.com, which compiles car and truck prices, for manufacturers suggested retail prices for model-year 2013 and 2014 pickups.According to the site, the price for a basic Ford F-150 regular cab starts at $24,070 (2013 model) and $24,735 (2014). A Toyota Tacoma regular cab starts at $17,625 (2013) and $18,125 (2014),the sitesays.Gutierrez pointed out news articles including a Feb. 20, 2013,Time magazine piecestating that unlike other consumers who have taken advantage of reduced interest rates to refinance purchases, student borrowers have been restricted because Congressnot the free marketsets the interest rate on the vast majority of student debt, and because these loans are not secured by collateral private lenders are loath to undercut the federal governments terms.The Time story noted that student loan debt was at $1 trillionand of that, the federal government backed $864 billion. Also, most of the debt was being carried at an interest rate higher than 6 percent, a figure Time attributed to a Feb. 13, 2013,reportfrom the left-leaning Center for American Progress. Thats almost twice the rate of an average 30-year mortgage, Time said.By telephone,Heather Jarvis, a North Carolina attorney specializing in student loan law, said that some graduates may be able to refinance student loans at lower rates through private lenders, though she said this would only happen in cases of substantial income. (Car owners, in contrast, have four-wheeled collateral.)Also by phone,Brian Stewartof the Center for American Progress -- which has urged the Democratic-backed action -- said its possible but difficult to refinance student loans with private lenders while there's no way for students to get the federal government to refinance a government-backed loan. Stewart, a spokesman for Generation Progress, a center project focused on young adults, said the center has been researching student-loan issues for about two years.Click here formoreon the six PolitiFact ratings and how we select facts to check.

FMD_train_213

Pizza Hut's 58th Anniversary promotion offering freebies is under scrutiny for being a scam.

10/04/2017

In October 2017, multiple versions of a dubious post titled "Pizza Hut is giving 3 FREE Large Pizza Coupons on their 58th Anniversary" circulated on Facebook. The link led to suspicious domains, including pizzahutfree.us, pizzahut.com-freezones.us, and massiveoffers.xyz/p/, none of which followed the proper formatting for a pizzahut.com subdomain, which is "link.pizzahut.com." Those who clicked through found a page that looked somewhat legitimate but showed signs of being a common survey scam. Users were first asked a series of questions. The page followed a typical scammer template, appropriating Pizza Hut's logo and Facebook's visual interface, but clumsily boasted that entrants had "a chance to get [a] Papa [John's] Coupon." Any interaction with the prompts (again mentioning Papa John's 58th anniversary, not Pizza Hut's) led to a screen encouraging potential victims to spread the scam further on Facebook. Underneath the "Congratulations" interface was a series of what appeared to be comments from real Facebook users who had successfully redeemed the purported coupon. All of the profiles featured individuals with jobs displayed as "MD, at the Hospital." Pizza Hut addressed a previous flood of customer queries on their Facebook wall during a similar scam in May 2016. Facebook users continue to regularly encounter survey scams (often the "anniversary" version) on the social network. A July 2014 article from the Better Business Bureau advised users on how not to fall prey: "

False

The link lead to suspicious domains including pizzahutfree.us, pizzahut.com-freezones.us, pizzahut.com-freezones.us, and massiveoffers.xyz/p/, none of which followed the proper formatting for a pizzahut.com subdomain, which is "link.pizzahut.com." Those who clicked through found a page that looked somewhat legitimate, but showed signs of being a very common survey scam. Users were first asked a series of questions:Facebook users continue to regularly encounter survey scams (quite often the "anniversary" version) on the social network. A July 2014 article from the Better Business Bureau advised users how not to fall prey:

FMD_train_154

Did Will Smith Donate $150,000 to a 'Terrorist Organization'?

09/13/2015

On 9 September 2015, Minister Louis Farrakhan announced on Facebook that actor Will Smith and his wife Jada Pinkett Smith had donated $150,000 to help cover the cost of the "Justice or Else! Million Man March" event planned for 10 October 2015: Facebook event While neither Will Smith nor Jada Pinkett Smith commented on the announcement, their donation was seemingly confirmed on Twitter by Brother Jesse, a journalist and Million Man March supporter: Shortly after news of the reported donation broke, several conservative media outlets picked up on the story and asserted that Will Smith had donated to a "black Muslim" who planned to "kill all whites." Many of these stories were posted along with a photograph of Will Smith in a kaffiyeh: stories Reports have begun to surface that Smith and his wife, Jada Pinkett-Smith, have given a huge sum of money to Louis Farrakhan, the leader of the radical group Nation of Islam. Nation of Islam also has ties to the Black Panthers, a black power movement that borders on being terrorist organization. That should be interesting to explain on their tax returns. Farrakhan is proudly stating that Smith gave $150,000 to his Justice ... or Else! march. This march, which is theoretically supposed to honor the 20-year anniversary of Farrakhan's Million Man March, will take place on October 10 in Washington D.C. The reality is that this event will most likely be used to call for violence against the police and could well lead to rioting and more than a few arrests. The image of Will Smith in a kaffiyeh was not a genuine photograph of the actor. It was a piece of artwork created by Mohammad Kanoo: artwork His series "A Question of Identity" (2012) presents a range of recognizable international public figures political leaders and celebrities dressed in the traditional kandoorah and ghutra for the men, and for the ladies in the abayya and hijab, once again using disjunction as a means of engaging viewers. Using Photoshop, Kanoo gives us an idea of what politicians such as Barack Obama, George Bush and Margaret Thatcher, and celebrities like George Clooney, Oprah Winfrey and Paris Hilton, would look like "out of their comfort zone," that is, if they adopted an Arab sartorial identity. Will and Jada Pinkett Smith's reported donation would go towards sponsoring the "Justice Or Else! Million Man March" event, not to Louis Farrakhan personally. And while Minister Farrakhan is the leader of the Nation of Islam (and did once say that "if the federal government will not intercede in our affairs, then we must rise up and kill those who kill us), those are the views of an individual and not the official position of the organization. say Farrakhan's controversial positions have inspired criticism of his involvement ever since the first "Million Man March" in 1995: criticism March supporters point out that instead of the stereotypes, often perpetuated by the media, of criminals, druggies or dropouts, most African-American men are hardworking people with families and communities. And many are troubled themselves by the reality that some black men have not measured up to their responsibilities. "I have taken the position that this march is directed first at the African-American community, and secondly at the nation at large," said Ron Walters, a professor at Howard University. But both the nation and the African-American community have reservations. Not with the message, but with the messenger: Farrakhan. The controversial head of the nation of Islam is, to many, a racist and separatist. A number of black churches, especially Baptists, have refused to endorse his march. "If it had originated from our end, we would be there," said Levi Chaplin of Pleasant Lane Baptist Church. "But we can't support somebody that talks against us in one breath, and in one breath hugs us. I mean, that's not right." Will Smith and Jada Pinkett Smith may have donated to an event sponsored by Farrakhan's organization, but the associated cause was supporting equal rights for the black community and not funding the murder of white people.

NEI

On 9 September 2015, Minister Louis Farrakhan announced on Facebook that actor Will Smith and his wife Jada Pinkett Smith had donated $150,000 to help cover the cost of the "Justice or Else! Million Man March" event planned for 10 October 2015:Shortly after news of the reported donation broke, several conservative media outlets picked up on the story and asserted that Will Smith had donated to a "black Muslim" who planned to "kill all whites." Many of these stories were posted along with a photograph of Will Smith in a kaffiyeh:The image of Will Smith in a kaffiyeh was not a genuine photograph of the actor. It was a piece of artwork created by Mohammad Kanoo:Will and Jada Pinkett Smith's reported donation would go towards sponsoring the "Justice Or Else! Million Man March" event, not to Louis Farrakhan personally. And while Minister Farrakhan is the leader of the Nation of Islam (and did once say that "if the federal government will not intercede in our affairs, then we must rise up and kill those who kill us), those are the views of an individual and not the official position of the organization.Farrakhan's controversial positions have inspired criticism of his involvement ever since the first "Million Man March" in 1995:

FMD_train_1089

Is the Jim Henson Company Making Labyrinth 2?

11/13/2014

Claim: The Jim Henson Company has announced development of a sequel to the 1986 film Labyrinth. Example: [Collected via email, November 2013] "Labyrinth 2 return of the goblin king is rumored to be released soon but I can't find a release date anywhere and it's floating around facebook like wild fire.. Is this a rumor? or can all of the Jim Henson lovers of the world get stoked about the upcoming Labyrinth 2?!" Origins: On 9 October 2014, a rumor began circulating via social media that the Jim Henson Company was working on Labyrinth 2, a sequel to the 1986 film Labyrinth. The rumor stemmed from an article published by Variety about Billy Crystal's joining the cast of another Jim Henson project, Which Witch. At the end of the article, author Davy McNary mentioned the Henson company also had several other projects in the works: article It's also working on a quartet of legacy titles in the Henson library a Fraggle Rock movie that's been in development at New Regency; a sequel to 1982's The Dark Crystal; a sequel to 1986's Labyrinth; and a movie based on the Emmet Otter character. Variety updated the article on 13 October 2014 to clarify the above-quoted sentence: Henson Co. is working on a project based on Labyrinth, but it is not a sequel. But that correction didn't kill the rumor, because in November 2014 a fake movie poster for Labyrinth 2 started circulating on the internet: That movie poster was a private mockup for the not-in-the-works Labyrinth 2 created by artist Ruben Ireland which went viral shortly after it was published by Slash Film on 11 November 2014 in an article titled "Cool Stuff: Movie Posters for Sequels That Never Happened." article In January 2016, Variety reported that Sony had closed a deal with the Jim Henson Co. to produce what was described as a Labyrinth "reboot" (rather than a sequel): Sony is developing a reboot of "Labyrinth," the final movie directed by Jim Henson, and has closed a deal with the Jim Henson Co. to produce the film with Sony's TriStar division. Lisa Henson of the Henson Co. will produce the project. "Guardians of the Galaxy" co-writer Nicole Perlman will write the script. The original musical fantasy movie, released in 1986, starred a 15-year-old Jennifer Connelly as the protagonist who has to navigate a maze to save her infant brother, who had been kidnapped by a goblin king played by David Bowie, who recorded five songs for the film. Tri-Star's Nicole Brown will oversee the new "Labyrinth" for the studio. However, EW then confusingly reported that "the new 'Labyrinth' film will be a sequel to the original, not a reboot." reported Shortly afterwards, screenwriter Nicole Perlman fostered even more uncertainty when she tweeted to say that "no one is remaking 'Labyrinth'" and suggested that a "continuation" of the film was in the works: Guys, please don't fall for all the clickbait. No one is remaking "Labyrinth." That movie is perfect as it is. Nicole Perlman (@Uncannygirl) January 24, 2016 January 24, 2016 Labyrinth is my favorite film from childhood, so I share your concerns that any continuation of the world be handled with love and respect. Nicole Perlman (@Uncannygirl) January 23, 2016 January 23, 2016 Henson Co & I started talking in late 2014, so the timing of these rumors is so upsetting. I would never seek to profit from Bowie's death. Nicole Perlman (@Uncannygirl) January 23, 2016 January 23, 2016 So what's next in the Labyrinth realm: a sequel, a reboot, or a continuation? The answer remains unclear. The original Labyrinth was something of a box office bust when it was released in 1986 but has built a cult following over the years thanks to Jim Henson's amazing puppetry and a flamboyant performance by the Goblin King, David Bowie: bust Last updated: 6 February 2016 Lussier, Germain. "Movie Posters for Sequels That Never Happened." Slash Film. 11 November 2014. McNary, David. "Billy Crystal Joins Henson Co.'s 'Which Witch.'" Variety. 9 October 2014. McNary, David. "Sony Rebooting Jim Henson's 'Labyrinth.'" Variety. 22 January 2016.

NEI

Origins: On 9 October 2014, a rumor began circulating via social media that the Jim Henson Company was working on Labyrinth 2, a sequel to the 1986 film Labyrinth. The rumor stemmed from an article published by Variety about Billy Crystal's joining the cast of another Jim Henson project, Which Witch. At the end of the article, author Davy McNary mentioned the Henson company also had several other projects in the works:That movie poster was a private mockup for the not-in-the-works Labyrinth 2 created by artist Ruben Ireland which went viral shortly after it was published by Slash Film on 11 November 2014 in an article titled "Cool Stuff: Movie Posters for Sequels That Never Happened." However, EW then confusingly reported that "the new 'Labyrinth' film will be a sequel to the original, not a reboot." Nicole Perlman (@Uncannygirl) January 24, 2016 Nicole Perlman (@Uncannygirl) January 23, 2016 Nicole Perlman (@Uncannygirl) January 23, 2016The original Labyrinth was something of a box office bust when it was released in 1986 but has built a cult following over the years thanks to Jim Henson's amazing puppetry and a flamboyant performance by the Goblin King, David Bowie:

FMD_train_223

Has Sberbank in Russia restricted cash withdrawals to $20?

02/28/2022

In late February 2022, a rumor went viral on TikTok and Twitter that said Russia's largest bank, Sberbank, had imposed a cash withdrawal limit that would be equivalent to $20 in the U.S. The rumor began to spread just after Russia began its invasion of Ukraine on Feb. 24. TikTok Twitter Russia Russia invasion Ukraine On Feb. 25, the person behind the @bantg Twitter account tweeted: "Sberbank, Russian largest bank, has limited cash withdrawals to $20." tweeted The tweet cited no sources. Another tweet posted on Feb. 26 claimed: "JUST IN: Sberbank, the largest bank in Russia, has limited cash withdrawals for its customers to $20 ? #PutinWillFeelThePainSoon." The hashtag referred to Russian President Vladimir Putin. tweet Vladimir Putin Replies under the tweet asked for a source for the information, but @nick82gh did not respond to them. While this second tweet didn't receive many engagements, it was shared the same day to TikTok as a screenshot. Within 48 hours of being posted, that TikTok video received 80,000 likes and was viewed more than 1.4 million times. The person speaking in the video said: "The bank run has started. Russia is going bankrupt. This is the end of [the] Russian economy completely." video Here are the facts: It's true that Sberbank is Russia's largest bank by its amount of assets, according to The Wall Street Journal. However, at the time, we found no reporting or evidence of any kind that backed up the claim that the Sberbank had limited cash withdrawals to $20. We also found no data about anything related to Sberbank causing the entire country of Russia to go bankrupt, as mentioned in the TikTok video. The Wall Street Journal By email, a spokesperson for Sberbank told us: "This information contradicts reality. Sberbank continues to fulfill all of its obligations in full, including the withdrawal of funds from accounts. All funds are available to customers at any time." On Feb. 28, ABC News and The Associated Press reported that Sberbank had been hit with "tough U.S. sanctions," leading to some limits on cash withdrawals: ABC News Associated Press Sberbank and VTB banks are Russias two largest state-run banks and own roughly half of the assets in the Russian banking system. They were targeted last week by tough U.S. sanctions aimed at limiting their businesses internationally and over the weekend barred from the international SWIFT payment system. SWIFT In both Slovenia and Croatia, Sberbank temporarily closed its branches or limited cash withdrawals following a rush by its clients last week. In Croatia, the banks clients will be allowed to withdraw a maximum of about 1,000 euros per day over the next two days. In Slovenia, the branches will be closed for the next two days and then the withdrawals will be limited to 400 euros per day. At the time that this news was published, 1000 euros was equivalent to $1,121, while 400 euros converted to $448. Neither of these figures was anywhere close to a $20 limit. We asked Sberbank for information on cash withdrawal limits for other countries but did not receive a response before this story was published. While we found no evidence regarding Sberbank branches having a $20 cash withdrawal limit, the conflict in Ukraine did lead to fears that the bank could fail, according to a report from Reuters, which cited a warning from the European Central Bank. Ukraine report Also, on a similar subject, The National Bank of Ukraine imposed cash withdrawal limits after the invasion began, according to The Wall Street Journal. However, again, those limits were reported to be nowhere near $20. Instead, the reporting said the limit was "100,000 Ukrainian hryvnia a day, equivalent to about $3,339.13." according to The Wall Street Journal This story will be updated if we receive further information.

False

In late February 2022, a rumor went viral on TikTok and Twitter that said Russia's largest bank, Sberbank, had imposed a cash withdrawal limit that would be equivalent to $20 in the U.S. The rumor began to spread just after Russia began its invasion of Ukraine on Feb. 24.On Feb. 25, the person behind the @bantg Twitter account tweeted: "Sberbank, Russian largest bank, has limited cash withdrawals to $20." The tweet cited no sources.Another tweet posted on Feb. 26 claimed: "JUST IN: Sberbank, the largest bank in Russia, has limited cash withdrawals for its customers to $20 ? #PutinWillFeelThePainSoon." The hashtag referred to Russian President Vladimir Putin. Replies under the tweet asked for a source for the information, but @nick82gh did not respond to them.While this second tweet didn't receive many engagements, it was shared the same day to TikTok as a screenshot. Within 48 hours of being posted, that TikTok video received 80,000 likes and was viewed more than 1.4 million times. The person speaking in the video said: "The bank run has started. Russia is going bankrupt. This is the end of [the] Russian economy completely."Here are the facts: It's true that Sberbank is Russia's largest bank by its amount of assets, according to The Wall Street Journal. However, at the time, we found no reporting or evidence of any kind that backed up the claim that the Sberbank had limited cash withdrawals to $20. We also found no data about anything related to Sberbank causing the entire country of Russia to go bankrupt, as mentioned in the TikTok video.On Feb. 28, ABC News and The Associated Press reported that Sberbank had been hit with "tough U.S. sanctions," leading to some limits on cash withdrawals:Sberbank and VTB banks are Russias two largest state-run banks and own roughly half of the assets in the Russian banking system. They were targeted last week by tough U.S. sanctions aimed at limiting their businesses internationally and over the weekend barred from the international SWIFT payment system.While we found no evidence regarding Sberbank branches having a $20 cash withdrawal limit, the conflict in Ukraine did lead to fears that the bank could fail, according to a report from Reuters, which cited a warning from the European Central Bank.Also, on a similar subject, The National Bank of Ukraine imposed cash withdrawal limits after the invasion began, according to The Wall Street Journal. However, again, those limits were reported to be nowhere near $20. Instead, the reporting said the limit was "100,000 Ukrainian hryvnia a day, equivalent to about $3,339.13."

FMD_train_1408

Did NYC Ban Hot Dogs?

04/25/2019

On 22 April 2019, New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio announced the city's "Green New Deal," an "audacious plan to attack global warming on all fronts." While this package of investments and new legislation aimed to reduce emissions by nearly 30 percent by the year 2030, several outlets focused their headlines on one specific fast-food item: hot dogs. An article published on iHeartRadio's platform, for instance, was misleadingly entitled "NYC To Ban Hot Dogs and Processed Meats To Improve Climate." As this article and others like it circulated on social media, many viewers apparently stopped reading after the headline and came away with the belief that hot dogs had been banned city-wide. One Twitter user wrote: "NYC Mayor - you just made enemies of a lot of NYC vendors who sell great hot dogs, the citizens & visitors who love them! Repeat: You will make NYC a ghost town by 2030 if you continue this ridiculous green deal! New Yorkers, speak up!" Hot dogs are not being banned in New York City. Headlines such as "NYC To Ban Hot Dogs and Processed Meats To Improve Climate" are misleading for two reasons. First, hot dogs are not being banned throughout the city. The city government plans to reduce the purchase of processed meats consumed at city-run facilities, such as hospitals, public schools, and correctional facilities, but this policy will have no effect on vendors, restaurants, grocery stores, or any other privately owned businesses that sell hot dogs, or on their customers who eat them. Second, the city's plan to reduce the consumption of hot dogs is only partly based on an effort to "improve climate." NYC's "Green New Deal" policies are part of the city's "OneNYC 2050: Building a Strong and Fair City" strategy. While these policies address climate-change issues, they also deal with community well-being and the general health of the city's population. The section of OneNYC 2050 dealing with processed meats can actually be found in the "Healthy Living" portion of this strategy. More specifically, the section addressing processed meats explains that reducing the consumption of hot dogs will lower the risk of heart disease and cancer. Here's the relevant section of OneNYC 2050 (emphasis ours): ADOPT MORE SUSTAINABLE CONSUMPTION PRACTICES IN CITY GOVERNMENT OPERATIONS. The City will shift away from goods that have an outsized impact on the environment and identify opportunities to reduce waste and cut GHG emissions throughout City government. Through updates to our Environmentally Preferable Purchasing (EPP) and executive action, we are ending the purchasing of unnecessary single-use plastic foodware, reducing the purchasing of beef, and phasing out the purchasing of processed meat. Single-use plastic foodware, including straws, cutlery, cups, plates, bowls, and trays, are designed to be used once and then thrown away. These petroleum-based products are a threat to our neighborhoods, waterways, and climate. The City is ending the purchasing of unnecessary single-use plastic foodware, switching to compostable, reusable, or recyclable alternatives while maintaining a sufficient supply of single-use plastic foodware for those who need it. We will work with City Council to expand these requirements to private businesses. Building on the success of implementing Meatless Mondays at all New York City public schools, the City will reduce the purchasing of beef by 50 percent. Beef has a relatively high environmental footprint compared to poultry, pork, and plant-based foods. Beef cattle, managing manure, and manufacturing fertilizer produce nitrous oxide and methane, two climate-warming pollutants 298 and 25 times more powerful than carbon dioxide, respectively. Processed meat consumption is linked with an increased risk of cancer and is often high in saturated fat and sodium, which is linked with heart disease. This policy would offer health benefits to the most vulnerable New Yorkers. So New York City plans to reduce the consumption of processed meats at city-run facilities such as hospitals, public schools, and correctional facilities. But this plan will not "ban" hot dogs in the city. Restaurants, hot dog stands, grocery stores, and other privately owned businesses will still be able to sell hot dogs in the city. Moore, Deanna. "NYC To Ban Hot Dogs and Processed Meats To Improve Climate." v1017.iheart.com. 23 April 2019. NYC.Gov. "Action on Global Warming: NYC's Green New Deal." 22 April 2019.

False

On 22 April 2019, New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio announced the city's "Green New Deal," an "audacious plan to attack global warming on all fronts." While this package of investments and new legislation covered several approaches to reduce emissions by nearly 30 percent by the year 2030, a number of outlets focused their headlines on one specific fast-food item: hot dogs. An article published on iHeartRadio's platform, for instance, was misleadingly entitled "NYC To Ban Hot Dogs and Processed Meats To Improve Climate." As this article and others like it circulated on social media, many viewers apparently stopped reading after the headline and came away with the belief that hot dogs had been banned city-wide:One Twitter user wrote: "NYC Mayor - you just made enemies of a lot of NYC vendors who sell great hot dogs, the citizens & visitors who love them! Repeat: You will make NYC a ghost town by 2030 if you continue this ridiculous green deal! New Yorkers, speak up!"Second, the city's plan to reduce the consumption of hot dogs is only partly based on an effort to "improve climate." NYC's "Green New Deal" policies are part of the city's "OneNYC 2050: Building a Strong and Fair City" strategy. While these policies address climate-change issues, they also deal with community well-being and the general health of the city's population. The section of OneNYC 2050 dealing with processed meats can actually be found in the "Healthy Living" portion of this strategy. More specifically, the section dealing with processed meats explains that reducing the consumption of hot dogs will lower the risk of heart disease and cancer.Here's the relevant section of OneNYC 2050 (emphasis ours):

FMD_train_1041

Washington Redskins Predict Presidential Elections

11/03/2004

Claim: The outcome of Washington Redskins home football games has correctly predicted the winner of every U.S. presidential election since 1936. OUTDATED Example: [Collected via e-mail, November 2012] Did you know....?? The Washington Redskins have proved to be a time-tested election predictor. In the previous 15elections, if the Washington Redskins have lost their last home game prior to the election, the incumbent party has lost the White House. When they have won, the incumbent has stayed in power. This election year, that deciding game takes place on Sunday, October 31 ... vs. Green Bay. Go Pack!!! Origins: Our desire to understand and assert some control over the world around us is often manifested by our attempts to find predictive signs that enable us to prognosticate events even when there is no seeming connection between predictor and event. Sometimes one natural phenomenon supposedly forecasts another, as in the belief that a groundhog's seeing his shadow on February 2 portends another six weeks of winter. In other instances the linkage is between affairs of mankind, as in the superstition that the winner of football's Super Bowl augurs that year's stock market performance (or vice-versa). groundhog Super Bowl One item of this ilk which gained currency in 2004 maintained that the results of the last game played at home by the NFL's Redskins (a football team based in the national capital, Washington, D.C.) before a U.S. presidential election foretold the winner of that contest. If the Redskins won their last home game before the election, the party that occupied the White House continued to hold it; if the Redskins lost that last home game, the challenger from the out-of-office party unseated the incumbent party. And up until that 2004 election, the Redskins indicator had a rather remarkable record: Since 1936, the earliest presidential election year in which the current Redskins franchise played under that team name, the team's results had currently predicted the outcome of 17 straight presidential contests. Reality finally trumped coincidence in 2004, however: Despite the Green Bay Packers' 28-14 defeat of the Redskins at the latter's home field on 31 October, presaging a victory for Democratic challenger John Kerry in upcoming the presidential election, two days later incumbent President George W. Bush was re-elected, breaking the Redskins' predictive pattern. The Redskins indicator failed again in 2012 as Washington suffered a 21-13 home loss at the hands of the Carolina Panthers on 4 November 2012, just two days before that year's election, but Republican nominee Mitt Romney failed to unseat incumbent president Barack Obama. defeat loss While we don't presume there is anything more behind the phenomenon than random correlation, the Redskins indicator can still boast an accuracy rate of 90% with 18 correct matches out of the last 20 elections: After stumbling in 2004, the Redskins' power as election predictors got back on track in 2008. In a Monday night game contested on 3 November 2008, the evening before Election Day, the Redskins were defeated at home, 23-6, by the Pittsburgh Steelers, a loss that foretold a change in party which would bring the Democratic candidate into the White House. The following day, the Democratic presidential candidate, Senator Barack Obama, defeated the Republican presidential candidate, Senator John McCain, for the White House. defeated On 30 October 2000 the Washington Redskins lost a Monday night game at home to the Tennessee Titans, 27-21, presaging a loss for the incumbent Democratic party. Since President Bill Clinton had already been elected to the constitutionally-mandated maximum of two terms in office, the 7 November 2000 presidential election pitted Democratic Vice-President Al Gore against Republican Governor George W. Bush of Texas. In the closest (and most controversial) presidential election since 1876, Governor Bush gained the White House by the slim margin of five electoral votes, thereby fulfilling the Redskin prophecy. lost On 27 October 1996 the Washington Redskins defeated the Indianapolis Colts at home, 31-16, predicting a win for the incumbent Democrats. Sure enough, in the 5 November 1996 general election, Democratic President Bill Clinton won re-election over his Republican challenger, Senator Bob Dole of Kansas. defeated On 1 November 1992 the Washington Redskins lost to the New York Giants at home, 24-7, predicting a similar loss for the incumbent Republicans. As expected, in the 3 November 1992, Republican President George H. W. Bush lost his re-election bid to Governor Bill Clinton of Arkansas. lost On 6 November 1988 the Washington Redskins edged the New Orleans Saints at home, 27-24, predicting a win for the incumbent Republicans. As President Ronald Reagan had already been elected twice, the 8 November 1988 election once again matched a sitting Vice-President, Republican George H. W. Bush, against a challenger, Democratic Governor Michael Dukakis of Massachusetts. True to form, Vice-President Bush emerged victorious. edged On 5 November 1984 the Washington Redskins bested the Atlanta Falcons in a Monday night home game, 27-14, predicting a win for the incumbent Republicans. The next day, President Ronald Reagan handily defeated his Democratic challenger, former Vice-President and Senator Walter F. Mondale of Minnesota, winning re-election with an electoral vote landslide. bested On 2 November 1980 the Washington Redskins were trounced at home by the Minnesota Vikings, 39-14, predicting a loss for the incumbent Democrats. As expected, on 4 November 1980 President Jimmy Carter failed in his re-election bid, losing to his Republican opponent, former California governor Ronald Reagan. trounced On 31 October 1976 the Washington Redskins were spooked by the Dallas Cowboys in a Halloween Day home game, losing 20-7 and predicting a loss for the incumbent Republicans. Two days later, on 2 November 1976, Democratic Governor Jimmy Carter of Georgia unseated President Gerald Ford (who had been appointed Vice-President after the resignation of Spiro Agnew in 1973 and became chief executive in 1974 after President Richard Nixon also resigned). spooked On 22 October 1972 the Washington Redskins edged the Dallas Cowboys, 24-20, predicting a win for the incumbent Republicans. The 7 November 1972 election resulted in the electoral vote landslide re-election of President Richard Nixon over the Democratic nominee, Senator George McGovern of South Dakota. edged On 27 October 1968 the Washington Redskins lost a close game to the New York Giants, 13-10, predicting a loss for the incumbent Democrats. Since President Lyndon B. Johnson had announced several months earlier that he would not seek another term as president, the November 1968 election was a contest between sitting Vice-President Hubert Humphrey and a former Vice-President, Republican Richard Nixon. In a mirror of the Redskins game, the Democrats lost in a close contest (the two candidates were separated by a slim 0.6% margin in the popular vote). lost On 25 October 1964 the Washington Redskins beat the Chicago Bears, 27-20, predicting a win for the incumbent Democrats. As predicted, on 3 November 1964 President Lyndon Johnson (who had ascended to the White House after the assassination of President Kennedy in 1963) won a landslide victory over Republican Senator Barry Goldwater of Arizona. beat On 30 October 1960 the Washington Redskins were pasted at home by the Cleveland Browns, 31-10, predicting a loss for the incumbent Republicans. President Dwight D. Eisenhower had already served two terms, so Vice-President Richard Nixon took up the Republican mantle against Senator John F. Kennedy of Massachusetts in the 8 November 1960 presidential election. Like the Redskins, the Republicans lost; unlike the Redskins, the Republicans made the contest a very close one. (Kennedy bested Nixon by a mere 0.2% margin in the popular vote.) pasted On 21 October 1956 the Washington Redskins soundly defeated the Cleveland Browns at home, 20-9, predicting a win for the incumbent Republicans on 6 November 1956. And, for the second straight election, the Republicans and their standard-bearer, Dwight D. Eisenhower, prevailed over the Democratic nominee, Adlai Stevenson. defeated On 2 November 1952 the Washington Redskins lost a squeaker to the Pittsburgh Steelers at home, 24-23, predicting a similar loss for the incumbent Democrats. President Harry S. Truman declined to run for re-election (he had already served eight years), leaving the field open for former Illinois governor Adlai Stevenson to stand against the Republican candidate, General Dwight D. Eisenhower. The Democrats' loss on 4 November 1952 was not nearly as close as the Redskins' had been. lost On 31 October 1948, the Washington Redskins walloped the Boston Yanks at home, 59-21, predicting a win for the incumbent Democrats. Two days later, In one of the most stunning political upsets in U.S. history, President Harry S. Truman (who had assumed office in 1945 when President Franklin D. Roosevelt died shortly after beginning his fourth term) defeated his Republican challenger, Governor Thomas E. Dewey of New York. walloped On 5 November 1944, the Washington Redskins trimmed the Cleveland Rams at home, 14-10, predicting a win for the incumbent Democrats. And win the Democrats did, as President Franklin D. Roosevelt secured an unprecedented fourth term by defeating the Republican nominee, Thomas Dewey, on 7 November 1944. trimmed On 3 November 1940, the Washington Redskins thrashed the Pittsburgh Pirates (forebears of today's Steelers team) at home, 37-10, predicting a win for the incumbent Democrats. Likewise, Democrat Franklin D. Roosevelt became the first (and only) three-term president as he thrashed Republican challenger Wendell Willkie of New York (a former Democrat who had never held high elected office) on 5 November 1940. thrashed Going back to 1936 puts us beyond the beginnings of the Washington Redskins, as that year the Redskins franchise was still playing in Boston. Nonetheless, their knack for foretelling the outcome of presidential elections was already in place. On 1 November 1936 the Boston Redskins downed the Chicago Cardinals at Fenway Park, 13-10, predicting a win for the incumbent Democrats. Two days later, President Franklin D. Roosevelt won re-election over Republican Governor Alf Landon of Kansas. downed That is as far back as the streak goes. In 1932 the Washington Redskins were neither the Redskins nor a Washington team: they were the Boston Braves, and they played in Braves Field, which they shared with the National League baseball team of the same name. On 6 November 1932 they won at home against the Staten Island Stapletons, 19-6, a result that should have foretold a presidential victory for the incumbent Republican party. Neither the Redskins' team name nor their predictive powers were yet evident, however, as President Herbert Hoover lost to his Democratic challenger, Governor Franklin Delano Roosevelt of New York, on 8 November 1932. won Sightings: This Redskins home game election predictor was mentioned in an episode of the AMC television drama Mad Men ("The Wheel," original air date 18 October 2007): Last updated: 7 November 2012

True

groundhog's seeing his shadow on February 2 portends another six weeks of winter. In other instances the linkage is between affairs of mankind, as in the superstition that the winner of football's Super Bowl augurs that year's stock market performance (or vice-versa).Reality finally trumped coincidence in 2004, however: Despite the Green Bay Packers' 28-14 defeat of the Redskins at the latter's home field on 31 October, presaging a victory for Democratic challenger John Kerry in upcoming the presidential election, two days later incumbent President George W. Bush was re-elected, breaking the Redskins' predictive pattern. The Redskins indicator failed again in 2012 as Washington suffered a 21-13 home loss at the hands of the Carolina Panthers on 4 November 2012, just two days before that year's election, but Republican nominee Mitt Romney failed to unseat incumbent president Barack Obama. After stumbling in 2004, the Redskins' power as election predictors got back on track in 2008. In a Monday night game contested on 3 November 2008, the evening before Election Day, the Redskins were defeated at home, 23-6, by the Pittsburgh Steelers, a loss that foretold a change in party which would bring the Democratic candidate into the White House. The following day, the Democratic presidential candidate, Senator Barack Obama, defeated the Republican presidential candidate, Senator John McCain, for the White House. On 30 October 2000 the Washington Redskins lost a Monday night game at home to the Tennessee Titans, 27-21, presaging a loss for the incumbent Democratic party. Since President Bill Clinton had already been elected to the constitutionally-mandated maximum of two terms in office, the 7 November 2000 presidential election pitted Democratic Vice-President Al Gore against Republican Governor George W. Bush of Texas. In the closest (and most controversial) presidential election since 1876, Governor Bush gained the White House by the slim margin of five electoral votes, thereby fulfilling the Redskin prophecy. On 27 October 1996 the Washington Redskins defeated the Indianapolis Colts at home, 31-16, predicting a win for the incumbent Democrats. Sure enough, in the 5 November 1996 general election, Democratic President Bill Clinton won re-election over his Republican challenger, Senator Bob Dole of Kansas. On 1 November 1992 the Washington Redskins lost to the New York Giants at home, 24-7, predicting a similar loss for the incumbent Republicans. As expected, in the 3 November 1992, Republican President George H. W. Bush lost his re-election bid to Governor Bill Clinton of Arkansas. On 6 November 1988 the Washington Redskins edged the New Orleans Saints at home, 27-24, predicting a win for the incumbent Republicans. As President Ronald Reagan had already been elected twice, the 8 November 1988 election once again matched a sitting Vice-President, Republican George H. W. Bush, against a challenger, Democratic Governor Michael Dukakis of Massachusetts. True to form, Vice-President Bush emerged victorious. On 5 November 1984 the Washington Redskins bested the Atlanta Falcons in a Monday night home game, 27-14, predicting a win for the incumbent Republicans. The next day, President Ronald Reagan handily defeated his Democratic challenger, former Vice-President and Senator Walter F. Mondale of Minnesota, winning re-election with an electoral vote landslide. On 2 November 1980 the Washington Redskins were trounced at home by the Minnesota Vikings, 39-14, predicting a loss for the incumbent Democrats. As expected, on 4 November 1980 President Jimmy Carter failed in his re-election bid, losing to his Republican opponent, former California governor Ronald Reagan. On 31 October 1976 the Washington Redskins were spooked by the Dallas Cowboys in a Halloween Day home game, losing 20-7 and predicting a loss for the incumbent Republicans. Two days later, on 2 November 1976, Democratic Governor Jimmy Carter of Georgia unseated President Gerald Ford (who had been appointed Vice-President after the resignation of Spiro Agnew in 1973 and became chief executive in 1974 after President Richard Nixon also resigned). On 22 October 1972 the Washington Redskins edged the Dallas Cowboys, 24-20, predicting a win for the incumbent Republicans. The 7 November 1972 election resulted in the electoral vote landslide re-election of President Richard Nixon over the Democratic nominee, Senator George McGovern of South Dakota. On 27 October 1968 the Washington Redskins lost a close game to the New York Giants, 13-10, predicting a loss for the incumbent Democrats. Since President Lyndon B. Johnson had announced several months earlier that he would not seek another term as president, the November 1968 election was a contest between sitting Vice-President Hubert Humphrey and a former Vice-President, Republican Richard Nixon. In a mirror of the Redskins game, the Democrats lost in a close contest (the two candidates were separated by a slim 0.6% margin in the popular vote). On 25 October 1964 the Washington Redskins beat the Chicago Bears, 27-20, predicting a win for the incumbent Democrats. As predicted, on 3 November 1964 President Lyndon Johnson (who had ascended to the White House after the assassination of President Kennedy in 1963) won a landslide victory over Republican Senator Barry Goldwater of Arizona. On 30 October 1960 the Washington Redskins were pasted at home by the Cleveland Browns, 31-10, predicting a loss for the incumbent Republicans. President Dwight D. Eisenhower had already served two terms, so Vice-President Richard Nixon took up the Republican mantle against Senator John F. Kennedy of Massachusetts in the 8 November 1960 presidential election. Like the Redskins, the Republicans lost; unlike the Redskins, the Republicans made the contest a very close one. (Kennedy bested Nixon by a mere 0.2% margin in the popular vote.) On 21 October 1956 the Washington Redskins soundly defeated the Cleveland Browns at home, 20-9, predicting a win for the incumbent Republicans on 6 November 1956. And, for the second straight election, the Republicans and their standard-bearer, Dwight D. Eisenhower, prevailed over the Democratic nominee, Adlai Stevenson. On 2 November 1952 the Washington Redskins lost a squeaker to the Pittsburgh Steelers at home, 24-23, predicting a similar loss for the incumbent Democrats. President Harry S. Truman declined to run for re-election (he had already served eight years), leaving the field open for former Illinois governor Adlai Stevenson to stand against the Republican candidate, General Dwight D. Eisenhower. The Democrats' loss on 4 November 1952 was not nearly as close as the Redskins' had been. On 31 October 1948, the Washington Redskins walloped the Boston Yanks at home, 59-21, predicting a win for the incumbent Democrats. Two days later, In one of the most stunning political upsets in U.S. history, President Harry S. Truman (who had assumed office in 1945 when President Franklin D. Roosevelt died shortly after beginning his fourth term) defeated his Republican challenger, Governor Thomas E. Dewey of New York. On 5 November 1944, the Washington Redskins trimmed the Cleveland Rams at home, 14-10, predicting a win for the incumbent Democrats. And win the Democrats did, as President Franklin D. Roosevelt secured an unprecedented fourth term by defeating the Republican nominee, Thomas Dewey, on 7 November 1944. On 3 November 1940, the Washington Redskins thrashed the Pittsburgh Pirates (forebears of today's Steelers team) at home, 37-10, predicting a win for the incumbent Democrats. Likewise, Democrat Franklin D. Roosevelt became the first (and only) three-term president as he thrashed Republican challenger Wendell Willkie of New York (a former Democrat who had never held high elected office) on 5 November 1940. Going back to 1936 puts us beyond the beginnings of the Washington Redskins, as that year the Redskins franchise was still playing in Boston. Nonetheless, their knack for foretelling the outcome of presidential elections was already in place. On 1 November 1936 the Boston Redskins downed the Chicago Cardinals at Fenway Park, 13-10, predicting a win for the incumbent Democrats. Two days later, President Franklin D. Roosevelt won re-election over Republican Governor Alf Landon of Kansas.That is as far back as the streak goes. In 1932 the Washington Redskins were neither the Redskins nor a Washington team: they were the Boston Braves, and they played in Braves Field, which they shared with the National League baseball team of the same name. On 6 November 1932 they won at home against the Staten Island Stapletons, 19-6, a result that should have foretold a presidential victory for the incumbent Republican party. Neither the Redskins' team name nor their predictive powers were yet evident, however, as President Herbert Hoover lost to his Democratic challenger, Governor Franklin Delano Roosevelt of New York, on 8 November 1932.

FMD_train_1824

Was a Karl Marx Banknote Released in Germany?

03/20/2018

In March 2018, an image showing a young woman holding what appeared to be an official piece of European currency featuring the face of German philosopher and Communist Manifesto co-author Karl Marx started making its way around the Internet: Communist Manifesto Karl Marx Internet "Zero Euros" are a popular souvenir item in Europe. Richard Faille started producing the realistic currency (which is authorized by the European Central Bank) in 2015, with the help of an official banknote printer called Oberthur Fiduciaire. Faille's operation expanded over the years and now Zero Euro notes are available in a number of European countries and commemorate a variety of topics, such as anniversaries, historical locations, city events, and notable individuals: authorized 2015 commemorate The Zero Euro is a souvenir banknote with authorized printing by the European Central Bank (ECB) and is on queue to be a popular in 2017 banknote collector markets. Its origins stem from France in 2015 after Richard Faille, creator of popular French currency souvenirs, decided to create euros that promote tourism. The banknotes are printed at a private fiduciary facility and they share many of the same characteristics of a real Euro except that they are marked as 0, hence the name, and are tested to ensure they cannot enter circulation as legitimate financial currency. The front of all zero euros is the same and it includes a white zero followed by the Euro sign to denominate no financial value. Then (from left to right) Brandenburg Gate, Big Ben, the Eiffel Tower, the Colosseum, Sagrada Familia, Manneken Pis and the Mona Lisa. The pictured item is a souvenir that was produced by a tourism company in Trier, the German town where Marx was born, in honor of what would have been the author's 200th birthday in May 2018. The bill can be purchased for 3: bill On 5 May 2018 the city of Trier celebrates the 200th birthday of its famous son Karl Marx and on this occasion we have a bill from Trier Tourismus und Marketing GmbH. Norbert Kthler, the Managing Director of Trier Tourism and Marketing, acknowledged the humor in putting Marx on a worthless piece of currency: acknowledged Norbert Kthler, Geschftsfhrer der ttm, sagt zu dem Null-Euro-Schein: Das Souvenir setzt sich spielerisch mit der Marxschen Kapitalismuskritik auseinander. Und natrlich passen die Null-Euro-Scheine auch hervorragend zu Marx als Geldscheinmotiv. Norbert Kthler, Managing Director of TTM, says about the Zero Euro note: "The souvenir playfully deals with Marx's critique of capitalism. And of course, zero-euro bills also fit perfectly with the Marx motif." Satirical web site the Sacramento Brie also used an altered version of this image in an article that facetiously claimed that the zero value Marx bill was being used in Venezuela to boost the country's economy. Sacramento Brie Numis Magazine. "Zero Euro Banknote Creator Richard FAILLE Strikes Again!" 25 June 2017. Lokalo.de. "'Das Geld Wird Abgeschafft!' Trier Bietet Zum 200. Geburtstag Von Karl Marx Einen Null-Euro-Schein An." 17 March 2018.

True

In March 2018, an image showing a young woman holding what appeared to be an official piece of European currency featuring the face of German philosopher and Communist Manifesto co-author Karl Marx started making its way around the Internet:"Zero Euros" are a popular souvenir item in Europe. Richard Faille started producing the realistic currency (which is authorized by the European Central Bank) in 2015, with the help of an official banknote printer called Oberthur Fiduciaire. Faille's operation expanded over the years and now Zero Euro notes are available in a number of European countries and commemorate a variety of topics, such as anniversaries, historical locations, city events, and notable individuals: The pictured item is a souvenir that was produced by a tourism company in Trier, the German town where Marx was born, in honor of what would have been the author's 200th birthday in May 2018. The bill can be purchased for 3:Norbert Kthler, the Managing Director of Trier Tourism and Marketing, acknowledged the humor in putting Marx on a worthless piece of currency:Satirical web site the Sacramento Brie also used an altered version of this image in an article that facetiously claimed that the zero value Marx bill was being used in Venezuela to boost the country's economy.

FMD_train_893

Comparison between Hiroshima and Detroit

08/11/2016

The photo montage displayed above is one of dozens circulating online since 2009, purporting to demonstrate that 50-plus years of rule by the Democratic Party wrought a level of destruction on Detroit comparable to that caused by the dropping of the atomic bomb on Hiroshima, Japan in 1945. Some versions have sought to make the case verbally, as well. For example:What has caused more long term destruction - the A-bomb, or Government welfare programs created to buy the votes of those who want someone to take care of them? Japan does not have a welfare system. Work for it or do without. These are possibly the 5 best sentences youll ever read and all applicable to this experiment: 1. You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. 2. What one person receives without working for, another person must work for without receiving. 3. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. 4. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it! 5. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them, and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for, that is the beginning of the end of any nation. The comparison of 2010 Detroit to 1945 Hiroshima is grotesquely forced, however, as is the implication that Democratic policies are wholly to blame for the Detroit's decline since World War II. We'll start our analysis with the images, some of which are inaccurately labeled. Beginning with the upper left-hand photo, it is, in fact, an aerial view of the hypocenter (ground zero) of the atomic bomb explosion over Hiroshima on 6 August 1945, taken a few months after the fact. Here's a larger view of the image: hypocenter Working clockwise, the next image in the set supposedly depicts modern-day Hiroshima except that it doesn't. It's actually a snapshot taken from the Landmark Tower Sky Garden in Yokohama, Japan much like this one from Flickr: Flickr That having been pointed out, it's true that Hiroshima was rebuilt from its ashes and is now a beautiful and modern city. Nor is it too terribly hard to find an actual photo of it. rebuilt photo The photo at bottom-right though taken in 2013, not 2010 does show a dilapidated building (of which there are plenty) on the east side of Detroit. It's the former Packard Automotive Plant, which closed in the late 1950s: plenty closed However, the thing to note about the use of this image to portray Detroit as a locus of Hiroshima-like devastation is that all we actually see is one long-abandoned, crumbling building. It doesn't make the case. Lastly, we're shown a photo supposedly depicting Detroit in its mid-1940s heyday except that it was taken in the mid-1930s. It's an aerial view of Navin Field (later Tiger Stadium): Navin Field Granted, for the purposes of argument it doesn't really matter whether the above photo was taken in the '30s or '40s the point remains that Detroit once had a teeming population, abundant jobs, and a booming economy. In 1950 it was the fourth-largest city in the United States, but no longer. The question is, who was responsible? There's no simple explanation (and therefore no single scapegoat at whom to point fingers) for Detroit's long, slow descent to bankruptcy. Scott Martelle, author of Detroit: A Biography, offered this capsule summary in an op-ed column published in 2011: column The collapse of Detroit has roots in intentional de-industrialization by the Big Three automakers, which in the 1950s began aggressively spider-webbing operations across the nation to produce cars closer to regional markets, and to reduce labor costs by investing in less labor-friendly places than union-heavy Detroit. Their flight was augmented by government policies that, in the 1970s and 1980s particularly, forced municipalities and states to compete with each other for jobs by offering corporate tax breaks and other inducements to keep or draw business investments, a bit of whipsawing that helped companies profit at the expense of communities. Another summary of Detroit's decline cited issues such as the city's dependence on a single industry (i.e., automobiles), decades of racial tensions, shortcomings of leadership (stretching back to the 1930s), and the lack of an efficient transit system. decline Did Democrats and Democratic policies play some role in the fall of Detroit? Surely they did. Every Detroit mayor since 1962 has been a Democrat, after all. But Republicans held the seat for the 12 years prior to that, from 1950 through 1961. The Packard plant whose hollowed-out remains were displayed above closed its doors during that time. Whatever blame is to be allotted to politicians must be shared by both Democrats and Republicans on the national level, as well. Detroit's decline since World War II took place during periods when both parties held the presidency and/or controlled Congress. Finally, the specific suggestion that Detroit's downfall was an unintended consequence of the spread of social welfare programs while Hiroshima's dramatic recovery is at least partially attributable to the lack of same in Japan is based on misinformation. Japan has maintained strong public health care and social welfare programs in one form or another since the 1920s. Yet Hiroshima was rebuilt and flourished just the same. maintained Drury, Flora."A City Rebuilt from the Ashes." Daily Mail Online.5 August 2015. Martelle, Scott."The Collapse of Detroit." Los Angeles Times.27 March 2011. "Anatomy of Detroit's Decline." New York Times.8 December 2013. "Zombieland: The Abandoned Buildings of Detroit." Beaumont Enterprise.18 July 2013.

False

Beginning with the upper left-hand photo, it is, in fact, an aerial view of the hypocenter (ground zero) of the atomic bomb explosion over Hiroshima on 6 August 1945, taken a few months after the fact. Here's a larger view of the image:Working clockwise, the next image in the set supposedly depicts modern-day Hiroshima except that it doesn't. It's actually a snapshot taken from the Landmark Tower Sky Garden in Yokohama, Japan much like this one from Flickr:That having been pointed out, it's true that Hiroshima was rebuilt from its ashes and is now a beautiful and modern city. Nor is it too terribly hard to find an actual photo of it.The photo at bottom-right though taken in 2013, not 2010 does show a dilapidated building (of which there are plenty) on the east side of Detroit. It's the former Packard Automotive Plant, which closed in the late 1950s:Lastly, we're shown a photo supposedly depicting Detroit in its mid-1940s heyday except that it was taken in the mid-1930s. It's an aerial view of Navin Field (later Tiger Stadium):There's no simple explanation (and therefore no single scapegoat at whom to point fingers) for Detroit's long, slow descent to bankruptcy. Scott Martelle, author of Detroit: A Biography, offered this capsule summary in an op-ed column published in 2011:Another summary of Detroit's decline cited issues such as the city's dependence on a single industry (i.e., automobiles), decades of racial tensions, shortcomings of leadership (stretching back to the 1930s), and the lack of an efficient transit system.Finally, the specific suggestion that Detroit's downfall was an unintended consequence of the spread of social welfare programs while Hiroshima's dramatic recovery is at least partially attributable to the lack of same in Japan is based on misinformation. Japan has maintained strong public health care and social welfare programs in one form or another since the 1920s. Yet Hiroshima was rebuilt and flourished just the same.

FMD_train_1835

Austin Energy is considering its first rate increase since 1994.

05/10/2011

Answering a question for the May 1Voters Guidefrom the League of Women Voters of the Austin Area, City Council hopeful Kathie Tovo made us check our pocketbooks. Tovo said: Austin Energy, the citys electric utility, is considering its first rate increase since 1994.We wondered about that, since our first thought was that surely electric bills went up during that time. Tovos campaign manager, Mark Yznaga, told us Tovo was referring to the utilitys base charge for electricity. News reports and posts on Austin Energys website show hearings are expected to culminate in the City Council considering a rate bump as soon as later this year.The utility says in aJanuary Austin Energy Rate Review newsletterthat since 1994, its added more than 100,000 customers, experienced big increases in the cost of materials and services and added business functions while expanding others such as energy efficiency and solar rebate programs. At the same time, the article says growth in Austin Energy electric sales has trended downward of late, requiring the utility to dip into its reserves for operations.Echoing the newsletter article, Austin Energy spokesman Ed Clark told us the base electric rate, covering the costs of staff, the electric system, power plants, vehicles and the like, has not changed since 1994. Its 3.55 cents for each of the first 500 kilowatt-hours of electricity used and 7.82 cents for each additional kilowatt-hour. Clark said customers also pay an unchanged $6 monthly service charge,Yet that doesnt mean theyve paid the same amount for electricity every year.Their bills include such variables as a fee for statewide transmission costs added by the Texas Public Utility Commission in November plus a fluctuating fee tied to ups and downs in fuel costs. At our request, Clark told us what an average residential customer using 1,000 kilowatt-hours a month would have been billed each August from 1994 through 2011. For the period, we calculate, the fuel charge averaged 2.322 cents per kilowatt-hour, though its exceeded that every year from 2004 on.In 1994, the bill for 1,000 kilowatt-hours would have been $79.14. In 2010, the bill for using that much electricity was $100.20 -- an increase of 27 percent. In August 2011, the same usage would be billed $94.72, due to a drop in the fuel charge. Put another way, the 2011 charge looks to be 20 percent more than what it cost a customer using the same amount of electricity in 1994.A-ha! Is it really fair to say Austin Energys rates have not increased since 1994?Well, we realized, our comparison failed to consider inflation over the years. According to our check using theConsumer Price Index inflation calculatorposted online by the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the 2011 bill actually ends up about $15 less than the comparable 1994 bill. When we ran this by Austin economist Stuart Greenfield, he pointed out that according to a finer inflation adjustment tied to household energy prices, the average August 2010 bill was about $33 less than what it was in 1994.At a glance, still, Tovos statement could leave the misimpression that utility customers havent had to dig out more dollars for electricity since 1994. They have. We rate the statement Mostly True.

True

Answering a question for the May 1Voters Guidefrom the League of Women Voters of the Austin Area, City Council hopeful Kathie Tovo made us check our pocketbooks. Tovo said: Austin Energy, the citys electric utility, is considering its first rate increase since 1994.We wondered about that, since our first thought was that surely electric bills went up during that time. Tovos campaign manager, Mark Yznaga, told us Tovo was referring to the utilitys base charge for electricity. News reports and posts on Austin Energys website show hearings are expected to culminate in the City Council considering a rate bump as soon as later this year.The utility says in aJanuary Austin Energy Rate Review newsletterthat since 1994, its added more than 100,000 customers, experienced big increases in the cost of materials and services and added business functions while expanding others such as energy efficiency and solar rebate programs. At the same time, the article says growth in Austin Energy electric sales has trended downward of late, requiring the utility to dip into its reserves for operations.Echoing the newsletter article, Austin Energy spokesman Ed Clark told us the base electric rate, covering the costs of staff, the electric system, power plants, vehicles and the like, has not changed since 1994. Its 3.55 cents for each of the first 500 kilowatt-hours of electricity used and 7.82 cents for each additional kilowatt-hour. Clark said customers also pay an unchanged $6 monthly service charge,Yet that doesnt mean theyve paid the same amount for electricity every year.Their bills include such variables as a fee for statewide transmission costs added by the Texas Public Utility Commission in November plus a fluctuating fee tied to ups and downs in fuel costs. At our request, Clark told us what an average residential customer using 1,000 kilowatt-hours a month would have been billed each August from 1994 through 2011. For the period, we calculate, the fuel charge averaged 2.322 cents per kilowatt-hour, though its exceeded that every year from 2004 on.In 1994, the bill for 1,000 kilowatt-hours would have been $79.14. In 2010, the bill for using that much electricity was $100.20 -- an increase of 27 percent. In August 2011, the same usage would be billed $94.72, due to a drop in the fuel charge. Put another way, the 2011 charge looks to be 20 percent more than what it cost a customer using the same amount of electricity in 1994.A-ha! Is it really fair to say Austin Energys rates have not increased since 1994?Well, we realized, our comparison failed to consider inflation over the years. According to our check using theConsumer Price Index inflation calculatorposted online by the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the 2011 bill actually ends up about $15 less than the comparable 1994 bill. When we ran this by Austin economist Stuart Greenfield, he pointed out that according to a finer inflation adjustment tied to household energy prices, the average August 2010 bill was about $33 less than what it was in 1994.At a glance, still, Tovos statement could leave the misimpression that utility customers havent had to dig out more dollars for electricity since 1994. They have. We rate the statement Mostly True.

FMD_train_542

Says Milwaukee County Sheriff David Clarke has deputies collecting overtime while sitting passively in chairs watching courthouse security personnel work.

06/30/2014

Milwaukee County SheriffDavid A. Clarke Jr.regularlyuses the mediato criticize other elected officials -- having, for example, accused Milwaukee County Executive Chris Abele ofpenis envyand Milwaukee Mayor Tom Barrett of beingclueless. In contrast, Milwaukee County District AttorneyJohn Chisholmrarely engages in public political battles. So it was a surprise when Chisholm excoriated Clarkein a letteron June 2, 2014. Among other things, Chisholm said the Sheriff's Office was running a budget deficit partly because Clarke has deputies collecting overtime while sitting passively in chairs watching courthouse security personnel work. Chisholms charge seemed worthy of a look. The backdrop The district attorneys letter was in response toa letterhe and the countys chief judge received a few days earlier from Clarke. Clarke, in the wake ofa shootingof a 10-year-old Milwaukee girl, who was gravely wounded in the crossfire between two men on a playground, called for temporarily suspending plea bargaining and probation sentences for major crimes. For years, he wrote, the county's prosecutors and judges had engaged in soft-on-crime practices. Security checkpoints Security checkpoints for the county courthouse complex, which includes the Public Safety Building and the Criminal Justice Facility, are not the responsibility of the Sheriffs Office but rather the county Division of Facilities Management. In other words, county workers, not sheriffs deputies, check visitors and operate metal detectors at the various entrances to the complex. The security work is not part of the sheriffs budget. Clarke, however, has asserted his authority to help provide security. In March 2013,Clarke announcedthat during an integrity check, an undercover sheriff's deputy with a gun cleared security checkpoints at all six entrances into the county courthouse complex. He said that, as a result, he had ordered deputies posted at each security checkpoint in the complex until he is convinced weapons cannot get through. He said the staffing would be paid for with overtime. That staffing is continuing. When we checked the entrances one afternoon in June 2014, we found two county employees manning each checkpoint and a deputy nearby. At one checkpoint, we saw a deputy actively working the metal detector; but at the others, a deputy was only observing. Our colleagues who regularly visit the courthouse told us the same: usually they see deputies merely observing, but occasionally actively working a checkpoint. For his part, Clarke told us the deputies are not posted at the checkpoints to watch the screeners. The deputies are there to provide an armed presence for the protection of the public and employees, and to prevent and deter an armed person from getting into the building, he said in an email. The cost Theres no dispute that overtime pay is being used, at least in part, to pay deputies to work security checkpoints at the courthouse complex. But the amount is not clear. Based on overtime reports the Sheriffs Office submits to county officials, its not possible to tell how much in overtime pay is being spent on deputies working security checkpoints at the courthouse complex, said county Auditor Jerome Heer. Overall, the sheriffs overtime expenditures have gone over budget. In 2013, the Sheriffs Office spent $5.9 million for overtime, exceeding the $3.6 million overtime budget, Heer said. As of June 23, 2014, he said, overtime expenditures were $2.7 million, which is on pace to exceed the overtime budget of $4.1 million. Our rating Chisholm said Clarke has deputies collecting overtime while sitting passively in chairs watching courthouse security personnel work. Theres no dispute that part of the sheriffs overtime budget pays deputies to work security checkpoints at the courthouse complex. The deputies typically are observing visitors passing through the checkpoints, but sometimes get actively involved in screening them or monitoring metal detectors. We rate Chisholms statement Mostly True. To comment, go to the Milwaukee Journal Sentinelwebsite.

True

Milwaukee County SheriffDavid A. Clarke Jr.regularlyuses the mediato criticize other elected officials -- having, for example, accused Milwaukee County Executive Chris Abele ofpenis envyand Milwaukee Mayor Tom Barrett of beingclueless.In contrast, Milwaukee County District AttorneyJohn Chisholmrarely engages in public political battles.So it was a surprise when Chisholm excoriated Clarkein a letteron June 2, 2014.The district attorneys letter was in response toa letterhe and the countys chief judge received a few days earlier from Clarke.Clarke, in the wake ofa shootingof a 10-year-old Milwaukee girl, who was gravely wounded in the crossfire between two men on a playground, called for temporarily suspending plea bargaining and probation sentences for major crimes.In March 2013,Clarke announcedthat during an integrity check, an undercover sheriff's deputy with a gun cleared security checkpoints at all six entrances into the county courthouse complex. He said that, as a result, he had ordered deputies posted at each security checkpoint in the complex until he is convinced weapons cannot get through. He said the staffing would be paid for with overtime.To comment, go to the Milwaukee Journal Sentinelwebsite.

FMD_train_1914

The market is making this decision. The market has driven down the cost of coal, so you have companies going bankrupt.

05/10/2016

Some coal country voters see Hillary Clinton as a threat, someone who would install regulations that would hurt rather than help the struggling coal industry. But Clinton, the Democratic frontrunner, told CNNs Anderson Cooper that she thinks it's necessary to move away from fossil fuels to clean, renewable energy, and she wants to do what she can to help current coal mine workers make that transition. But the market is making this decision, she said May 4. The market has driven down the cost of coal, so you have companies going bankrupt. So what I'm offering is a $30 billion plan to really revitalize coal country, to provide support for coal miners and their families, and I think that is the least the country owes these brave people. Coal has historically been the countrys primary electricity generator. But several major coal companies have gone bankrupt in recent years, including Arch Coal, Alpha Natural Resources and Peabody Energy. We decided to dig into the question of how much of that change is due solely to market forces, rather than environmental regulation. We talked to coal industry experts who told us that the primary forces working against coal are market-based, notably the growth of natural gas as a cleaner, cheaper alternative. But now that coal is vulnerable, environmental regulations may seal coals demise. Coal has always been able to absorb new regulations, said Robert Godby, a professor and expert in energy economics at the University of Wyoming. But the impact natural gas has had since the fracking boom has been amazing to watch. He added: This would all still be happening regardless of regulations. Natural gas is eating coals lunch, and the coal companies made a bad bet on Chinese demand. Coalused to generateabout 50 percent of electricity in the United States, but now its down to about 30 percent. Just in the past couple years, natural gas has begun todisplacecoal. (In this Energy Information Administration chart, the grey line represents coal, and the orange line represents natural gas.) A recent boom inhydraulic fracturing(fracking) in the United States has dramatically increased the availability of natural gas. Natural gasprices are low, and it produces abouthalf as much carbon. Consequently, demand for natural gas is going up, and demand for coal is going down, and fast. While natural gas is the main threat, a growing demand and diminishing costs for renewable energy, like wind and solar power, also takes away from coal demand, said West Virginia University law professor Patrick McGinley. He added that on top of all this, its getting harder to produce cheap coal in the Appalachia region because a century of mining has depleted supply, and so the costs of mining new coal are going up. This is all a huge problem for coal, because electricity is about 90 percent of the coal market, said Andy Roberts, research director for global thermal coal markets at the consulting firm Wood Mackenzie. He said the trend is unlikely to reverse. But it was a big, failed bet on the international coal market that ultimately pushed companies to a point where they couldnt pay off their debts, forcing them to file for bankruptcy reorganization. About five years ago, the big coal companies Arch, Alpha and Peabody took out massive loans to invest in metallurgical coal, a type found in the Appalachia region. They thought fast-growing Asian countries, particularly China, would want the coal to facilitate economic development. But Chinas growth slowed, and the demand never materialized. The companies have been unable to pay back their debts on this project, and thats what sent them into bankruptcy, Godby said. Regulations may make electricity companies apprehensive about investing in coal down the line. This is the best way to think about how environmental regulations affect coal: If youre an electricity company considering building a new coal-powered plant or rehabilitating an outdated one, youre already on the fence about whether thats a good investment, because of the threat of natural gas. But then you remember you might have to face strict carbon emission limitations down the line, which convinces you to go with a natural gas plant instead of a coal plant. Take President Barack Obamas Clean Power Plan, a major initiative that would affect coal-powered plants by reducing carbon emissions. It isnt in effect yet, and it faces court hurdles. Even so, the uncertainty of what kinds of carbon limitations coal plants will face, and the possibility that they could be significant, has already reduced coal plant investment, Roberts said. So, investment in coal plants is now basically nil, Roberts said. And when the CPP begins in earnest in 2022, coal demand, already suffering, will more rapidly and inexorably decline. Similarly, the2015 Mercury and Air Toxics Standardsis a federal regulation that has had a significant impact on the coal industry and contributed to coal-powered plant closures. But its impossible to tell how much of the changes in the coal market can be attributed solely to the regulations, rather than the regulations plus the market forces. Multiple experts we asked said that so far, its primarily been the market putting pressure on coal. But looking toward the future, as coal becomes more vulnerable and environmental rules get bigger, regulations may play a larger role. Yes, as Secretary Clinton notes, the market is sorting this out, Roberts said. Competitive natural gas, the market, does indeed have something to do with that. But so do the CPP and federal subsidies for renewable generation. The combination of all these elements has been toxic for coal companies and lethal for those with too much debt. In reality, the market for coal is partially economic but increasingly regulatory. In October,Appalachian Power President Charles Patton saidcoal power wont be able to rebound with or without the Clean Power Plan the economics just dont make sense. Our ruling Clinton said, The market is making this decision. The market has driven down the cost of coal, so you have companies going bankrupt. Economic forces on both the national and international markets are the main reason coals prominence in the American energy sector is now vulnerable, forcing coal-burning plant closures and several high-profile bankruptcies. For a long time, coal has been impervious to government regulation. But more recently, regulations a non-economic force might be the straw that breaks the camels back, especially going forward now that coal is on shaky ground. Clintons claim is missing this important context, so we rate it Mostly True.

True

Coalused to generateabout 50 percent of electricity in the United States, but now its down to about 30 percent. Just in the past couple years, natural gas has begun todisplacecoal. (In this Energy Information Administration chart, the grey line represents coal, and the orange line represents natural gas.)A recent boom inhydraulic fracturing(fracking) in the United States has dramatically increased the availability of natural gas. Natural gasprices are low, and it produces abouthalf as much carbon. Consequently, demand for natural gas is going up, and demand for coal is going down, and fast.Similarly, the2015 Mercury and Air Toxics Standardsis a federal regulation that has had a significant impact on the coal industry and contributed to coal-powered plant closures.In October,Appalachian Power President Charles Patton saidcoal power wont be able to rebound with or without the Clean Power Plan the economics just dont make sense.

FMD_train_259

Sink Used as Toilet

01/26/2000

Legend: A young woman on a date who is too timid to ask where the toilet is meets with disastrous results. LEGEND Examples: [Collected on the Internet, 1999] This girl had been dating a rich guy in New York City. After a few months he took her to dinner at his parents mansion. During dinner she needed to use the toilet. Not wanting to be indiscreet she asked where the "powder room" was. The parents had the butler assist her to the powder room. When she went inside it had only a vanity and sink. She did not want to embarass herself by asking for the toilet, instead she decided to pee in the sink. However when she sat on the sink, it pulled out of the wall, and she fell off hitting her head on the towel rack and knocking herself unconscious. On hearing a loud thump from above the family rushed upstairs to find the sink broken and girl passed out with her pants down. [Collected on the Internet, 1999] There was this teenager. She was the daughter of a rich (if stuffy) couple and went to an exclusive private girls-only school. She was also head over heels in love with a particularly nice boy from one of the local boys-only private schools. She would do anything to meet him, and was continually making up excuses or 'coincidences' so that she would run into him. Being a boy, he finally got the message after she almost threw herself at him. He invited her out. However, being himself from a stuffy family, their first 'date' was to dinner at his house with his parents. The girl was ecstatic, if nervous, and immediately set out to make sure that the night would be a success. She didn't eat for a week. She spent a huge amount on a new haircut and a makeover. She bought a new dress. Finally, the night came. She went to the house and was introduced to the parents at the door. They made small talk. Things were going fine. Then, in the middle of the main course, the girl needed to go to the toilet. Being on her best behaviour, she asked for the bathroom. She was given directions, but when she got there, she only found a bath and a sink. Not wanting to appear foolish and go back to ask directions to the toilet, she decided to use the sink. Unfortunately, it was a little high and awkward to sit on, and half way though she slipped, broke the sink, and knocked herself unconscious. After half an hour, concerned about what had happened to her, that's where the entire family found her - unconscious, her knickers around her ankles, lying in a mess of water, urine and broken sink. Of course, when she came to, she was humiliated. The boy, however, thought it was the funniest thing in the world. He visited her in hospital and asked her to come around again. At first she wouldn't but, when convinced that the family had forgiven her and that it would never be mentioned, she agreed. As with the first time, she spent a week preparing for the night. As with the first time, she was greeted by the parents at the door. Feeling slightly more nervous than the first time, the sat down on the nearest sofa - only to hear a hideous cracking sound. She quickly stood up, and discovered that she had just broken the back of the family's beloved chihuahua. She never saw the boy again. Origins: The legend of the social-climbing young lady and her fall from both grace and a bathroom sink dates to at least 1991. It's usually set in Britain, where one could possibly still find older homes in which the bathroom (or washroom) contained only a washstand and where one would therefore need to ask for the "water closet" if one expected to be directed to the toilet, or (as in the first example above) in a "rich person's home" where one might find a "vanity room" with only a sink. (Neither explanation really applies to the second example above, in which the girl is clearly from the same area and social class as the boy she's dating.) This related version was told by novelist and biographer Andrew Sinclair: A friend of mine from Australia was asked to an elegant party in Eaton Square. Caviar was to be served after the champagne. Having drunk too much of that, my friend found his way to the bathroom. He groped around for a light switch, but did not discover it. He then groped around for a lavatory, but did not discover one. Finally, he found the edge of the bath and settled for that. He relieved himself slowly and fully, then turned on the taps to swill away the evidence. Going back to the party, he asked his hostess where the caviar might be. 'Packed on ice,' she said, 'in the bath. I am just going to get it.' He went instead, walking quickly back to Australia. As a legend, the "sink tinkle" shares a number of elements with the more common crushed dog tale in which an over-anxious guest manages to kill the family pooch by sitting on it. It's therefore no surprise to see the two combined into one story as they appear in the second example above. Crushed dog tales often include a lead-in of the guest having committed a prior faux pas, necessitating his return to the scene of the crime to tender an apology: crushed dog A young man, new in town, is invited to a party at an expensive home. He falls asleep after drinking heavily and awakens in a dark room. While fumbling for the light switch, he accidentally sticks his finger into an open ink well and leaves stains and fingerprints all over the room. Embarrassed by the damage he has done, the young man slips away unnoticed. The next day he decides to return and apologize. He was admitted by a servant, who led him to a dim library to await his host or hostess. He entered the library, and sank into the nearest comfortable chair, only to hear and feel a mind-boggling CRUNCH! The young man leapt to his feet to discover that he had crushed a delicate Chihuahua to death. He fled again, and never returned. A 1996 British version of the crushed dog tale also includes a lead-in involving a boorish guest and bathroom functions gone awry. In that telling, a lad staying over at a country home awakens in the middle of the night, overcome by the urgent need to defecate. He locates a chamber pot in his room, does his business in it, and returns to bed, resolving to empty the pot first thing in the morning before anyone else is about. In the morning, after topping up the pot with the contents of a full bladder, he sets out to look for a toilet to dump this steaming stew into. Alas, none is to be found. Still a bit tipsy from the night before, our hero decides to empty the pot out a window and onto the flower beds below. Unfortunately, as he holds the pot out the window, the weight of everything in it causes its handle to snap off. The pot plummets down the side of the house, crashes through the glass conservatory roof below, smashing and splashing its contents over the main table where the other guests are seated for breakfast. Be it spilled ink, a broken sink, or a crushed dog, at the heart of each of these tales lies an overriding commonality the unforgivable social error committed by someone clearly out of his element. Stories such as these are our way of venting such fears, getting them out in the open where we can laugh at them, but at the same time confirming to ourselves how very much we dread some day becoming the one to break the sink or squash the dog. Only because the following story fits well enough with the theme of social embarrassment to permit me an excuse to slip it in here, I present the following letter to Miss Manners: Dear Miss Manners: This may sound silly, but I'm serious. When someone suffers a particularly embarrassing accident in front of you and many others, what is the socially appropriate response? My husband and I got into an argument about this. We recently visited Boston, and while we were there, we attended a large party where everyone was elegantly dressed. At the party, a lady in a low-cut gown tripped, stumbled, lurched across a table, falling face first into a bowl of guacamole dip, and in the process "popped out" of her top. After an initial stunned silence, practically everyone in the room burst out laughing, even though it was obvious that the lady was terribly embarrassed. Then the hostess rushed over to help her and ushered her upstairs. After we left the party, I criticized my husband for laughing and told him I thought it was very bad manners. But he said that it was not impolite for people to laugh at something like that as long as they meant no harm and didn't "overdo" it. I said it was inconsiderate of the person's feelings to laugh at all. He said it's the social custom. Could you settle the argument? Gentle Reader: What do you mean "something like that"? Miss Manners doubts that there is anything in the world like an elegantly dressed Bostonian lurching across the room and diving face first into a bowl of guacamole dip while simultaneously disengaging her bodice from her bosom. Therefore, Miss Manners has a wee bit of trouble preparing a general rule for dealing with this eventuality. Nor, if she were your husband, would she attempt to justify a reaction on grounds other than direct cause and effect. One might try to ignore a less spectacular accident. If, say, it were avocado dip, rather than guacamole, and the lady had merely trailed her sleeve in it, one could pretend not to have noticed. To pretend not to notice a performance such as you have described even if it were humanly possible would be to suggest that the lady did it all the time and her friends have gotten used to it. It is far better to comfort her later by telling stories of your own about hilariously embarrassing accidents you have survived. Doesn't a broken sink or a squashed dog now almost sound picayune in comparison? Barbara "social quirker" Mikkelson Sightings: The "crushed dog" part of the legend shows up in Tom Robbin's 1980 novel Still Life with Woodpecker. Those looking for the "broken sink" part of the story will find that in an episode of television's The Single Guy (a short-lived sitcom aired in the U.S. from 1995-97). Last updated: 29 July 2013 Martin, Judith. Miss Manners' Guide to Excruciatingly Correct Behavior. New York: Warner Books, 1983 ISBN 0-446-37763-5 (pp. 468-469). Morley, Robert. Robert Morley's Second Book of Bricks. UK: Coronet Books, 1982 (p. 75). Samon, Katherine Ann. Dates from Hell. New York: Plume, 1992 (pp. ix-xiii). Scott, Bill. Pelicans & Chihuahuas and Other Urban Legends. St. Lucia, Queensland: Univ. of Queensland Press, 1996. ISBN 0-7022-2774-9 (p. 157).

True

As a legend, the "sink tinkle" shares a number of elements with the more common crushed dog tale in which an over-anxious guest manages to kill the family pooch by sitting on it. It's therefore no surprise to see the two combined into one story as they appear in the second example above. Crushed dog tales often include a lead-in of the guest having committed a prior faux pas, necessitating his return to the scene of the crime to tender an apology:

FMD_train_1455

Is Olive Garden Going Out of Business?

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_1673

Did Harry Truman Denounce the Use of 'Socialism' as a 'Scare Word'?

03/15/2019

In early 2019, several progressive Democratic politicians who were frequent headline subjects including Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York, Sen. Bernie Senators of Vermont, and Rep. Ilhan Omar of Minnesota were often tagged by critics with the word "socialist," used as a pejorative. At the recently concluded Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC), for example, Republicans warned of "radical" Democrats "embracing socialism." News accounts proclaimed that "Republicans are determined to paint Democrats as out-of-control, out-of-their minds socialists." CPAC accounts That political climate touched off the online circulation of a memetic quote from 33rd U.S. President Harry S. Truman, who purportedly fended off similar attacks on Democrats in 1952 by declaring that "socialism" was a "scare word [Republicans] have hurled at every advance the people have made in the last 20 years": The circulated meme was an accurate reproduction of a portion of a campaign speechTruman delivered from the rear platform of a train in Syracuse, New York, on 10 October 1952. (Truman himself was not a candidate for re-election that year, but he stumped for the Democratic ticket, headed by Illinois Gov.Adlai Stevenson II). Much of Truman's speech was a caustic rebuke of Republicans (and their presidential nominee, General Dwight D. Eisenhower), whom Truman characterized as having "opposed almost all our programs to help the economic life of the country" and "having blindly turned [their] back on the tradition of public action for the public good": speech [Republican Senator Robert] Taft explained that the great issue in this campaign is "creeping socialism." Now that is the patented trademark of the special interest lobbies. Socialism is a scare word they have hurled at every advance the people have made in the last 20 years. Socialism is what they called public power. Socialism is what they called social security. Socialism is what they called farm price supports. Socialism is what they called bank deposit insurance. Socialism is what they called the growth of free and independent labor organizations. Socialism is their name for almost anything that helps all the people. When the Republican candidate inscribes the slogan "Down With Socialism" on the banner of his "great crusade," that is really not what he means at all. What he really means is, "Down with Progress -- down with Franklin Roosevelt's New Deal," and "down with Harry Truman's fair Deal." That is what he means. Truman had earlier touched on the idea of "socialism" as a Republican scare word during an address he delivered at a Better Business Bureaus dinner on 6 June 1950, leading into a sardonic joke about New York Gov. Thomas E. Dewey (the unsuccessful Republican presidential nominee in the 1944 and 1948 elections): address I know that you have been hearing a lot of charges lately about Government interference with business, about the undermining of the free enterprise system, and about "creeping socialism." In short, you have been hearing that the Government is doing everything possible to wreck every industry in the country. Nothing could be further from the truth. The record shows that the Government action in recent years has been the salvation of private enterprise ... I know there are some people who still don't believe that the policies of the Government have had anything to do with our present prosperity. That reminds me of a story I heard on my recent nonpolitical trip. It seems that there was a rock-ribbed old gentleman of a political persuasion, shall we say, somewhat different from mine. One of his friends asked him what man to vote for for President in 1952. "Well," he said, "I would like to vote for Dewey." "Dewey!" said the friend. "Why Dewey?" "Well," he said, "I voted for him the last two times, in 1944 and in 1948, and business has never been so good as it is today" ... The funny thing is that this has all been said before. The current campaign is almost exactly like the campaign of the old Liberty League, back in 1935 and 1936. I was in that campaign, too, by the way. It uses the same old slogans, the same old scare words, and the same old falsehoods. The only difference is that it sounds even more foolish now than it did 14 years ago. Lightman, David. "Accusations of Socialism Drive GOP's 2019 (and 2020) Playbook." The [Tacoma] News Tribune. 12 February 2019. Pappas, Alex. "At CPAC, Conservatives Warn of 'Radical' Dems Embracing Socialism, Trump Impeachment." Fox News. 28 February 2019. Truman, Harry S. "Address at a Dinner of the Better Business Bureaus." The American Presidency Project. 6 June 1950. Truman, Harry S. "Rear Platform and Other Informal Remarks in New York ." The American Presidency Project. 10 October 1952.

True

In early 2019, several progressive Democratic politicians who were frequent headline subjects including Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York, Sen. Bernie Senators of Vermont, and Rep. Ilhan Omar of Minnesota were often tagged by critics with the word "socialist," used as a pejorative. At the recently concluded Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC), for example, Republicans warned of "radical" Democrats "embracing socialism." News accounts proclaimed that "Republicans are determined to paint Democrats as out-of-control, out-of-their minds socialists."The circulated meme was an accurate reproduction of a portion of a campaign speechTruman delivered from the rear platform of a train in Syracuse, New York, on 10 October 1952. (Truman himself was not a candidate for re-election that year, but he stumped for the Democratic ticket, headed by Illinois Gov.Adlai Stevenson II). Much of Truman's speech was a caustic rebuke of Republicans (and their presidential nominee, General Dwight D. Eisenhower), whom Truman characterized as having "opposed almost all our programs to help the economic life of the country" and "having blindly turned [their] back on the tradition of public action for the public good":Truman had earlier touched on the idea of "socialism" as a Republican scare word during an address he delivered at a Better Business Bureaus dinner on 6 June 1950, leading into a sardonic joke about New York Gov. Thomas E. Dewey (the unsuccessful Republican presidential nominee in the 1944 and 1948 elections):

FMD_train_1601

Foiled Child Abduction in Tupelo Rumor

12/14/2006

Claim: E-mail claims a Mexican woman attempted to abduct a tot from a store in Tupelo, Mississippi. Examples: [Collected via e-mail, 2006] Ok this is freaky but it really happened at the mall in Tupelo. Everyone please beware this Holiday Season. A couple of weeks ago a lady with two kids was shopping at JCPennys in the mall here at Tupelo. One of her sons was pretty small and he was in a stroller buckled in and the other one was older and he was walking beside her. A mexican woman came by and told the lady how cute her little baby was...well the lady told her "Thank You" and went on her way. A couple of minutes later the mexican woman approched the lady again telling her how cute her little baby boy was. The lady again replied with thank you. As the lady turned her back to look at a piece of clothing the oldest son started screaming. The lady turned around to find that the mexican lady had unbuckled the baby and grabbed him out of the stroller and took off with him. The lady ran after them and caught the mexican woman as the was getting out the door with her son. The only way that she caught her was the mexican woman had long hair and she pulled it and knocked her down. The lady held her in her custody until the authorities arrived. The lady was shocked when the authorities asked her if she wanted to press charges. The lady replied back with heck yeah this is my son your talking about. Come to find out the mexican lady was here illegally. They are coming here to steal our kids and carry them across the border to sell to the black market... scary I know....but I had to pass on. Now you do the same.. Thanks and have a Great Day This really happened to a relative of a girl that goes to church with me. They have the lady in custody that tried to take the baby. She was hispanic and finally admitted that she was taking the baby across the border to sell it. This was last Wednesday night, Nov. 15 at the JC Penneys at Barnes Crossing. They did not catch anyone that was accompanying the lady andwe don't know if she gave up any names. So there could still be predators out there. Warn everyone you know with small children. Very scary... Last night as our family was out eating out at a local resturant , one of my aunts shared with us a very disturbing event that happened this past Wednesday night at JC Penny. A lady was shopping with her 2 small children one a baby in a stroller and the other a toddler that was just old enough to talk. The lady had her children both right next to her as she was looking at clothes and the toddler said "Mama that lady just got my sister". This mother started chasing this Hispanic lady and finally caught her by reaching out and grabbing her hair from behind. She then started screaming this woman has my baby. Security came and took care of the horrible situation and told the Mom - we can almost bet you the lady had a car waiting outside with a driver and ready to take off and sell your baby on the black market in Mexico. This mother's grateful thought was Thank Goodness my toddler could talk and tell me - because she never thought this could happen since her children were right next to her within arms reach. I am sure with the Holiday Season approaching us all, the distractions as we shop will be more - but I hope this will help us all to stay a little more alert while out and about doing our shopping. And better Yet lets all each day Ask for the Lord to Guide and protect us and our families! Origins: In November 2006, these accounts describing a foiled child abduction at a store in Tupelo, Mississippi, began arriving in our e-mail. Akin to other Internet-circulated tales about attempted childnappings at large stores (such as the venerable canard about kids being pulled in store washrooms to be drugged and have their hair dyed by those attempting to make off with them, or the 2006 hoax about a failed child grab at a Blockbuster in North Texas), this one also proved to be a fiction. dyed Blockbuster According to Lee County Sheriff Jim Johnson and Tupelo Police Chief Harold Chaffin, the story about a Mexican woman who initially admired a shopper's baby, then grabbed it from the stroller and ran off with it was pure invention. There hadn't been any such incident no brave mom who seized the would-be abductor by her long hair and held her until police arrived, no baby-stealing illegal immigrant now behind bars awaiting trial, no ring of kidnappers frequenting Tupelo-area stores in search of product for a Mexican black market in American infants. The Mall at Barnes Crossing, a venue where the alleged foiled abduction was said to have taken place, did succeed in tracing the e-mails to their source. Mall manager Jeff Snyder indicated no legal action was contemplated against the rumor's originator, but he noted that this could well be the last time the Mall would be inclined to be so lenient regarding damage done to its reputation. The false story spread from inbox to inbox because it invoked not just the specter of the child-abducting stranger (a frightening enough figure all on its own) but melded into it a bogeyman of the moment, the illegal immigrant from south of the border. While illegal immigration into the U.S. from Mexico has long been a problem, prior to 2006 it was less of a concern to those not living in border states. In 2006, however, the illegal immigration issue was pushed to the center of the political arena, with some of that pushing taking the form of unsubstantiated rumors positioning all those who come into the U.S. on the sly as violent criminals. The fictive Mexican woman of this tale is presented as a kidnapper of small children, and not even one propelled by misguided maternal desire into taking youngsters so she could become their mother, but one motivated purely by avarice, in it for the cash that selling the purloined tots would bring. She is wholly and irredeemably evil and therefore held up as an example of the sort of person a "look the other way" attitude towards illegal immigration has allowed into the country. Her theft is not merely that of social services, it is of defenseless children; the cost of having her here is not merely a small increase in taxes paid by the typical family, but the risk that the next tot she or her compatriots snatch will be yours. Barbara "bogeyman the barricades" Mikkelson Last updated: 15 December 2006 Sources: Gray, Lloyd. "Today's Falsehoods Spread Faster, Wider." Northeast Mississippi Daily Journal. 10 December 2006 (p. B4).

False

Origins: In November 2006, these accounts describing a foiled child abduction at a store in Tupelo, Mississippi, began arriving in our e-mail. Akin to other Internet-circulated tales about attempted childnappings at large stores (such as the venerable canard about kids being pulled in store washrooms to be drugged and have their hair dyed by those attempting to make off with them, or the 2006 hoax about a failed child grab at a Blockbuster in North Texas), this one also proved to be a fiction.

FMD_train_1926

The United States has never been richer, if you look at per capita GDP.

11/18/2013

As congressional Democrats and Republicans sit down for high-stakes budget talks,the rhetoric has flown furiously to familiar territory.Republicans want cuts and reforms to entitlement programs, while Democrats insist that revenue must be on the table, too. Rep. Jan Schakowsky, D-Ill., made the case for the latter inan interview on MSNBCon Nov. 12, 2013. This country has never been richer, if you look at per capita GDP, she said. It doesn't feel that way when you hear about austerity and we have to cut this and we have to cut that. It's because the income inequality is greater than it has ever been. We wondered if she was correct. The numbers dont lie Schakowskys office sent us figures from theEconomic Research Serviceof the U.S. Department of Agriculture. According to those numbers, the GDP per capita, when adjusted for inflation, hit $45,633 this year, which surpassed the previous high of $45,360, which was set in 2007 prior to the most recent recession. It was barely higher, but higher all the same. (The government defines the GDP gross domestic product as the market value of the goods and services produced by labor and property within the country.) We were curious how the data was calculated, so we contacted Mathew Shane, an economist with the USDA who put the figures together. He told us that the 2013 number was partially based on a projection, since the year is not yet completed. But if that projection is borne out, he said,then GDP per capita will be at its highest level ever. Its close, Shane said. We hit a peak in 2007 when the crisis hit. Theres been no income growth in real terms since 2007. The difference between (2007 and 2013) is a very modest difference. We, essentially, finally regained what we were in 2007. I guess we could say were projected to be slightly better than we were in 2007. If I guess doesnt sound definitive enough, we also sought out another source:the Bureau of Economic Analysis, the government agency that calculates the nations GDP. The bureaus analysis also backs up Shanes findings. By the second quarter of this year, GDP per capita had surpassed 2007 levels. The third quarter of 2013 is the highest on record, said Thomas Dail, spokesman for the bureau. Finally, GDP per capita, even when adjusted for inflation, hasgone up and upfor more than a century. In other words, Schakowsky could have said what she said at virtually any given point during the last 150 years and had a pretty good chance of being right. Our ruling Schakowsky said, This country has never been richer, if you look at per capita GDP. We found that GDP has trended upward throughout much of America's history and the current level is only slightly higher than pre-recession levels. But the numbers show Schakowsky is right. We rate her comments True.

True

Rep. Jan Schakowsky, D-Ill., made the case for the latter inan interview on MSNBCon Nov. 12, 2013.Schakowskys office sent us figures from theEconomic Research Serviceof the U.S. Department of Agriculture. According to those numbers, the GDP per capita, when adjusted for inflation, hit $45,633 this year, which surpassed the previous high of $45,360, which was set in 2007 prior to the most recent recession. It was barely higher, but higher all the same. (The government defines the GDP gross domestic product as the market value of the goods and services produced by labor and property within the country.)If I guess doesnt sound definitive enough, we also sought out another source:the Bureau of Economic Analysis, the government agency that calculates the nations GDP. The bureaus analysis also backs up Shanes findings.

FMD_train_1596

During the Reagan era, the richest Americans had their top income tax rate cut in half.

10/06/2009

In his latest film,Capitalism: A Love Story, Michael Moore takes more than a few swipes at President Ronald Reagan, essentially asserting that under Reagan's watch, the rich got richer at the expense of everyone else. During the Reagan era, he said, the richest Americans had their top income tax rate cut in half. Moore is correct that the top marginal tax rate the rate of income tax charged to an individual on their last dollar of earnings decreased from 70 percent in 1980 to 28 percent in 1989. That's not the same as saying the richest had their taxes cut in half. In 1980, the top marginal tax rate was 70 percent on earnings over $161,300. The rate was substantially lower for the income earned below that. For example, that year, there were no taxes on the first $2,300 of income; 14 percent on income between $2,300 and $4,400; and on up via a graduated scale. So if you made $162,000 in 1980, for example, you paid far less on average than 70 percent of your income in federal taxes. The marginal tax rate also doesn't take into account various available deductions and tax credits, said Bob Williams of the Tax Policy Center. When Reagan revamped the tax code and dropped the top marginal tax rates to 50 percent in 1982, and then down to 28 percent by 1988, he also closed some of the tax loopholes available to people at the top. It's much fairer, we think, to look at effective individual income tax rates. That's the actual percentage of income that people paid in income taxes, factoring in not only the graduated percentages along the marginal tax rate scale, but also the deductions and tax credits that people were entitled to. In 1980,the effective individual income tax ratefor the top 1 percent of earners was 22.3 percent. In 1989, that rate dropped to 19.9 percent. That's a decrease of 2.4 percentage points, which works out to an 11 percent drop. That's sizable, but nowhere near 50 percent. If you widen the field and consider the top 10 percent of earners, instead of just the top 1 percent,the drop in effective individual income tax rate was about the same, just over 10 percent. For middle incomes, the effective individual income tax rate also dropped, from 8 percent to 6 percent. That's a 25 percent decrease. In other words, it wasn't just the rich who saw their income tax rates drop under Reagan. One more thing. When the top marginal tax rate dropped between 1980 and 1989, it went from 70 percent on earnings over $161,300 in 1980 to 28 percent on earnings over $128,810 in 1989. Obviously, that's not an apples-to-apples comparison. Did the rich get richer during the Reagan years? Yes. And Moore is technically correct when he says that the richest Americans had their top income tax rate cut in half. But we suspect some may mistake that for the richest having their taxes cut in half. In fact, we first began to look at this claim from a fact sheet provided on Moore's Web site before the movie was publicly released. And in the fact sheet, it states that the richest had their taxes cut in half. We were prepared to give that a False, as the effective tax rate for the richest was cut by about 10 or 11 percent. But in the movie, Moore describes it as the top income tax rate, apparently referring to the highest marginal rate. As we said, some may misinterpret that, but we think Moore has been careful enough with his words to get a Mostly True.

True

In 1980,the effective individual income tax ratefor the top 1 percent of earners was 22.3 percent. In 1989, that rate dropped to 19.9 percent. That's a decrease of 2.4 percentage points, which works out to an 11 percent drop. That's sizable, but nowhere near 50 percent.

FMD_train_1708

Did the IRS Send Thousands of Tax Refunds to the Same Addresses?

06/21/2013

This story started making the rounds in June 2013: The Internal Revenue Service sent 23,994 tax refunds worth a combined $46,378,040 to "unauthorized" alien workers who all used the same address in Atlanta, Ga., in 2011, according to the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration (TIGTA). That was not the only Atlanta address theoretically occupied by thousands of "unauthorized" alien workers receiving millions in federal tax refunds in 2011. In fact, according to a TIGTA audit report published last year, four of the top ten addresses to which the IRS sent thousands of tax refunds to "unauthorized" aliens were in Atlanta. The IRS sent 11,284 refunds worth a combined $2,164,976 to unauthorized alien workers at a second Atlanta address; 3,608 worth $2,691,448 to a third; and 2,386 worth $1,232,943 to a fourth. Once the U.S. Internal Revenue Service (IRS) began using Social Security Numbers (SSN) as the primary form of taxpayer identification, it ran into a problem: how to identify people who had federal tax reporting or filing requirements but were not eligible to obtain Social Security Numbers (such as non-resident foreign nationals who earned income which was taxable in the U.S.). The IRS' initial solution was to create temporary numbers known as Internal Revenue Service Numbers (IRSN) to process the tax returns of such persons, but that system created a problem because IRSNs were assigned to tax returns rather than to the individuals filing those tax returns, a situation which made it difficult to track all the returns filed by any particular person. To remedy that problem, in 1996 the IRS introduced the Individual Taxpayer Identification Number (ITIN), nine-digit numbers similar in structure to SSNs issued to individuals (regardless of their immigration status) who are required to have U.S. taxpayer identification numbers but are not eligible to obtain SSNs: ITIN An Individual Taxpayer Identification Number (ITIN) is a tax processing number issued by the Internal Revenue Service. It is a nine-digit number that always begins with the number 9. IRS issues ITINs to individuals who are required to have a U.S. taxpayer identification number but who do not have, and are not eligible to obtain a Social Security Number (SSN) from the Social Security Administration (SSA). ITINs are issued regardless of immigration status because both resident and nonresident aliens may have a U.S. filing or reporting requirement under the Internal Revenue Code. Individuals must have a filing requirement and file a valid federal income tax return to receive an ITIN, unless they meet an exception. In July 2012, the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration (TIGTA) issued a final report titled "Substantial Changes Are Needed to the Individual Taxpayer Identification Number Program to Detect Fraudulent Applications" which stated the TIGTA had initiated an audit of the ITIN assignment process due to two congressional complaints alleging IRS management personnel were encouraging the approval of fraudulent ITIN applications, and that it found the complaints to be largely accurate: report This audit was initiated because TIGTA received IRS employee complaints referred from members of Congress alleging that IRS management responsible for overseeing the ITIN operation was encouraging employees to assign ITINs to applicants when the ITIN application was fraudulent. The objective of our review was to assess the efficiency and effectiveness of the IRS's process to identify questionable ITIN applications. TIGTA substantiated many of the allegations set forth in the IRS employees' complaints. The complaints alleged that IRS management is not concerned with addressing questionable applications and is interested only in the volume of applications that can be processed, regardless of whether they are fraudulent. The audit found that the ITIN application review and verification process is so deficient that there is no assurance that ITINs are not being assigned to individuals submitting questionable applications. Because of lax documentation requirements to obtain an ITIN, tax fraud can go undetected. Management also eliminated successful processes used to identify questionable ITIN application fraud patterns and schemes. In its report, the TIGTA noted its analysis of ITIN application data had identified indications of possible fraud, such as ten addresses that were each issued thousands of tax refunds from returns using ITINs in 2011: As stated in the example quoted in the head of this article, four of those ten addresses were located in Atlanta, Georgia, with one address accounting for a total of nearly 24,000 different tax returns and over $46,000,000 in refunds. However, whether such information is indicative of widespread tax fraud involving the use of ITINs by non-citizens cannot be determined from the information provided. TIGTA's report did not claim to have uncovered specific cases of tax fraud; it offered charts such the one displayed as examples of how various analyses of IRS data could "identify indications of possible fraud." It's possible some of the addresses referenced above correspond to the offices of lawyers or accountants or some other service providers who assist immigrants and other non-citizens in preparing and filing tax returns. It's also possible that if some of those addresses are indeed connected to fraudulent tax return filings, the perpetrators of that activity are domestic criminals rather than "aliens." The July 2012 TIGTA report noted some of the deficiencies observed "had been brought to management's attention long ago" via a September 2002 report, but "management has failed to take sufficient action to address those deficiencies." In the 2012 report, TIGTA made nine different recommendations for modifying the ITIN review process to ensure the integrity of the program; in response, Peggy Bogadi, commissioner of the IRS's Wage and Investment Division, issued a memorandum stating the IRS was taking steps to implement seven of those recommendations by the end of 2012 and would consider the other two after conducting a broader review of the program and evaluating the feasibility and impact of those changes. Pickel, Mary Lou. "Tea Party at the Capitol." The Atlanta Journal-Constitution. 28 February 2009.

True

Once the U.S. Internal Revenue Service (IRS) began using Social Security Numbers (SSN) as the primary form of taxpayer identification, it ran into a problem: how to identify people who had federal tax reporting or filing requirements but were not eligible to obtain Social Security Numbers (such as non-resident foreign nationals who earned income which was taxable in the U.S.). The IRS' initial solution was to create temporary numbers known as Internal Revenue Service Numbers (IRSN) to process the tax returns of such persons, but that system created a problem because IRSNs were assigned to tax returns rather than to the individuals filing those tax returns, a situation which made it difficult to track all the returns filed by any particular person. To remedy that problem, in 1996 the IRS introduced the Individual Taxpayer Identification Number (ITIN), nine-digit numbers similar in structure to SSNs issued to individuals (regardless of their immigration status) who are required to have U.S. taxpayer identification numbers but are not eligible to obtain SSNs:In July 2012, the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration (TIGTA) issued a final report titled "Substantial Changes Are Needed to the Individual Taxpayer Identification Number Program to Detect Fraudulent Applications" which stated the TIGTA had initiated an audit of the ITIN assignment process due to two congressional complaints alleging IRS management personnel were encouraging the approval of fraudulent ITIN applications, and that it found the complaints to be largely accurate:

FMD_train_720

Parkland Memorial Hospital and Illegal Immigrants

11/07/2006

Claim: 70% of the women who gave birth at Parkland Memorial Hospital in the first three months of 2006 were illegal immigrants. Example: [Collected via e-mail, 2006] Parkland Memorial Hospital in Dallas, Texas is a fairly famous institution and for a variety of reasons: 1. John F. Kennedy died there in 19632. Lee Harvey Oswald died there shortly after3. Jack Ruby, who killed Lee Harvey Oswald, died there a few years later by coincidence On the flip side, Parkland is also home to the second busiest maternity ward in the country with almost 16,000 new babies arriving each year. (That's almost 44 per day every day) A recent patient survey indicated that 70 percent of the women who gave birth at Parkland in the first three months of 2006 were illegal immigrants.' Crikey, that's 11,200 anchor babies born every year just in Dallas. According to the article, the hospital spent $70.7 million delivering 15,938 babies in 2004 but managed to end up with almost $8 million dollars in surplus funding. Medicaid kicked in $34.5 million, Dallas County taxpayers kicked in $31.3 million and the feds tossed in another $9.5 million. The average patient in Parkland's maternity wards is 25 years old, married and giving birth to her second child. She is also an illegal immigrant. By law, pregnant women cannot be denied medical care based on their immigration status or ability to pay. OK, fine. That doesn't mean they should receive better care than everyday, middle-class American citizens. But at Parkland Hospital, they do. Parkland Memorial Hospital has nine prenatal clinics. NINE. The Dallas Morning News article followed a Hispanic woman who was a patient at one of the clinics and pregnant with her third child her previous two were also born at Parkland. Her first two deliveries werefree and the Mexican native was grateful because it would have cost $200 to have them in Mexico. This time, the hospital wants her to pay $10 per visit and $100 for the delivery but she was unsure if she could come up with the money. Not that it matters, the hospital won't turn her away. (I wonder why they even bother asking at this point.) How long has this been going on? What are the long-term effects? Well, another subject of the article was born at Parkland in 1986 shortly after her mother entered the U.S. illegally now she is having her own child there as well. (That's right, she's technically a U.S. citizen.) These women receive free prenatal care including medication, nutrition, birthing classes and child care classes. They also get freebies such as car seats, bottles, diapers and formula. Most of these things are available to American citizens as well but only for low-income applicants and even then, the red tape involved is almost insurmountable. Because these women are illegal immigrants they do not have to provide any sort of legitimate identification no proof of income. An American citizen would have to provide a social security number which would reveal their annual income an illegal immigrant need only claim to be poor and the hospital must take them at their word. My husband is a pilot for the United States Navy (yes, he fought in Iraq) and while the health care is good, we Navy wives don't get any of these perks! Car seats? Diapers? Not so much. So my question is this: Does our public medical care system treat illegal immigrants better than American citizens? Yes it does! As I mentioned, the care I have received is perfectly adequate but it's bare bones, meat and potato medical care not top of line. Their (the illegals) medical care is free simply because they are illegal immigrants? Once again, there is no way to verify their income. Parkland Hospital offers indigent care to Dallas County earn less than $40,000 per year. (They also have to prove that they did not refuse health coverage at their current job. Yeah, the 'free' care is not so easy for Americans.) There are about 140 patients who received roughly $4 million dollars for un-reimbursed medical care. As it turns out, they did not qualify for free treatment because they resided outside of Dallas County. So the hospital is going to sue them! Illegals get it all free! But U.S. citizens who live outside of Dallas County get sued! How stupid is this? As if that isn't annoying enough, the illegal immigrant patients are actually complaining about hospital staff not speaking Spanish. In this AP story, the author speaks with a woman who is upset that she had to translate comments from the hospital staff into Spanish for her husband. The doctor was trying to explain the situation to the family and the mother was forced to translate for her husband who only spoke Spanish. This was apparently a great injustice to her. In an attempt to create a Spanish-speaking staff, Parkland Hospital is now providing incentives in the form of extra pay for applicants who speak Spanish. Additionally, medical students at the University of Texas Southwestern for which Parkland Hospital is the training facility will now have a Spanish language requirement added to their already jammed-packed curriculum. No other school in the country boasts such a ridiculous multi-semester (multicultural) requirement. Origins: Dallas' Parkland Memorial Hospital is familiar even to many non-Texans as the site where both President John F. Kennedy and his assassin, Lee Harvey Oswald (who was himself shot by Jack Ruby), were transported for emergency life-saving procedures in November 1963. Now, in 2006, Parkland Memorial is well known for its maternity program, which includes nine prenatal clinics and employs 72 doctors training to become obstetricians-gynecologists and 45 nurse-midwives. According to the Dallas Morning News, in 2005 Parkland Memorial staff delivered 15,590 babies, an average of more than 42 infants per day. In a pair of June 2006 articles, the Morning News reported that a recent patient survey indicated 70% of the women who gave birth at Parkland in the first three months of 2006 were illegal immigrants (while a similar New York Times article pegged the yearly tally for 2005 as "at least 56%"). The hospital spent $70.7 million delivering babies born there in 2004, with taxpayers covering about 40% of the costs ($31.3 million) directly, and federal and state funds (primarily Medicaid) making up the remainder. Because of large payments from the Medicaid system, Parkland still ended 2004 with a $7.9 million surplus in obstetrics. A recent hospital analysis concluded that the average maternity ward patient at Parkland is a 25-year-old, married Hispanic woman giving birth to her second child. The Parkland staff does not ask maternity patients whether they are illegal immigrants, so the preponderance of illegal aliens among this group has to be inferred through other means.) (Under the 1986 Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act [EMTALA], hospitals are obligated to provide care to pregnant women in need of emergency help, and those that fail to do so are subject to fines of up to $50,000 per violation and exclusion from Medicare and state health care programs.) EMTALA Parkland's policies contrast with those of the public hospital system in neighboring Tarrant County: Uninsured Hispanic immigrants with uncertain immigration status have flocked in recent years to public hospital emergency rooms and maternity wards in Texas, California and other border states. Their care has swelled costs for struggling hospitals and increased the health care bills that fall to states and counties, giving ammunition to opponents of illegal immigration who complain of undue burdens on local taxpayers. As a result, health care has become one of the sorest issues in the border states' debate over illegal immigration. Facing harsh criticism from residents, public hospitals are confronted with an uneasy decision: demand immigration documents from patients and deny subsidized care to those who lack them, or follow the public health principle of providing basic care to anyone who needs it. In Texas, two of the biggest public hospitals chose differently. The Parkland Health and Hospital System, which serves Dallas County, offers low-cost care to low-income residents with no questions asked about immigration status. "I don't want my doctors and nurses to be immigration agents," said Dr. Ron J. Anderson, the president of Parkland. "We decided that these are folks living in our community and we needed to render the care." In Fort Worth, in neighboring Tarrant County, JPS Health Network requires foreign-born patients to show legal immigration documents to receive financial assistance in nonemergencies, like elective surgery and the treatment of routine or chronic illnesses. Executives said that their first responsibility was to legal residents, but that they were uncomfortable about having to make such distinctions. Administrators from both hospital systems indicated that some of the common assumptions made about immigrants who seek medical care at those facilities (and at other Texas hospitals) are misconceptions: While Texas border hospitals often get "anchor babies" children of Mexican women who dart across the border to give birth to an American citizen most illegal immigrants who go to major hospitals in Texas can show that they have been living here for years, said Ernie Schmid, policy director at the Texas Hospital Association. Many immigrant families have mixed status; often a patient with no documents has a spouse or children who are legal. Most immigrant patients have jobs and pay taxes, through paycheck deductions or property taxes included in their rent, administrators at the Dallas and Fort Worth hospitals said. At both institutions, they have a better record of paying their bills than low-income Americans do, the administrators said. The largest group of illegal immigrant patients is pregnant women, hospital figures show. Contrary to popular belief here, their care is not paid for through local taxes. Under a 2002 amendment to federal regulations, the births are covered by federal taxes through Medicaid because their children automatically become American citizens. These cases are not affected by new regulations that went into effect on July 1 [2006] requiring Medicaid patients to provide proof of citizenship, Texas health officials said. They said they believed that only small numbers of illegal immigrants had received other Medicaid benefits. Last updated: 25 August 2015 Sources: Jacobsen, Sherry. "Parkland Is Brimming with Babies." Dallas Morning News. 11 June 2006. Jacobsen, Sherry. "Parkland Will Treat All Moms-to-Be." Dallas Morning News. 12 June 2006. Preston, Julia. "Texas Hospitals' Separate Paths Reflect the Debate on Immigration." The New York Times. 18 July 2006 (p. A1).

False

A recent hospital analysis concluded that the average maternity ward patient at Parkland is a 25-year-old, married Hispanic woman giving birth to her second child. The Parkland staff does not ask maternity patients whether they are illegal immigrants, so the preponderance of illegal aliens among this group has to be inferred through other means.) (Under the 1986 Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act [EMTALA], hospitals are obligated to provide care to pregnant women in need of emergency help, and those that fail to do so are subject to fines of up to $50,000 per violation and exclusion from Medicare and state health care programs.)

FMD_train_1108

Was the Dakota Territory divided into two states in order to gain additional Republican senators?

04/23/2021

Amid discussions of statehood for Washington, D.C., in late April 2021, a meme spread on social media positing that the Dakota territory was split into the states now known as North and South Dakota in the late 1800s for the purpose of giving the Republican Party more political power, namely more senators and electors. One example is a meme from U.S. Rep. Ro Khanna, D-Calif.: The meme read, "Congress split the Dakota territory in half in 1889 to admit two new states with 4 Republican senators. So spare us the fake outrage over DC statehood." The text was taken from a tweet posted by journalist Ari Berman on April 22. tweet The meme generally responds to congressional Republicans who have stated that allowing D.C., a heavily Democratic region, to become a state will shift the balance of political power in Congress. Noting the racial demographics of D.C. versus other states, some Democrats have accused Republicans of stonewalling D.C. statehood because of racism. stated racial demographics accused It also characterizes current Republican opposition to D.C. statehood as hypocritical, noting that the national Republican party has benefited historically from addition of new states with Republican populations. Writing for The Atlantic in 2019, Boston College historian Heather Cox Richardson wrote: The Atlantic The number of states in the union has been fixed at 50 for so long, few Americans realize that throughout most of our history, the addition of new states from time to time was a normal part of political life. New states were supposed to join the union when they reached a certain population, but in the late 19th century, population mattered a great deal less than partisanship. While McConnell is right to suspect that admitting Puerto Rico and the District of Columbia now would shift the balance in Congress toward the Democrats, the Republican Party has historically taken far more effective advantage of the addition of new states. In 1889 and 1890, Congress added North Dakota, South Dakota, Montana, Washington, Idaho, and Wyomingthe largest admission of states since the original 13. This addition of 12 new senators and 18 new electors to the Electoral College was a deliberate strategy of late-19th-century Republicans to stay in power after their swing toward Big Business cost them a popular majority. The strategy paid dividends deep into the future; indeed, the admission of so many rural states back then helps to explain GOP control of the Senate today, 130 years later. Like most things viewed through the lens of history, the reasons North and South Dakota exist as two separate states are complicated by changing context. Business interests, local efforts, and national political wrangling all played a role, but without a doubt, adding North and South Dakota to the growing union of states had the effect of benefiting the national Republican party politically, and they didn't hide that motivation. But comparing the statehood process for North and South Dakota to current advocation for Washington, D.C. statehood is comparing apples to oranges, said Michael Card, associate professor of political science at the University of South Dakota. That period in American history was drastically different to the current circumstances in many ways namely, at that time, a large number of states were in the process of being added into the Union. One of the major factors in deciding statehood was population counts of non-indigenous American settlers. That figure was set at 60,000 in 1787. set at 60,000 Another contextual difference was that the nature of the political parties have evolved over time, meaning the Republicans and Democrats of today are not representative of the parties with those names from the late 19th century in many ways. Many of the non-indigenous settlers in the southern part of what was then Dakota territory were Union veterans of the Civil War and their families, who were Republicans. Many likely moved far away from the battlefields in the American South in an effort to get away from traumatic memories, Card noted. Scandinavian and Canadian immigrants tended to settle in the north. As USA Today pointed out, "the Republican Party was much more concerned with protecting African Americans and their voting rights from its founding through the early 20th century. In the mid-20th century, both parties' stances on racial equity began to switch." That switch came after Democratic legislators passed voting and civil rights legislation i the 1960s. pointed out Another important point of context the population counts in North and South Dakota justified statehood and that Democrats, who were at that time were in control of national government and aware of the territory's Republican leanings, had slowed the statehood process, in hopes of gaining a political toehold in the region. slowed the statehood But they couldn't stall forever. According to historian Elwyn B. Robinson in the book "History of North Dakota," there were 190,983 inhabitants in North Dakota in 1890, while there were 348,600 in South Dakota. And in the end, it was Democrats in Congress and Democratic U.S. President Grover Cleveland who relented, signing legislation granting statehood to North and South Dakota, along with Montana and Washington. In "History of North Dakota," Robinson noted that local advocacy also came into play when it came to the creation of the two states. At the local level, there was an internal push for statehood from a small group of influential men who were unhappy with the outside control that came with Dakota being a territory, and who wanted political equality of status. History of North Dakota Statehood was a quiet revolution, accomplished by less than two hundred men. The first leaders were Yankton politicians, but all came from southern Dakota and all were Republicans. With few exceptions, they were conservative, middle-class business and professional menbankers, lawyers, ministers, railroad employees, and newspaper editors. They were of the older American stock and came from New England, New York, or the states of the Old Northwest. They were Republicans because Dakota was a one-party regiona result of the long years of territorial status when the Republican party had control of the United States government. The idea of splitting the northern region off from the southern one started with this group, but not because of political power in Washington, D.C., Robinson wrote: "From the beginning the Yankton leaders, a small oligarchy with much influence, planned for the division of the territory at the forty-sixth parallel. Division seemed natural. The railroads ran east and west, so that southern and northern Dakota had little contact with each other." When Robinson described the decision to ultimately split the territory into two when admitting it into the Union though, he noted that it was pushed hard by the Republican Indiana senator who would become the 23rd U.S. president, Benjamin Harrison: Finally, the program of division, with southern Dakota becoming a state and northern Dakota a territory, was dropped in favor of a bill to admit two states. Senator Benjamin Harrison of Indiana pushed it hard and the large population of Dakota (in 1890, North Dakota alone had 190,983 inhabitants and South Dakota 348,600) made further denial seem unjust and irresponsible. In the presidential campaign of 1888 the Republican platform called for admission of two states. Ordway and the Dakota Democrats finally dropped their single-state bill. Both Republicans and Democrats voted for the Omnibus Bill of February 22, 1889, authorizing the framing of constitutions in North Dakota, South Dakota, Montana, and Washington. When the bill finally passed the House of Representatives, some of the members threw books and papers into the air in celebration and there was a general handshaking of congratulation. A step toward equality of status had been taken. Updated rating to "Mixture" and added additional context.

NEI

The meme read, "Congress split the Dakota territory in half in 1889 to admit two new states with 4 Republican senators. So spare us the fake outrage over DC statehood." The text was taken from a tweet posted by journalist Ari Berman on April 22.The meme generally responds to congressional Republicans who have stated that allowing D.C., a heavily Democratic region, to become a state will shift the balance of political power in Congress. Noting the racial demographics of D.C. versus other states, some Democrats have accused Republicans of stonewalling D.C. statehood because of racism.Writing for The Atlantic in 2019, Boston College historian Heather Cox Richardson wrote:That period in American history was drastically different to the current circumstances in many ways namely, at that time, a large number of states were in the process of being added into the Union. One of the major factors in deciding statehood was population counts of non-indigenous American settlers. That figure was set at 60,000 in 1787.As USA Today pointed out, "the Republican Party was much more concerned with protecting African Americans and their voting rights from its founding through the early 20th century. In the mid-20th century, both parties' stances on racial equity began to switch." That switch came after Democratic legislators passed voting and civil rights legislation i the 1960s.Another important point of context the population counts in North and South Dakota justified statehood and that Democrats, who were at that time were in control of national government and aware of the territory's Republican leanings, had slowed the statehood process, in hopes of gaining a political toehold in the region.In "History of North Dakota," Robinson noted that local advocacy also came into play when it came to the creation of the two states. At the local level, there was an internal push for statehood from a small group of influential men who were unhappy with the outside control that came with Dakota being a territory, and who wanted political equality of status.

FMD_train_1119

Young Bush School Report

08/03/2004

Claim: Grammar school report details problems with a young George W. Bush. Satire. Example: [Collected on the Internet, 2004] United States Grammar School Interim Report to Parents Dear Mr. and Mrs. G.H.W. Bush, Once again, it is that time of year when we update the parents of our students on their child's progress, and we regret to inform you that your son, Georgie, is not doing as well as we'd hoped and expected when he embarked on his four-year program at our school. As you are well aware, Georgie was installed as class president at the start of the school year, despite the fact that the majority of his fellow students did not vote for him. We foresaw problems immediately, but were assured by several school board members (who, as we understand it, are friends of your family) that this would not result in any real difficulty. Unfortunately, they have been proven wrong. In the area of scholastic achievement, despite our best efforts, Georgie is still reading and speaking at a grade level far below our usual standards. At this point, we are not sure if his failure to learn is due to laziness and a lack of ability to apply himself to his studies, or if he simply lacks the intellectual capacity to improve in these areas. His oral presentations to the class are particularly troubling; it is apparent that Georgie has not read the necessary materials, and he often simply fabricates facts to hide this shortcoming. In oral exams, he tends to repeat the same answers over and over, e.g. "The economy is good; jobs are on their way," indicating a profound failure to keep up with the Current Events portion of the curriculum. [Rest of article here.] here Origins: Another entry from the "no piece of satirical writing can be so obvious that someone won't miss the humor" file, the article excerpted above makes light of various aspects of George W. Bush and his presidency (e.g., his winning the controversial 2000 presidential election, questions regarding his fulfillment of National Guard obligations, his insistence that Vice-President Dick Cheney appear with him before the 9/11 commission) by casting them as the actions of a young boy and reporting them to his parents in the form a school principal's letter. The letter itself is the work of Nancy Greggs and was published on 25 May 2004 on the Democratic Underground web site. Democratic Underground Last updated: 19 August 2007

False

[Rest of article here.]The letter itself is the work of Nancy Greggs and was published on 25 May 2004 on the Democratic Underground web site.

FMD_train_988

Is the Kennedy Center Changing to the Obama Center?

08/13/2014

Claim: The John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts is changing its name to the Obama Center. Example: [Collected via e-mail, August 2014] Rumor: The Kennedy Center For The Arts' name is being changed to the Obama Center For The Arts. Origins: The John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts is a performance hall and education complex located on the banks of the Potomac River in Washington D.C. Although the Kennedy Center is the official home of the National Symphony Orchestra and the Washington National Opera, it is most widely known for hosting the annual Kennedy Center Honors, a program which recognizes living individuals for lifetime artistic achievement and which is broadcast live on network television each year. John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts Kennedy Center Honors Although the legislation to establish a National Cultural Center was signed by President Eisenhower in 1958, it was President and Mrs. Kennedy who used their influence as well known patrons of the arts to raise the private funds necessary to establish and maintain the center. After President Kennedy's death in 1963, Congress "designated the National Cultural Center ... as a 'living memorial' to Kennedy." living memorial But there is another Kennedy Center, this one a community recreation center and senior citizens hall in Willingboro, New Jersey. In early August 2014 the Willingboro Township Council voted to rename that Kennedy Center in honor of President Barack Obama: A recreation and senior citizens center in Willingboro known as the "Kennedy Center" will soon be named after the sitting president and not a former one. The change became official Tuesday when the township council voted to change the name of the building to honor President Barack Obama. The name of the street the building is on Kennedy Way will not be changed. A shopping center across the street is also named for Kennedy. That name change was planned as part of a multi-million dollar renovation of the Willingboro community facility, which converted the former high school cafeteria into a banquet hall. But after alumnae/i of the former Kennedy High School protested, the Willingboro council reversed the decision at its September 2014 meeting: Dawn Donnelly, of Burlington Township, a 1977 graduate of Kennedy, came to the meeting with 1,200 signatures of those opposing the name change. Im an Obama supporter, Donnelly said. I voted for him two times, and I would vote for him again. Its not about that.... Kennedy meant a lot to this town in the 1960s. They are changing history. Last updated: 3 September 2014 Goldman, Jeff. "Building In N.J. Town Named After John F. Kennedy Will Now Be Named After Obama." The Star-Ledger. 7 August 2014. Levinsky, David and Rose Krebs. "Willingboro Council Reverses Kennedy Center Name Change." Burlington County Times. 2 September 2014.

False

Origins: The John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts is a performance hall and education complex located on the banks of the Potomac River in Washington D.C. Although the Kennedy Center is the official home of the National Symphony Orchestra and the Washington National Opera, it is most widely known for hosting the annual Kennedy Center Honors, a program which recognizes living individuals for lifetime artistic achievement and which is broadcast live on network television each year.Cultural Center was signed by President Eisenhower in 1958, it was President and Mrs. Kennedy who used their influence as well known patrons of the arts to raise the private funds necessary to establish and maintain the center. After President Kennedy's death in 1963, Congress "designated the National Cultural Center ... as a 'living memorial' to Kennedy."

FMD_train_1763

Man Claiming to Be Transgender Arrested for Filming Women in Restroom

04/15/2016

On April 1, 2016, the website Breitbart published an article reporting that a California man posing as a woman had been arrested after filming women in the bathroom of a Macy's department store. A Palmdale, California, man wearing women's clothing was arrested in a Lancaster Macy's store after he was seen in a women's bathroom. The man was allegedly videotaping women in the bathroom. Jason Pomare, 33, was arrested over the weekend after mall security officers learned he had been lingering in a Macy's department store women's bathroom. The security guards contacted a Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department (LASD) deputy who found the cross-dressing man in a mall storage area, NBC Los Angeles reported. Breitbart also tied the story to anti-discrimination ordinances regarding bathroom usage by transgender people, stating that it is not clear if Lancaster has a bathroom ordinance like the one defeated in Houston the previous year, which would have allowed men to legally enter women's bathrooms and locker rooms. Breitbart Texas's Lana Shadwick covered the defeat of that ordinance in Houston. Pomare was not charged with any offenses related to being in the women's bathroom other than the illegal filming. On April 12, 2016, the website Daily Headlines published the same story, citing Breitbart as a source, and inaccurately conflating the use of bathrooms with filming inside them. The article stated that a man from Palmdale, California, wearing a bra and dress entered the ladies' bathroom at Macy's, and what happened next should not surprise you. The man, Jason Pomare, 33, entered the bathroom, which the ACLU and the liberal elitists in this country claim is his God-given right. He set up a hidden camera in one of the stalls and, for the next two hours, taped women using the bathroom. Eventually, one woman noticed the camera with the recording light on and notified mall security, who arrested Pomare. There was absolutely no way for anyone to see this coming, was there? (Removes tongue from cheek.) Although Breitbart provided a link to the source for their report, the site either didn't bother to check that source's date or deliberately misrepresented the incident to generate more interest. The linked news article from Los Angeles television station KNBC was clearly dated May 13, 2013 (not 2016, or "last weekend"). KNBC's 2013 reporting described an unambiguous violation of the law. The incident had nothing to do with bathroom ordinances; it involved unquestionably illegal actions, and the individual identified was arrested and charged. Charges were filed against a man who wore a wig and women's clothing to disguise himself as he allegedly used a concealed camera to record "hours" of video of women in a Los Angeles-area department store restroom. Jason Pomare, 33, of Palmdale, was arrested after customers contacted security officers at a Macy's store to report a man in the women's restroom. The security officers contacted a deputy who was on patrol at the Antelope Valley Mall when he saw a man matching the subject's description leave the store. Pomare was charged with six counts of unlawful use of a concealed camera for purposes of sexual gratification. After his arrest, investigators said a video camera found in his purse had "hours" of video of women using the restroom inside the store. Pomare's arrest was also reported by the Antelope Valley Times in May 2013. Neither Breitbart nor Daily Headlines updated their articles to note that the incident hadn't taken place in April 2016 and that the arrest occurred well before the passage of any prominent bathroom ordinances. Both sites failed to consider that more recent non-discrimination ordinances haven't legalized filming bathroom occupants, regardless of their gender identity. Pomare was charged with six counts of unlawful use of a concealed camera for the purposes of sexual gratification, a charge that would also be applicable in any jurisdiction that permitted transgender individuals to use bathrooms aligned with their gender. Ordinances of that nature have no provisions permitting the surreptitious filming of bathroom occupants for personal sexual gratification (or any other reason), nor have such provisions been sought or suggested by anyone.

False

On 1 April 2016, the web site Breitbart published an article reporting that a California man posing as a woman had been arrested after filming women in the bathroom of a Macy's department store:On 12 April 2016, the web site Daily Headlines published the same story, citing Breitbart as a source, and inaccurately confusing using bathrooms with filming inside them:Although Breitbart provided a link to the source for their report, the site either didn't bother to check that source's date or deliberately misrepresented the incident in order to leverage more interest in it. The linked news articlefrom Los Angeles television station KNBC was clearly dated 13 May 2013 (not 2016, or "last weekend"):KNBC's 2013 reporting described an unambiguous violation of the law. The incident had nothing to do with bathroom ordinances, itinvolved unquestionablyillegal actions, and the individual identifiedwas arrested and charged:(Pomare's arrest was alsoreported by the Antelope Valley Times in May 2013.)Neither Breitbart nor Daily Headlines updated their articles to note that the incident hadn't taken place in April 2016, and that the arrest occurred well prior to the passage of any prominent bathroom ordinances. And both sitesfailed to take into account that more recent non-discrimination ordinances haven't legalized filming bathroom occupants, no matter what their gender identity might be.

FMD_train_212

Was a Noah's Ark Theme Park Destroyed in a Flood?

04/20/2016

On 21 April 2016, the web siteThe Good Lord Above published an article reportingthat a Noah's Ark Christian theme park then under construction in Kentucky had been destroyed by a flood: The new 'Noah's Ark' Theme Parkin Williamstown, Kentucky, was destroyed in a flood earlier today. The sudden flash flood only seemed to affect the location of the Ark Encounter Theme Park, which was in the final phases of construction. "From a meteorological standpoint, this is quite confusing," said Dan Schmidt, a forecaster with the National Weather Service. "There were no storm clouds in the area. We're calling this flood an act of God." While it's true that a Noah's Ark-themed attraction was built in Kentucky, the project was not destroyed by a flood. Thereporting of such was a spoof fromThe Good Lord Above, a web site responsible for several other religiously-based fake news stories, such as anarticle proclaiming that Donald Trump had called Jesus a "socialist loser" and astory reporting thatBernie Sanders savedthree children from a house fire. To their credit, The Good Lord Abovemakes the site's humorous nature very clearon their "About" page: attraction built socialist saved God made the world. Then he flooded it. Then God went to sleep for 2000 years or so. Anyway, eventually God woke up and felt pretty bad for what he'd done in the past. In 2011, after years of therapy, God started his Divine God Facebook Page to restore his good name. In his infinite wisdom, in 2015 God launched this Holy Website, TheGoodLordAbove.com. Thou shalt remember that The First Amendment protects satire as a form of free speech and expression. TheGoodLordAbove uses invented names in all of its stories, except in cases where public figures are being satirized. Any other use of real names is accidental and coincidental. TheGoodLordAbove is not intended for readers under 18 years of age. The Ark Encounter Christian theme park finally opened in Kentucky on 7 July 2016, with a fully intact ark as one of its exhibits: opened

False

While it's true that a Noah's Ark-themed attraction was built in Kentucky, the project was not destroyed by a flood. Thereporting of such was a spoof fromThe Good Lord Above, a web site responsible for several other religiously-based fake news stories, such as anarticle proclaiming that Donald Trump had called Jesus a "socialist loser" and astory reporting thatBernie Sanders savedthree children from a house fire. To their credit, The Good Lord Abovemakes the site's humorous nature very clearon their "About" page:The Ark Encounter Christian theme park finally opened in Kentucky on 7 July 2016, with a fully intact ark as one of its exhibits:

FMD_train_68

More Texans have new jobs today than the entire population of Fort Worth.

10/25/2010

Republican Gov. Rick Perry frequently talks up the Texas economy, focusing in recent TV ads on the state's job gains since he took office almost 10 years ago. Texas added more than 850,000 new jobs, Perry says in a New Jobs spot that debuted online Oct. 13. More Texans have new jobs today than the entire population of Fort Worth. For an article published Sept. 23, we put the 850,000 number to the Truth-O-Meter, rating itTrue. On Oct. 11, Katy Bacon, spokeswoman for Democratic gubernatorial nominee Bill White, wrote us an e-mail suggesting that the jobs picture might have changed since our first pass, making the claim inaccurate. We put our pencils to her point, though in this article we'll be rating whether Perry's comparison of job gains to Fort Worth's population holds water. In an Oct. 19 news release about the New Jobs ad, the Perry campaign points to U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics data on state employment to show the change in the number of nonfarm jobs in Texas between January 2001, shortly after Perry became governor, and June 2010. During that time, the state experienced a net gain of 853,400 jobs. Of course, Texas was also growing during that time; according to projections from the Texas State Data Center, the population increased by about 4 million people between 2001 and 2010. Texas, the second-largest state, is among the 20 states that had net job gains during the 9.5-year span from January 2001 to June 2010. Texas ranked No. 1, followed by Arizona (132,700 jobs) and Utah (113,200 jobs). Yet as White's camp nudged June's numbers are no longer the most recent. By July 2010, Texas' net job gain had dropped to 848,000. In August, it fell even further, to 818,500, although that month's job numbers were preliminary until Friday, after Perry's ad was released. The August information makes Perry's figure off by 31,500 jobs. Bottom line? Perry's statement that Texas added more than 850,000 jobs is correct when considering a particular time period (that he doesn't mention in the ad): between January 2001 and June 2010. By August, that statement was no longer accurate, but that information wasn't final until after Perry's ad came out. Next, how do the job gains compare with the population of Cowtown, the state's fifth-largest city? For its head count, the governor's team uses a population estimate from the City of Fort Worth's website: 736,200 people as of Jan. 1, 2010. The U.S. Census Bureau's most recent estimate for July 1, 2009 is 727,577. We asked Ed Friedman, a director at Moody's Analytics who covers the Texas economy, about the validity of Perry's comparison of statewide job gains over time with Fort Worth's population in 2010. He called the comparison a reasonable way for Perry to give you an idea of the size of the gain. Either way, the Fort Worth comparison stands up because no matter which final month is chosen, the number of Texas jobs has gone up more than the population of Fort Worth. We rate Perry's statement as True.

True

For an article published Sept. 23, we put the 850,000 number to the Truth-O-Meter, rating itTrue.

FMD_train_1183

Did Lloyd Austin's DOD Approve Contracts for a Company He Owns Stocks in?

03/02/2021

This article has been updated and its rating has been changed from "True" to Following initial publication, Pentagon Press Secretary John Kirby provided us with this statement: "By prior arrangement, Secretary Austin divested his entire Raytheon portfolio on Jan. 22, 2021, immediately following the Senate vote confirming him as the new Secretary of Defense. Snopes initially received no comment on a Feb. 24, 2021 inquiry about his divestment from Raytheon, and as such, our initial article relied on a divestment timeline provided by Secretary Austin in filings with the Office of Government Ethics. On Feb. 19, 2021, an identically phrased claim went viral on multiple social media accounts, including that of a sitting congressman, after it was posted by a self-described MAGA "global recruiter" with the Twitter handle "@johnnyrwhitsett." The claim references an alleged $285 million defense contract awarded to a company that U.S. President Joe Biden's secretary of defense, Lloyd Austin, "owns over [$1 million] of stock in." posted The memes are referring to Austins past financial interest in the military contractor Raytheon. While Austin served on the Board of Directors of Raytheon and once held shares in the company given to him through executive compensation, the statement that he was invested in the company during the time he was in office is, according to Pentagon Spokesperson John Kirby, false. The specific monetary value in these memes appears to have their origin in a viral Feb. 17 YouTube video that despite discussing the value 85 million in the actual clip was shared by its creator with the higher number on Twitter. That video derived the number $85 million from an announcement by the State Department which does not award defense contracts approving a proposed sale of missiles produced by the company Raytheon to the government of Chile. YouTube video announcement does not Austin's divestment aside, senators have raised concerns over the close relationship between Raytheon and Austin in general. In correspondence with U.S. Sen. Elizabeth Warren, Austin pledged to extend his recusal from Raytheon Technologies for four years and to not seek a position on the board of a defense contractor or become a lobbyist after his government service. raised concerns It bears mentioning that Mark Esper, who served as former President Donald Trumps secretary of defense, served as Raytheons vice president of government relations directly before his confirmation. When asked by Warren during his confirmation hearing if he would recuse himself from decisions involving Raytheon, he refused. served refused From 2016 to the day of his confirmation as secretary of defense on Jan. 22, 2021, Austin served on the Board of Directors for Raytheon or a company, United Technologies Corp, that would merge with it. Prior to his confirmation, according to documents filed with the Office of Government Ethics, Austin held vested deferred stock units and vested and unvested restricted stock units in Raytheon. merge documents filed These are special forms of stock-based executive compensation. Deferred stock units are shares inaccessible to the owner until after that person has left the company. Restricted stocks are ownership shares of a company subject to special Securities and Exchange (SEC) restrictions intended, among other things, to prevent premature selling. Both options are often given on a vesting schedule, meaning that the full amount of the stock compensation is not available to that executive (i.e., it remains unvested) until the executive has worked at the company for a certain period of time. Deferred Restricted Austin sold these stocks the day of his confirmation. In his White House financial disclosure form, Austin indicated the value of his vested deferred stocks to be between $500,000 and $1,000,000 and the value of his vested restricted stocks to be between $50,000 and $100,000. Austin, a DOD spokesperson told us, "will file a Periodic Transaction Report and a Certificate of Ethics Agreement Compliance which will both be publicly available on the OGE website." disclosure form Raytheon performs a prodigious amount of work for the Department of Defense. Based on an analysis performed by Snopes, in the first month that Austin served as its secretary, the DOD granted at least $569,756,040 in new contracts or contract modifications to Raytheon or various divisions of Raytheon branches: an analysis $19,950,844 $290,704,534 $49,195,531 $53,861,439 $7,580,414 $8,377,372 $8,220,193 $74,238,334 $13,208,180 $14,921,191 $29,498,008 As part of Austin's ethics pledge, he stated that he would "not participate personally and substantially in any particular matter that to my knowledge has a direct and predictable effect on the financial interests of Raytheon." We asked the DOD how this arrangement would work, given the large volume of business conducted with Raytheon. In response, a spokesperson told us: ethics pledge Through a formal screening arrangement, the Secretary has directed his staff to identify all matters that involve Raytheon as a party or a representative of a party, as well as any matters that could directly and predictably affect the financial interests of Raytheon. Any such matters involving Raytheon are referred to the Deputy Secretary of Defense or another senior official for action or assignment. A copy of the Screening Arrangement is available in the DoD FOIA Reading Room. DoD FOIA Reading Room Because Austin divested entirely from Raytheon prior to any contract being awarded to the company under his leadership, the claim is Updated [March 2, 2021]: Changed rating from True to False based on a late-arriving statement from Pentagon Press Secretary John Kirby informing us that Austin divested entirely from Raytheon immediately after the Senate voted to confirm him.

False

On Feb. 19, 2021, an identically phrased claim went viral on multiple social media accounts, including that of a sitting congressman, after it was posted by a self-described MAGA "global recruiter" with the Twitter handle "@johnnyrwhitsett." The claim references an alleged $285 million defense contract awarded to a company that U.S. President Joe Biden's secretary of defense, Lloyd Austin, "owns over [$1 million] of stock in." The specific monetary value in these memes appears to have their origin in a viral Feb. 17 YouTube video that despite discussing the value 85 million in the actual clip was shared by its creator with the higher number on Twitter. That video derived the number $85 million from an announcement by the State Department which does not award defense contracts approving a proposed sale of missiles produced by the company Raytheon to the government of Chile.Austin's divestment aside, senators have raised concerns over the close relationship between Raytheon and Austin in general. In correspondence with U.S. Sen. Elizabeth Warren, Austin pledged to extend his recusal from Raytheon Technologies for four years and to not seek a position on the board of a defense contractor or become a lobbyist after his government service.It bears mentioning that Mark Esper, who served as former President Donald Trumps secretary of defense, served as Raytheons vice president of government relations directly before his confirmation. When asked by Warren during his confirmation hearing if he would recuse himself from decisions involving Raytheon, he refused.From 2016 to the day of his confirmation as secretary of defense on Jan. 22, 2021, Austin served on the Board of Directors for Raytheon or a company, United Technologies Corp, that would merge with it. Prior to his confirmation, according to documents filed with the Office of Government Ethics, Austin held vested deferred stock units and vested and unvested restricted stock units in Raytheon.These are special forms of stock-based executive compensation. Deferred stock units are shares inaccessible to the owner until after that person has left the company. Restricted stocks are ownership shares of a company subject to special Securities and Exchange (SEC) restrictions intended, among other things, to prevent premature selling. Both options are often given on a vesting schedule, meaning that the full amount of the stock compensation is not available to that executive (i.e., it remains unvested) until the executive has worked at the company for a certain period of time.Austin sold these stocks the day of his confirmation. In his White House financial disclosure form, Austin indicated the value of his vested deferred stocks to be between $500,000 and $1,000,000 and the value of his vested restricted stocks to be between $50,000 and $100,000. Austin, a DOD spokesperson told us, "will file a Periodic Transaction Report and a Certificate of Ethics Agreement Compliance which will both be publicly available on the OGE website."Raytheon performs a prodigious amount of work for the Department of Defense. Based on an analysis performed by Snopes, in the first month that Austin served as its secretary, the DOD granted at least $569,756,040 in new contracts or contract modifications to Raytheon or various divisions of Raytheon branches:As part of Austin's ethics pledge, he stated that he would "not participate personally and substantially in any particular matter that to my knowledge has a direct and predictable effect on the financial interests of Raytheon." We asked the DOD how this arrangement would work, given the large volume of business conducted with Raytheon. In response, a spokesperson told us:Through a formal screening arrangement, the Secretary has directed his staff to identify all matters that involve Raytheon as a party or a representative of a party, as well as any matters that could directly and predictably affect the financial interests of Raytheon. Any such matters involving Raytheon are referred to the Deputy Secretary of Defense or another senior official for action or assignment. A copy of the Screening Arrangement is available in the DoD FOIA Reading Room.

FMD_train_927

Did 62°C Temperatures in Kuwait Cause Trees to Burst into Flames?

08/07/2017

In July 2017, social media users shared videos and images of burning trees and melting streetlights, the purported results of a record-breaking heatwave in Kuwait during which temperatures soared to 62 Celsius (143.6 Fahrenheit). First of all, a 62 Celsius day has never been recorded. The highest temperature on record, according to the World Meteorological Organization, was 56.7C (134F) on 10 July 1913 in Furnace Creek, California. The highest temperature in Kuwait, 54C, was recorded in Mitrabah in July 2016. Although the footage of trees burning is likely real, the claim that these fires were caused by 62 Celsius temperatures is unfounded. temperature recorded The weather in Kuwait hovered around 50C during July 2017: hovered The web site Frontnews.eu shared one of the most popular videos of this claim, showing a tree burning on the side of the road along with the report that the temperature had reached 62C in Kuwait: shared In Kuwait, the air temperature in some places reached 62 degrees Celsius in an open area where there is no shadow. Users of social networks share videos of burning trees, bushes, and also note that because of the heat, gasoline in the car tanks exploded. This video was actually shot in Madinah, Saudi Arabia, and captured a palm tree that was struck by lightning, as the website alweeam.com reported (translated by Google Translate and edited for clarity): actually Madinah struck A thunderbolt struck a palm tree on the famous Sultana Street in Madinah. Following the heavy rains in the region today and some of its provinces, the fire broke out in the entire palm before the civil defense fire brigade began its work. A video clip was documented by a citizen. The burning process started gradually with the burning palm tree, and quickly spread to the whole of the surrounding area, causing danger to the firefighters before the fire brigade put out the fire in the palm and the surrounding trees. . . A second video purported to show a plant burning due to Kuwait's high temperatures: Although this video was shot in Kuwait, we found no evidence to suggest that the plant burst into flame solely because of high air temperatures. Local news reports (translated by Google Translate and edited for clarity) noted the cause of the fire was unknown: reports Firefighters extinguished a fire in a number of trees on the first ring road near the Martyr's Park. In the details, a report was sent to the operating room stating that a fire broke out on the first ring road. The Shuwaikh industrial fire station was called and the fire was extinguished. Firefighters are currently investigating. . . . A photograph of a melting traffic light also appeared alongside the claim about the high temperatures: alongside Although this image was taken in Kuwait, it dated back to 2013 and showed a street light that reportedly melted due to a nearby car fire. 2013 reportedly One final image was circulated as "evidence" that temperatures had reached 62C in Kuwait: According to the Kuwait Times, however, this image was manipulated. Meteorologist Adel Al-Saadoun, head of the Fintas Weather Observatory, explained that the temperature has never reached 62C in Kuwait and that such reports were just "fake news": explained Do not believe in fake news, warned meteorologist Adel Al-Saadoun, head of the Fintas Weather Observatory, as he debunked social media reports that temperatures in Kuwait reached 62 degrees. It is fake news not true, Saadoun told Kuwait Times. Kuwait has only recorded temperatures of a maximum of 52 degrees centigrade. Never in history has the temperature in Kuwait reached 62. As we speak now, the temperature is 49 degrees Celsius (at 2 pm yesterday), but people have been posting images of 54, 56 degrees the temperature inside the car is higher, but not as per our weather monitoring system. Saadoun said the mercury will continue to rise in the next few days till the end of July, but by the beginning of August, the heat will start subsiding. This has been the usual weather in Kuwait. This period is called the summer solstice. This is the period when the sun is right next to us up there, and we expect such weather in July, he said. World Meteorological Organization. "High Temperatures and Extreme Weather Continue." 7 July 2017. Chand, Eudore. "Shrubs, Palm in GCC on Fire Due to Heat? Watch Videos." Emirates 247. 7 August 2017. Garcia, Ben. "62 Degrees Centigrade Temperature Untrue, Fake News." Kuwait Times. 2 July 2017.

False

First of all, a 62 Celsius day has never been recorded. The highest temperature on record, according to the World Meteorological Organization, was 56.7C (134F) on 10 July 1913 in Furnace Creek, California. The highest temperature in Kuwait, 54C, was recorded in Mitrabah in July 2016. Although the footage of trees burning is likely real, the claim that these fires were caused by 62 Celsius temperatures is unfounded.The weather in Kuwait hovered around 50C during July 2017:The web site Frontnews.eu shared one of the most popular videos of this claim, showing a tree burning on the side of the road along with the report that the temperature had reached 62C in Kuwait:This video was actually shot in Madinah, Saudi Arabia, and captured a palm tree that was struck by lightning, as the website alweeam.com reported (translated by Google Translate and edited for clarity):Although this video was shot in Kuwait, we found no evidence to suggest that the plant burst into flame solely because of high air temperatures. Local news reports (translated by Google Translate and edited for clarity) noted the cause of the fire was unknown:A photograph of a melting traffic light also appeared alongside the claim about the high temperatures:Although this image was taken in Kuwait, it dated back to 2013 and showed a street light that reportedly melted due to a nearby car fire.According to the Kuwait Times, however, this image was manipulated. Meteorologist Adel Al-Saadoun, head of the Fintas Weather Observatory, explained that the temperature has never reached 62C in Kuwait and that such reports were just "fake news":

FMD_train_1651

Jeremy Allen White and Gene Wilder Are Related?

10/08/2023

Here at Snopes, celebrity doppelganger rumors are very common. In 2023, a rumor targeting actors from different eras had the internet abuzz: TikTok videos and Reddit posts compared the remarkably similar appearances of actors Jeremy Allen White and Gene Wilder, who died in 2016. The posts alleged a familial connection between the two. doppelganger TikTok Reddit 2016 Online ads spread the rumor with photos of the two actors and clickbait headlines such as, "[Photos] These Grandchildren Look Exactly Like Their Celebrity Grandparents," or the claim that Wilder was White's father. (Screenshot via People.com) There was no publicly available evidence to confirm, a consanguineous connection between Wilder and White. We reached out to Wilder's nephew, filmmaker Jordan Walker-Pearlman, through his production company (Harlem, Hollywood), as well as representatives for White via his talent agency, to pose the question. Walker-Pearlman, through a spokesperson for his production company confirmed that Wilder and White were not related. As such we have updated our rating to False. The spokesperson told us, "Jordan can confirm with you that as much as he admires the talent of Jeremy Allen White and believes Gene would have as well, and clearly sees the family resemblances, they are in fact not related." Wilder whose real name was Jerome Silberman was known for his portrayal of Willy Wonka in the 1971 movie, "Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory," as well as roles in "Young Frankenstein" and "Blazing Saddles." While he adopted a stepdaughter during his second marriage in 1967, he died without any biological children, according to The Guardian and his IMDb profile. He was reportedly estranged from his stepdaughter later in life, according to The Guardian. name known adopted without The Guardian profile reportedly In a 2002 interview with Larry King, he discussed her: "I had a daughter and lost her a long while ago. That's too sad a story to go into." He added that he "lost" her when she was 22 or 23 years old. discussed However, Wilder has at least one nephew, Walker-Pearlman. When Wilder died in 2016, Walker-Pearlman announced the news in a statement for the public. In an interview with NPR around that time, Walker-Pearlman mentioned other relatives, a cousin and aunt of his, who were also in the company of Wilder when he died. nephew announced mentioned It is unknown, at present, whether Pearlman has biological children of his own, though there's no indication of a link between him and White. White, a Brooklyn native, is known for his roles on television shows "Shameless" and "The Bear." He was born in 1991, and his mother, Eloise Zeigler, is of Ukrainian descent, according to his IMDb page. native known 1991 Eloise Zeigler IMDb Meanwhile, according to the New York Times and IMDb, Wilder's father was a Jewish immigrant from Russia, and his mother was reportedly of Russian descent. immigrant Russian In other words, not only is there no evidence of a familial connection between the two actors, Wilder and White seemingly do not share the same ancestry. White is aware of the comparisons, though. In an August 2022 video interview with InStyle magazine, he mentioned the rumor saying he agrees, "I look a lot like Gene Wilder" though he did not outright deny or confirm its legitimacy. He said: interview Yeah I've been made aware of some of the stuff out there. There's one in particular. Everyone's decided I look a lot like Gene Wilder, which I agree. But I guess someone called me 'Ketamine Gene Wilder.' Or called Carmy 'Ketamine Gene Wilder,' which I thought was weird and funny. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UxxG_AoRTlo&t=150s There is no proof of a familial connection between the two actors regardless of whether that hypothetical link was through marriage or blood. Wilder also had no biological children, and White, when publicly referencing the rumor, did not confirm or deny its legitimacy. Given that Wilder's nephew has also refuted the rumor, we rate this as "Alum Call Board: January 2021." VCUarts, 13 Jan. 2021, https://arts.vcu.edu/community/news/alum-call-board-january-2021/.Accessed 2 Oct. 2023. Evon, Dan. "Is Morgan Freeman Really Jimi Hendrix?" Snopes, 26 Sept. 2019, https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/morgan-freeman-jimi-hendrix/.Accessed 2 Oct. 2023. "Family: Wilder Passed to 'Somewhere Over the Rainbow.'" USA TODAY, https://www.usatoday.com/story/life/people/2016/08/29/gene-wilder-death-statement/89556566/. Accessed 2 Oct. 2023. "Gene Wilder | Actor, Writer, Director." IMDb, https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000698/. Accessed 2 Oct. 2023. "Gene Wilder Death: Star of Willy Wonka Dies Aged 83." BBC News, 1 Sept. 2016. www.bbc.com, https://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-37248049.Accessed 2 Oct. 2023. "Gene Wilder's Nephew Remembers Late Actor Who Starred In 'Willy Wonka.'" NPR, 29 Aug. 2016. NPR, https://www.npr.org/2016/08/29/491856240/gene-wilders-nephew-remembers-late-actor-who-starred-in-willy-wonka.Accessed 2 Oct. 2023. "Interview With Gene Wilder." CNN.Com, May 2, 2002. https://transcripts.cnn.com/show/lkl/date/2002-05-02/segment/00. Accessed 2 Oct. 2023. "Jeremy Allen White | Actor, Writer, Producer." IMDb, https://www.imdb.com/name/nm2087739/. Accessed 2 Oct. 2023. Lewis, Daniel. "Gene Wilder Dies at 83; Star of 'Willy Wonka' and 'Young Frankenstein.'" The New York Times, 29 Aug. 2016. NYTimes.com, https://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/30/movies/gene-wilder-dead.html.Accessed 2 Oct. 2023. Sidahmed, Mazin. "Gene Wilder, Star of Willy Wonka and Mel Brooks Comedies, Dies Aged 83." The Guardian, 30 Aug. 2016. The Guardian, https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/aug/29/gene-wilder-death-willy-wonka-mel-brooks-comedy.Accessed 2 Oct. 2023. "'The Bear's' Jeremy Allen White Has a Crush on Carmy, Too." GQ, 11 July 2022, https://www.gq.com/story/jeremy-allen-white-the-bear-profile.Accessed 2 Oct. 2023. Nov. 30, 2023: The story rating was updated to "False" along with a statement from Wilder's family member denying the claim.

False

Here at Snopes, celebrity doppelganger rumors are very common. In 2023, a rumor targeting actors from different eras had the internet abuzz: TikTok videos and Reddit posts compared the remarkably similar appearances of actors Jeremy Allen White and Gene Wilder, who died in 2016. The posts alleged a familial connection between the two.Wilder whose real name was Jerome Silberman was known for his portrayal of Willy Wonka in the 1971 movie, "Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory," as well as roles in "Young Frankenstein" and "Blazing Saddles." While he adopted a stepdaughter during his second marriage in 1967, he died without any biological children, according to The Guardian and his IMDb profile. He was reportedly estranged from his stepdaughter later in life, according to The Guardian.In a 2002 interview with Larry King, he discussed her: "I had a daughter and lost her a long while ago. That's too sad a story to go into." He added that he "lost" her when she was 22 or 23 years old.However, Wilder has at least one nephew, Walker-Pearlman. When Wilder died in 2016, Walker-Pearlman announced the news in a statement for the public. In an interview with NPR around that time, Walker-Pearlman mentioned other relatives, a cousin and aunt of his, who were also in the company of Wilder when he died.White, a Brooklyn native, is known for his roles on television shows "Shameless" and "The Bear." He was born in 1991, and his mother, Eloise Zeigler, is of Ukrainian descent, according to his IMDb page.Meanwhile, according to the New York Times and IMDb, Wilder's father was a Jewish immigrant from Russia, and his mother was reportedly of Russian descent.White is aware of the comparisons, though. In an August 2022 video interview with InStyle magazine, he mentioned the rumor saying he agrees, "I look a lot like Gene Wilder" though he did not outright deny or confirm its legitimacy. He said:

FMD_train_466

Was a 'Terrorist who was found guilty' a member of the board of a BLM funding organization?

07/14/2020

In the summer of 2020, amid a new wave of nationwide protests over racial injustice and police brutality, readers inquired about the accuracy of online articles and social media posts that claimed a convicted terrorist sat on the board of directors of a left-leaning organization that provides fundraising and administration services for the Black Lives Matter movement. On July 8, 2020, Twitter user @asdomke posted a widely-shared tweet that read: "This is convicted terrorist Susan Rosenberg, she sits on the Board of Directors for the fundraising arm of Black Lives Matter. She was convicted for the 1983 bombing of the United States Capitol Building, the U.S. Naval War College and the New York Patrolmen's Benevolent Assoc." In June, the website of right-leaning talk radio host Wayne Dupree posted an article with the headline "Report: Leader of Group Handling 'BLM Fundraising' is a Convicted Terrorist Who Carried Out Bombings in NYC and DC." Similar articles were published by the Daily Caller (an article that was republished by the Western Journal) and on the website of former Fox News pundit Bill O'Reilly. article Daily Caller Western Journal Bill O'Reilly On July 9, 2020, Tucker Carlson ran a segment about Rosenberg's past and her connection to Thousand Currents and the Black Lives Matter movement on his Fox News show. segment Those posts and articles were largely based on a June 24, 2020, report published by the right-leaning Capital Research Center, which carried the headline "A Terrorist's Ties to a Leading Black Lives Matter Group." The report went on to state that: report Some conservatives have begun speculating the unrest in American cities -- even as late as Monday night in Washington, DC as protestors unsuccessfully worked to tear down a statue of Andrew Jackson and set up an autonomous zone across the street from the White House -- may in part be an attempt to affect the upcoming presidential election, with the chaos and violence intended to make it as difficult as possible for Donald Trump to win a second term. Lending credence to this idea is the fact that at least one board member of the group fiscally sponsoring the most organized part of the Black Lives Matter movement, who have been involved in most of the activity surrounding the current unrest -- tried the same thing almost 40 years ago during Ronald Reagans reelection campaign. And it landed her in federal prison for 16 years. If there were any question whether Black Lives Matter has ideological ties to the Communist terrorists of the 1960s, the story of Susan Rosenberg should put that issue to bed... Rosenberg, who started out as a member of the 1960s revolutionary group Weather Underground, graduated into even more violent, and arguably successful, forms of terrorism in the 1970s and 1980s -- including bombings at an FBI field office in Staten Island, the Navy Yard Officers Club in Washington, DC, and even the U.S. Capitol building, where she damaged a representation of the greatest of the Democrat defenders of slavery, John C. Calhoun. She currently serves as human and prisoner rights advocate and a vice chair of the board of directors of Thousand Currents. Thousand Currents is undoubtedly very closely linked to the Black Lives Matter Global Network Foundation, a Delaware-registered entity that is one of the leading formal embodiments of the broader Black Lives Matter movement. The Thousand Currents website outlines the relationship between the two entities: outlines "In 2016, BLM Global Network approached Thousand Currents to create a fiscal sponsorship agreement. Thousand Currents, a 501(c)(3) tax-exempt nonprofit organization, provides the legal and administrative framework to enable BLM to fulfill its mission. Fiscal sponsorship is a common structure utilized by nonprofit organizations. Oftentimes, nonprofit initiatives seek fiscal sponsorship to be able to have the fiscal sponsor handle administrative operations while the organization focuses on its programs and builds up its own organizational infrastructure. In this capacity, we provide administrative and back office support, including finance, accounting, grants management, insurance, human resources, legal and compliance." Descriptions of Thousand Currents as an organization which "handles fundraising" for Black Lives Matter were therefore accurate. As recently as June 24, the date on which the Capital Research Center published their report, the Thousand Currents website listed Susan Rosenberg as vice chair of the organization's board of directors, describing her as a "human and prison rights advocate and writer." The entire "board of directors" page has since been removed from the site. describing According to tax documents obtained by Snopes, Rosenberg sat on the board of directors during the 2015 and 2016 financial years, and was elevated to the position of vice chair in 2017. We asked Thousand Currents for the dates of Rosenberg's tenure on the board, and as its vice chair, and invited the organization to comment on the ongoing controversy, and will update this story if we receive a response. 2015 2016 2017 Rosenberg's prominent position within Thousand Currents is clear, as are that organization's close links to the Black Lives Matter Global Network (and thereby the broader Black Lives Matter movement). However, the question of whether she should be described as a "terrorist" or "convicted terrorist" is much more complicated. Originally from New York City, Rosenberg was an active member of several revolutionary left-wing groups and movements during the 1960s, 1970s and 1980s. In November 1984, she was arrested in Cherry Hill, New Jersey after police said she and an associate, Timothy Blunk, were found transferring 740 pounds of explosives, an Uzi submachine gun, an M-14 rifle, a rifle with a telescopic sight, a sawed-off shotgun, three 9-millimeter handguns and boxes of ammunition from a car into a storage locker. said Rosenberg was tried and convicted on the following charges: "Conspiracy to possess unregistered firearms, receive firearms and explosives shipped in interstate commerce while a fugitive, and unlawfully use false identification documents ...; possession of unregistered destructive devices, possession of unregistered firearm (two counts) ...; carrying explosives during commission of a felony ... ; possession with intent to unlawfully use false identification documents...; false representation of Social Security number, possession of counterfeit Social Security cards." charges In May 1985, New Jersey U.S. District Court Judge Frederick Bernard Lacey gave Rosenberg and Blunk the maximum available sentence of 58 years each in prison. On Jan. 20, 2001, his last day in office, President Bill Clinton commuted Rosenberg's sentence, and she was released from prison. sentence commuted According to several contemporaneous news reports, Rosenberg had previously been charged with multiple offenses as part of a major 1982 conspiracy case against several prominent left-wing revolutionaries. Along with the others, Rosenberg was charged with conspiracy and racketeering offenses in connection with the following incidents: incidents The most high-profile incident was the October 1981 Brink's robbery in Nyack, New York. Several members of the Weather Underground and Black Liberation Army groups were accused of having orchestrated and carried out the violent robbery of a Brink's armored vehicle at the Nanuet Mall, stealing total of $1.6 million. In the course of a police chase and shootout, two police officers and a Brink's guard were killed. The money was recovered. Specifically, Rosenberg was accused of having driven one of the getaway cars. killed accused After Rosenberg's arrest in New Jersey in 1984, and her subsequent conviction and imprisonment on the weapons and explosives possession charges, prosecutors dropped the conspiracy and racketeering charges against her, and she was never tried or convicted in relation to the 1981 Brink's robbery, the 1979 Shakur prison escape, or other armed robberies. The prosecutor who oversaw the decision not to proceed with that case, in the 1980s, was Rudolph Giuliani, then U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York. After Rosenberg's release in 2001, Giuliani, by then Mayor of New York City, told the New York Times the charges were dropped because her existing 58-year prison sentence made a further prosecution unnecessary. told In 1988, Rosenberg was charged with aiding and abetting a series of bombings which took place between 1983 and 1985, at the Capitol building, Fort McNair, the Washington Navy Yard Computer Center and the Washington Navy Yard Officers' Club, all in Washington, D.C. Bombs were also planted, but did not detonate, at several sites in New York: the FBI's office in Staten Island, the Israeli Aircraft Industries building, the South African consulate and the New York Patrolmen's Benevolent Association. However, prosecutors dropped those charges in 1990 as part of a plea deal involving other suspects in the bombings. As a result, Rosenberg was never tried or convicted on any charges relating to the 1983-1985 bombing campaign. The claim, made in @asdomke's tweet, that Rosenberg was "convicted of" several 1983 bombings, was therefore false. The claim in the headline of an article on Wayne Dupree's website that Rosenberg "carried out" the bombings stands in contrast to the fact that she was never tried or convicted in relation to those incidents. dropped During her 16-year incarceration, Rosenberg renounced the use of political violence, though her political beliefs appear not to have changed significantly. In a radio interview shortly after her release in January 2001, she said she "rejects" the "potential for violence in my past actions," saying her view of violence as a strategic tool had undergone an "enormous change," but that she retained "a political view that is certainly progressive and radical in a certain sense." interview In her 2011 memoir, she recounted what she said during an unsuccessful 1997 parole application: recounted "I outlined my criminal acts and what I felt about them then and now. I talked about the political ethos of the 1960s and how it had led me and my associates into thinking our activities were acceptable. I detailed how sorry I felt now, how I accepted responsibility for my past actions, and how I would never commit any crimes again. I tried to put my life within the context of the historical period when many Americans thought they could change the world and end war and racism and poverty. I tried to distinguish between my core values and my embrace of the use of political violence. I stated that I now rejected the use of violence. I meant all that I said." There is no single, universally-accepted definition of terrorism, so any use of that label requires a degree of explanation or justification. One basis upon which one might reasonably describe a person as a terrorist is if they have been convicted of terrorist offenses. That is not true of Rosenberg, who was convicted only of weapons and explosives possession and fraudulent document possession, after her arrest in New Jersey 1984. She pleaded not guilty to charges relating to the 1980s bombing campaign, and those charges against her were dropped, and she has denied any involvement in the 1979 Shakur prison break and 1981 Brink's robbery, with those charges also having been dropped. not guilty denied The United States Code defines "domestic terrorism" (as distinct from "international terrorism") as follows: defines "... Activities that (A) involve acts dangerous to human life that are a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or of any State; (B) appear to be intended (i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population; (ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or (iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping; and (C) occur primarily within the territorial jurisdiction of the United States ..." However, that definition was only added in 1992, years after Rosenberg was convicted of weapons and explosives possession and charged for her alleged role in the 1983-1985 bombing campaign, and her alleged role in a series of armed robberies by left-wing revolutionaries. added In any event, despite the existence of a definition of domestic terrorism in federal law, a discrete criminal offense of domestic terrorism does not exist, and did not exist in the 1980s. As a result, even if Rosenberg's activities perfectly met the definition of domestic terrorism currently set out in federal law, and even if that definition existed in the 1980s, she could not have been charged with, tried for and convicted of domestic terrorism as such does not exist In the 1988 indictment relating to the 1983-1985 bombing campaign, prosecutors accused Rosenberg and others of trying "to influence, change and protest policies and practices of the United States Government concerning various international and domestic matters through the use of violent and illegal means." That language is remarkably similar to that found in the present U.S. Code definition of domestic terrorism as seeking to "influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or (iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping ..." accused Examining the 1980s bombings retrospectively, one might very well be justified as describing them as a campaign of domestic terrorism, even if prosecutors were not in a position to hang that label on them at the time. However, the charges against Rosenberg were dropped anyway, and she was never convicted in relation to the bombing campaign. In her memoir, Rosenberg wrote of her 1984 arrest in New Jersey that "there was no immediate, specific plan to use the explosives" with which she and Blunk were caught. However, it's clear they were transporting and transferring them for a purpose that was at the very least broadly associated with the group's wider mission of opposing various U.S. government policies and carrying out a socialist uprising. "We were stockpiling arms for the distant revolution that we all had convinced ourselves would come soon," she added. wrote Earlier in her book, Rosenberg indicated that she was comfortable, at least at one point in time, with bombing government buildings: "We thought that by taking armed actions against government property (including bombing unoccupied government buildings), we would show that despite the power of the state, it was possible to oppose it." indicated One could reasonably argue that Rosenberg's actions in the explosives possession case served her and her comrades' overarching mission of militant opposition to U.S. government policy and broader power structures and were in keeping with the group's (if not Rosenberg's) proven record of using bomb attacks to influence the wider American public and advance their cause. As such, a supportable (though not definitive) case exists for claiming that the crimes of which Rosenberg was convicted in 1985 were indeed acts of domestic terrorism. Crane, Missy. "Report: Leader of Group Handling 'BLM Fundraising' is a Convicted Terrorist Who Carried Out Bombings in NYC and DC." WayneDupree.com. 28 June 2020. Kerr, Andrew. "A Convicted Terrorist Sits on Board of Charity Handling Black Lives Matter Fundraising." The Daily Caller. 27 June 2020. O'Reilly, Bill. "Does Karl Marx Matter?" BillOReilly.com. 5 July 2020. Walter, Scott. "A Terrorist's Ties to a Leading Black Lives Matter Group." Capital Research Center. 24 June 2020. Raab, Selwyn. "Radical Fugitive in Brink's Robbery Arrested." The New York Times. 1 December 1984. The Associated Press/The Philadelphia Daily News. "2 Revolutionaries Get 58 Years Each in N.J." 20 May 1985. Barbanel, Josh. "4 Indicted by U.S. in Escape of Joanne Chesimard in '79." The New York Times. 19 November 1982. Barbanel, Josh. "3 Killed in Armored Car Holdup." The New York Times. 21 October 1981. Gross, Jane. "Brink's Suspect Held Without Bail After She Refuses to Enter a Plea." The New York Times. 14 May 1985. Lipton, Eric. "Officials Criticize Clinton's Pardon of an Ex-Terrorist." The New York Times. 22 January 2001. The Associated Press/The New York Times. "3 Radicals Agree to Please Guilty in Bombing Case." 6 September 1990. Rosenberg, Susan. "An American Radical..." Citadel Press. 2011. Legal Information Institute, Cornell Law School. "United States Code, Title 18, Part I, Chapter 113B, Section 2331 -- Definitions." Accessed 14 July 2020. McCord, Mary B. "It's Time for Congress to Make Domestic Terrorism a Federal Crime." Lawfare. 5 December 2018. Shenon, Philip. "U.S. Charges 7 in the Bombing at U.S. Capitol." The New York Times. 12 May 1988.

NEI

In June, the website of right-leaning talk radio host Wayne Dupree posted an article with the headline "Report: Leader of Group Handling 'BLM Fundraising' is a Convicted Terrorist Who Carried Out Bombings in NYC and DC." Similar articles were published by the Daily Caller (an article that was republished by the Western Journal) and on the website of former Fox News pundit Bill O'Reilly. On July 9, 2020, Tucker Carlson ran a segment about Rosenberg's past and her connection to Thousand Currents and the Black Lives Matter movement on his Fox News show. Those posts and articles were largely based on a June 24, 2020, report published by the right-leaning Capital Research Center, which carried the headline "A Terrorist's Ties to a Leading Black Lives Matter Group." The report went on to state that:Thousand Currents is undoubtedly very closely linked to the Black Lives Matter Global Network Foundation, a Delaware-registered entity that is one of the leading formal embodiments of the broader Black Lives Matter movement. The Thousand Currents website outlines the relationship between the two entities:As recently as June 24, the date on which the Capital Research Center published their report, the Thousand Currents website listed Susan Rosenberg as vice chair of the organization's board of directors, describing her as a "human and prison rights advocate and writer." The entire "board of directors" page has since been removed from the site.According to tax documents obtained by Snopes, Rosenberg sat on the board of directors during the 2015 and 2016 financial years, and was elevated to the position of vice chair in 2017. We asked Thousand Currents for the dates of Rosenberg's tenure on the board, and as its vice chair, and invited the organization to comment on the ongoing controversy, and will update this story if we receive a response.Originally from New York City, Rosenberg was an active member of several revolutionary left-wing groups and movements during the 1960s, 1970s and 1980s. In November 1984, she was arrested in Cherry Hill, New Jersey after police said she and an associate, Timothy Blunk, were found transferring 740 pounds of explosives, an Uzi submachine gun, an M-14 rifle, a rifle with a telescopic sight, a sawed-off shotgun, three 9-millimeter handguns and boxes of ammunition from a car into a storage locker.Rosenberg was tried and convicted on the following charges: "Conspiracy to possess unregistered firearms, receive firearms and explosives shipped in interstate commerce while a fugitive, and unlawfully use false identification documents ...; possession of unregistered destructive devices, possession of unregistered firearm (two counts) ...; carrying explosives during commission of a felony ... ; possession with intent to unlawfully use false identification documents...; false representation of Social Security number, possession of counterfeit Social Security cards."In May 1985, New Jersey U.S. District Court Judge Frederick Bernard Lacey gave Rosenberg and Blunk the maximum available sentence of 58 years each in prison. On Jan. 20, 2001, his last day in office, President Bill Clinton commuted Rosenberg's sentence, and she was released from prison.According to several contemporaneous news reports, Rosenberg had previously been charged with multiple offenses as part of a major 1982 conspiracy case against several prominent left-wing revolutionaries. Along with the others, Rosenberg was charged with conspiracy and racketeering offenses in connection with the following incidents:The most high-profile incident was the October 1981 Brink's robbery in Nyack, New York. Several members of the Weather Underground and Black Liberation Army groups were accused of having orchestrated and carried out the violent robbery of a Brink's armored vehicle at the Nanuet Mall, stealing total of $1.6 million. In the course of a police chase and shootout, two police officers and a Brink's guard were killed. The money was recovered. Specifically, Rosenberg was accused of having driven one of the getaway cars.The prosecutor who oversaw the decision not to proceed with that case, in the 1980s, was Rudolph Giuliani, then U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York. After Rosenberg's release in 2001, Giuliani, by then Mayor of New York City, told the New York Times the charges were dropped because her existing 58-year prison sentence made a further prosecution unnecessary.However, prosecutors dropped those charges in 1990 as part of a plea deal involving other suspects in the bombings. As a result, Rosenberg was never tried or convicted on any charges relating to the 1983-1985 bombing campaign. The claim, made in @asdomke's tweet, that Rosenberg was "convicted of" several 1983 bombings, was therefore false. The claim in the headline of an article on Wayne Dupree's website that Rosenberg "carried out" the bombings stands in contrast to the fact that she was never tried or convicted in relation to those incidents.During her 16-year incarceration, Rosenberg renounced the use of political violence, though her political beliefs appear not to have changed significantly. In a radio interview shortly after her release in January 2001, she said she "rejects" the "potential for violence in my past actions," saying her view of violence as a strategic tool had undergone an "enormous change," but that she retained "a political view that is certainly progressive and radical in a certain sense."In her 2011 memoir, she recounted what she said during an unsuccessful 1997 parole application:There is no single, universally-accepted definition of terrorism, so any use of that label requires a degree of explanation or justification. One basis upon which one might reasonably describe a person as a terrorist is if they have been convicted of terrorist offenses. That is not true of Rosenberg, who was convicted only of weapons and explosives possession and fraudulent document possession, after her arrest in New Jersey 1984. She pleaded not guilty to charges relating to the 1980s bombing campaign, and those charges against her were dropped, and she has denied any involvement in the 1979 Shakur prison break and 1981 Brink's robbery, with those charges also having been dropped.The United States Code defines "domestic terrorism" (as distinct from "international terrorism") as follows:However, that definition was only added in 1992, years after Rosenberg was convicted of weapons and explosives possession and charged for her alleged role in the 1983-1985 bombing campaign, and her alleged role in a series of armed robberies by left-wing revolutionaries.In any event, despite the existence of a definition of domestic terrorism in federal law, a discrete criminal offense of domestic terrorism does not exist, and did not exist in the 1980s. As a result, even if Rosenberg's activities perfectly met the definition of domestic terrorism currently set out in federal law, and even if that definition existed in the 1980s, she could not have been charged with, tried for and convicted of domestic terrorism as suchIn the 1988 indictment relating to the 1983-1985 bombing campaign, prosecutors accused Rosenberg and others of trying "to influence, change and protest policies and practices of the United States Government concerning various international and domestic matters through the use of violent and illegal means." That language is remarkably similar to that found in the present U.S. Code definition of domestic terrorism as seeking to "influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or (iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping ..."In her memoir, Rosenberg wrote of her 1984 arrest in New Jersey that "there was no immediate, specific plan to use the explosives" with which she and Blunk were caught. However, it's clear they were transporting and transferring them for a purpose that was at the very least broadly associated with the group's wider mission of opposing various U.S. government policies and carrying out a socialist uprising. "We were stockpiling arms for the distant revolution that we all had convinced ourselves would come soon," she added.Earlier in her book, Rosenberg indicated that she was comfortable, at least at one point in time, with bombing government buildings: "We thought that by taking armed actions against government property (including bombing unoccupied government buildings), we would show that despite the power of the state, it was possible to oppose it."

FMD_train_407

Did a Police Drug Raid Unexpectedly Find a Bitcoin Farm Instead?

02/01/2022

On Feb. 1, 2022, a Reddit user posted a video in the r/Unexpected subreddit titled: "Police were looking for drugs." The video purportedly showed Spanish police busting down a door and expecting to find marijuana or other drugs, but instead uncovering a Bitcoin mining farm for cryptocurrency. Reddit posted a video r/Unexpected video cryptocurrency We found that the clip was originally posted by the National Police YouTube channel on Jan. 28. It was recorded in Santiponce, Spain, which is near Seville. It's unclear on exactly what date the bust took place: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v5ET6kbChkA On the official website for the Spanish police, a news release also from Jan. 28 provided in-depth details on the Bitcoin mining farm bust: news release Police investigations began on a possible indoor marijuana plantation that could be located in some stables located in Santiponce. After carrying out the first inquiries, the agents realized that the existing indications did not correspond to the cultivation of marijuana, but rather that these facilities could be hosting a cryptocurrency farm of which there are hardly any records in Spain. With this information, the stables were entered and searched, where the agents discovered modern facilities for mining cryptocurrencies. In other words, it's true that the police originally thought the buildings might house a marijuana operation. However, according to the release, before the door was busted down, police had made inquiries and expected that they would find not marijuana or drugs, but rather a Bitcoin or other cryptocurrency mining farm. Inside the building. (Courtesy: National Police/YouTube) Research from NotebookCheck.net documented what was found in the raid and said that the electricity used by the Bitcoin mining farm was done in an illegal manner: NotebookCheck.net Over 21 Bitcoin mining ASICs were recovered from the location and what looks like five EVGA GeForce RTX 3080 graphics cards. The equipment, worth over 50,000, generated about 3,500 in revenue per month. The Bitcoin mine in question was relatively new, so it is unlikely that its owners came close to breaking even on their investment. Police are yet to identify who owns the farm in question and are investigating the matter. Like many other countries in the world, Spain does not have any laws against mining cryptocurrency, and mining is (somewhat) legal in the country. However, the electric connection for the Bitcoin mining farm was illegal and reportedly cost the state 2,000 per month. Regarding the illegal use of the electricity, the news release from police said: "Outside the premises, an illegal connection to the electrical network was located to power the equipment, observing a very high consumption of amps, which, according to technicians from the electrical company, could generate a monthly electricity fraud of 2,000 euros." An alternate view inside the building. (Courtesy: National Police/YouTube) In sum, the police seen in the video received information just prior to the bust that led them to expect that it was not marijuana or drugs that they would find, but rather the Bitcoin cryptocurrency mining farm that they eventually uncovered. 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. help explain let us know

False

On Feb. 1, 2022, a Reddit user posted a video in the r/Unexpected subreddit titled: "Police were looking for drugs." The video purportedly showed Spanish police busting down a door and expecting to find marijuana or other drugs, but instead uncovering a Bitcoin mining farm for cryptocurrency.On the official website for the Spanish police, a news release also from Jan. 28 provided in-depth details on the Bitcoin mining farm bust: Inside the building. (Courtesy: National Police/YouTube)Research from NotebookCheck.net documented what was found in the raid and said that the electricity used by the Bitcoin mining farm was done in an illegal manner: An alternate view inside the building. (Courtesy: National Police/YouTube)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.

FMD_train_1097

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

08/31/2021

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

False

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

FMD_train_35

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

01/21/2023

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

True

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

FMD_train_143

Was Cesar Sayoc an Obama-Supporting Stripper Before Trump's Rise?

10/29/2018

On 27 October 2018, a Facebook account bearing the face of controversial 19th-century Canadian Prime Minister John H. Macdonald shared a post that alleged two facts about Cesar Sayoc, the accused perpetrator of several attempted mail bombings: that he used to work as a stripper, and that he was long known to support Obama during that time: controversial post It is unclear what the author of this post meant to imply by combining the fact that Sayoc worked in strip clubs with the false assertion that he was an Obama supporter, but of the two claims raised, there is only support for the first. In the days following Sayocs arrest, several media outlets attempted to profile the man who had covered his live-in van with Trump memes and sent what appeared to be pipe bombs to Trumps political and media opponents. These profiles describe a directionless individual who worked at strip clubs in various capacities throughout his life, but who only found a political awakening in the run-up to the 2016 presidential election, when he became a supporter of President Trump. several media outlets Was Cesar Sayoc a Stripper? Several individuals have stated that Cesar Sayoc has not only been employed at strip clubs, but worked as a stripper himself. Ohio event promoter Tony Valentine told the Washington Examiner that he hired Cesar Sayoc to strip on multiple occasions during the 1990s and that Sayoc, now 56, traveled the country for similar appearances. told "He really couldn't find his niche in life, and I guess he found it now," Valentine told the Washington Examiner. "Back in the '90s, he was running around from Minnesota to the Carolinas to Florida. He was like a gypsy." For two months in 2004, according to a profile in the New York Times, Sayoc was married to a woman who was also a stripper. That womans mother told the Times that the two went on the circuit together as dancers: profile He had a short-lived marriage to a woman identified in court papers as Roberta Altieri that ended in divorce in Oklahoma City in 2004, according to court records. Billie Mode, the mother of his ex-wife, said the couple worked in strip clubs and were married just two months. They were dancers, Ms. Mode said. They went on the circuit together. According to Valentine (the event promoter who had worked with Sayoc in the 1990s), he had heard that, as of about five years ago, Sayoc was working as an employee at a female strip club while performing on the side at an all-male strip club in Florida. More recently, he has appeared in posts on the Facebook page "Chippen Fellas," apparently run by Sayoc himself to promote his Hard Rock International Entertainment brand. This page advertised all-male shows and in one instance included a dated picture of someone who appears to be Sayoc alongside more recent photos of younger men. It is unclear whether he ever performed with this group or merely served as a manager: appeared According to the Times, Sayoc showed up to work as a DJ at a West Palm Beach strip club named Ultra the day before he was arrested. work Did Sayoc Support Obama and Other Democrats In The Past? There is no evidence to support the claim that Sayoc, who sent a pipe bomb to the Obama family, ever supported President Obama. Sayoc registered to vote as a Republican in Florida on 4 March 2016, just ahead of the March 2016 Republican primary, according to the Associated Press. Some have attempted to use doctored images from a MyLife.com background check to assert he was a registered Democrat, but this claim is not rooted in reality. A check of the official Florida voter registry indicates he is currently registered as a Republican. according doctored images voter registry By all accounts, Sayoc lived a fairly apolitical life leading up to the 2016 presidential election. Ronald Lowy, a lawyer for the Sayoc family who represented Cesar during a 2002 case in which he threatened to bomb an electric company over a bill he disputed, told the Times that although Sayocs family members were Democrats, Cesar himself seemed to have no outspoken partisan views during the 2002 case. told Lowys recollection jibes with what a different lawyer, Daniel Lurvey (who represented Sayoc against theft charges in 2013 and 2014), remembers of the mans political leanings. He told the Washington Examiner that he could not recall Sayoc ever discussing politics. Instead, it appears that Sayocs chief interests during this time were bodybuilding and wrestling: told When they first met [over the 2002 bomb threat case], Mr. Lowy said, Mr. Sayoc brought in a scrapbook filled with notes and photographs he had collected from wrestlers, bodybuilders and strippers, table scraps from a world that he idolized. He comes across like a 15-year-old, Mr. Lowy said. He has a total lack of maturity. [...] He said that Mr. Trumps angry rhetoric and his appeals to the forgotten man and woman during the 2016 campaign seemed to strike a deep chord with Mr. Sayoc, whose father had abandoned the family when he was a child. By 2015, it became clear that Sayoc was an outspoken and enthusiastic Trump supporter. That year, In what may have been an effort to make a false insurance claim, he reported to police that $45,000 worth of suits and costumes he needed for his business were stolen from his van. According to the Times, that police report noted that of the 139 pieces he said were taken, 11 were the presidents clothing brand. According Sayoc also attended a Brevard College alumni event with members of his college soccer team that year, during which he quickly made clear he was a fanatical supporter of Mr. Trump, and bombarded them with racist and misogynist conspiracy theories. Two managers at a pizza shop where Sayoc worked in 2017 recall the man making racist remarks while explicitly attacking President Obama and praising President Trump: He loved Adolf Hitler; he talked about Adolf Hitler a lot, said Debra Gureghian, 56, a manager at the Fort Lauderdale pizza shop where Mr. Sayoc worked for about a year in 2017. He would say, I like his politics, we should have more people like him. Mr. Sayoc went on paranoid, racist screeds, saying that blacks and Hispanics were taking over the world. He referred to Mr. Obama with a racist slur and said he was not a citizen... Teresa Palmer, 48, another manager, said that she also recalled [his pro-Trump-stickered white] van, and that Mr. Sayoc would say nasty things about minorities. She remembered him mentioning Mr. Trump, but only recalled him saying that Mr. Trump made a great president. During this time, Sayoc was an outspoken proponent of conservative conspiracy theories and pro-Trump memes, which he shared both on social media and the windows of his sticker-covered white van. There is no such support for the notion that he was pro-Obama, pro-Democrat, or even political at all prior to 2015. proponent Hopper, Tristin. "Here is What Sir John A. Macdonald Did to Indigenous People." National Post. 28 August 2018. Nelson, Steven. "Mail Bomb Suspect Cesar Sayoc Was a 'Big Muscle Head' Stripper, Says Former Boss." Washington Examiner. 26 October 2018. Healy, Jack, et al. "Cesar Sayoc, Mail Bombing Suspect, Found an Identity in Political Rage and Resentment." New York Times. 27 October 2018. Balsamo, Michael, et al. "Florida Trump Supporter Charged in Chilling Mail-Bomb Plot." Associated Press. 26 October 2018. Lopez, German. "The Pipe Bomb Suspect Made Vitriolic, Threatening Posts Against Democrats on Social Media."

NEI

On 27 October 2018, a Facebook account bearing the face of controversial 19th-century Canadian Prime Minister John H. Macdonald shared a post that alleged two facts about Cesar Sayoc, the accused perpetrator of several attempted mail bombings: that he used to work as a stripper, and that he was long known to support Obama during that time:In the days following Sayocs arrest, several media outlets attempted to profile the man who had covered his live-in van with Trump memes and sent what appeared to be pipe bombs to Trumps political and media opponents. These profiles describe a directionless individual who worked at strip clubs in various capacities throughout his life, but who only found a political awakening in the run-up to the 2016 presidential election, when he became a supporter of President Trump.Several individuals have stated that Cesar Sayoc has not only been employed at strip clubs, but worked as a stripper himself. Ohio event promoter Tony Valentine told the Washington Examiner that he hired Cesar Sayoc to strip on multiple occasions during the 1990s and that Sayoc, now 56, traveled the country for similar appearances.For two months in 2004, according to a profile in the New York Times, Sayoc was married to a woman who was also a stripper. That womans mother told the Times that the two went on the circuit together as dancers:More recently, he has appeared in posts on the Facebook page "Chippen Fellas," apparently run by Sayoc himself to promote his Hard Rock International Entertainment brand. This page advertised all-male shows and in one instance included a dated picture of someone who appears to be Sayoc alongside more recent photos of younger men. It is unclear whether he ever performed with this group or merely served as a manager:According to the Times, Sayoc showed up to work as a DJ at a West Palm Beach strip club named Ultra the day before he was arrested.There is no evidence to support the claim that Sayoc, who sent a pipe bomb to the Obama family, ever supported President Obama. Sayoc registered to vote as a Republican in Florida on 4 March 2016, just ahead of the March 2016 Republican primary, according to the Associated Press. Some have attempted to use doctored images from a MyLife.com background check to assert he was a registered Democrat, but this claim is not rooted in reality. A check of the official Florida voter registry indicates he is currently registered as a Republican.By all accounts, Sayoc lived a fairly apolitical life leading up to the 2016 presidential election. Ronald Lowy, a lawyer for the Sayoc family who represented Cesar during a 2002 case in which he threatened to bomb an electric company over a bill he disputed, told the Times that although Sayocs family members were Democrats, Cesar himself seemed to have no outspoken partisan views during the 2002 case.Lowys recollection jibes with what a different lawyer, Daniel Lurvey (who represented Sayoc against theft charges in 2013 and 2014), remembers of the mans political leanings. He told the Washington Examiner that he could not recall Sayoc ever discussing politics. Instead, it appears that Sayocs chief interests during this time were bodybuilding and wrestling:By 2015, it became clear that Sayoc was an outspoken and enthusiastic Trump supporter. That year, In what may have been an effort to make a false insurance claim, he reported to police that $45,000 worth of suits and costumes he needed for his business were stolen from his van. According to the Times, that police report noted that of the 139 pieces he said were taken, 11 were the presidents clothing brand.During this time, Sayoc was an outspoken proponent of conservative conspiracy theories and pro-Trump memes, which he shared both on social media and the windows of his sticker-covered white van. There is no such support for the notion that he was pro-Obama, pro-Democrat, or even political at all prior to 2015.

FMD_train_1364

No, Former NFL QB John Elway Is Not 'Broke'

01/05/2022

In January 2022, an online advertisement displayed a picture of former Denver Broncos quarterback John Elway alongside the words, "Iconic NFL Players Who Went Broke." The ad was misleading clickbait, leading to a slideshow article on MoneyWise.com that again featured the same photograph of Elway. The headline read, "These Iconic NFL Players Lost It All." It wasn't until the last page of the lengthy article that Elway was mentioned; however, it said nothing about him running out of money or going "broke." Instead, it referenced that, in 2010, Elway fell victim to a Ponzi scheme orchestrated by a hedge fund manager named Sean Michael Mueller. The Associated Press reported that "he and a business partner gave Mueller $15 million," and that Mueller was later sentenced to 40 years in prison. The last page of the MoneyWise.com article also mentioned an ABC News article from 2016, which reported that Elway missed out on a potentially huge investment opportunity in 1998. Had he signed a deal with the Broncos to buy an ownership stake in the team, his investment might have been worth around $388 million by 2015, potentially yielding a "646 percent return on the 1998 investment, adjusted for inflation." As of early 2022, the former NFL great was employed as the president of football operations for the Broncos and had previously held the title of the team's general manager. There was no evidence that Elway was broke, nor did the lengthy MoneyWise.com article mention any such thing. 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 earn more money from ads displayed on the slideshow's pages than it cost to show the initial ad that attracted viewers.

False

In January 2022, an online advertisement showed a picture of former Denver Broncos quarterback John Elway next to the words, "Iconic NFL Players Who Went Broke." The ad was misleading clickbait.The ad led to a slideshow article on MoneyWise.com that again featured the same photograph of Elway. The headline read, "These Iconic NFL Players Lost It All."It wasn't until the last page of the long story that Elway was featured. However, it said nothing of him running out of money and going "broke."Instead, it referenced that, in 2010, Elway fell victim to a Ponzi scheme by a hedge fund manager named Sean Michael Mueller. The Associated Press reported that "he and a business partner gave Mueller $15 million," and that Mueller was later sentenced to 40 years in prison.The last page of the MoneyWise.com article also mentioned an ABC News article from 2016 that reported Elway missed out on a potentially huge investment opportunity in 1998. Had he signed a deal with the Broncos to buy an ownership stake in the team, his investment might have been worth around $388 million by the year 2015, potentially a "646 percent return on the 1998 investment, adjusted for inflation."As of early 2022, the former NFL great was employed as the president of football operations for the Broncos and had previously held the title of the team's general manager.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_1115

Coke Donates to Israel

05/08/2002

Coca-Cola has announced that it will be donating four days' worth of income to Israel. Example: [Collected on the Internet, 2002] I have heard various rumors about the nature of the relationship between Coca-Cola and the State of Israel. Today, I received a text message on my cell phone stating: "NBC states that the income that Coca-Cola will get in the coming four days starting from Monday will be donated to Israel." Origins: The ongoing Arab-Israeli conflict in the Middle East creates a precarious business climate, where any company operating in both Israel and other Middle Eastern countries risks being denounced by one side as a supporter of the other. Companies dealing in relatively inexpensive, ubiquitous products such as soft drinks or fast food are particularly visible targets for those who call for boycotts to protest financial support of one side or the other. American-based companies, in particular, often become the focus of such boycotts, as the USA is home to many of the world's most well-known brands and has been one of the few countries to openly support Israel. McDonald's and Coca-Cola frequently find themselves at the center of boycott calls; the former became a target a few years ago when Saudi Arabian McDonald's outlets donated a portion of their proceeds to Palestinian children's hospitals, while the latter is currently facing backlash due to false claims that they will be "donating four days' worth of income to Israel." Pepsi is also included in this short list, with claims sometimes taken literally that it is a 'Jewish product' whose name is an acronym for 'Pay Every Penny to Save Israel' or 'Pay Every Penny to the State of Israel.' As the Associated Press once noted, "Calling Pepsi a 'Jewish product' is ironic, given that Pepsi was one of many multinationals that wouldn't do business in Israel during the 40-year Arab commercial boycott of the Jewish state." Recently, a series of graphics employing Coca-Cola imagery has been circulated to garner support for an Arab boycott of American companies such as Coca-Cola. At least one such image, which depicts the Dome of the Rock emblazoned with a Coca-Cola logo, has caused an uproar among Muslims who have mistaken it for a bona fide Coca-Cola advertisement, lending support to the unfounded rumor that Coca-Cola will be donating four days' worth of income to Israel. It is hard to imagine that this rumor could be anything but a deliberate lie concocted to smear an American-based company that does business in both Israel and Middle Eastern countries, as no Coke-related business is currently engaged in any sponsorship that could reasonably be misunderstood as constituting a financial "donation" to the state of Israel. As The Coca-Cola Company itself has stated, the company does not support or oppose political or religious causes and does not take a stance on issues that do not directly affect the soft drink industry. The Coca-Cola Company operates worldwide in nearly 200 countries and territories with different cultures, political systems, religions, and histories. People from all around the world own shares in The Coca-Cola Company, and the company employs individuals from many different backgrounds and nationalities. Our partners who bottle, distribute, and sell our products are local business people who hire individuals in their local markets. We cannot and do not take the side of one country over another in any dispute. It's unfortunate that the incredible power of the Internet is being misused to spread false information. Moreover, since Ramallah is home to a Coca-Cola bottling facility that employs about 400 local residents (and indirectly creates employment for hundreds more), and Coca-Cola industries throughout the Middle East are operated as local businesses, any boycott of Coca-Cola in Middle Eastern countries is likely to cause more monetary harm to Arabs and Palestinians than it is to Americans or Israelis. Unfortunately, the maxim that the first casualty in war is truth still holds sway. Last updated: 2 December 2007.

False

Israel. McDonald's and Coca-Cola are frequent subjects of boycott calls, the former becoming a target a few years ago when Saudi Arabian McDonald's outlets donated a portion of their proceeds to Palestinian childrens' hospitals, and the latter a current victim due to false claims that they will be "donating four days' worth of income to Israel." (Pepsi is also a member of this short list, with claims sometimes taken literally that Pepsi is a 'Jewish product' whose name is an acronym for 'Pay Every Penny to Save Israel' or 'Pay Every Penny to the State of Israel.' As the Associated Press once noted, "Calling Pepsi a 'Jewish product' is ironic, given that Pepsi was one of many multinationals that wouldn't do business in Israel during the 40-year Arab commercial boycott of the Jewish state.")Lately a series of graphics employing Coca-Cola imagery (like the one to the right of this text, which is itself a deception within a deception, as it uses a controversial photograph of a Jewish student who was mistakenly identified as a Palestinian) has been circulated to garner support for an Arab boycott of American companies such as Coca-Cola (at least one such image, which depicts the Dome of the Rock emblazoned with a Coca-Cola logo, has caused an uproar among Muslims who have mistaken it for a bona fide Coca-Cola advertisement), lending support to the unfounded rumor that Coca-Cola will be donating four days' worth of income to Israel. It's hard to imagine that this rumor could be anything but a deliberate lie concocted to smear an American-based company that does business in both Israel and Middle Eastern countries, as (unlike the case of the McDonald's brouhaha mentioned above) no Coke-related business is currently engaged in any sponsorship that could reasonably be misunderstood as constituting a financial "donation" to the state of Israel. As The Coca-Cola Company itself has stated:Moreover, since Ramallah is home to a Coca-Cola bottling facility that employs about 400 local residents (and indirectly creates employment for hundreds more), and Coca-Cola industries throughout the Middle East are operated as local businesses, any boycott of Coca-Cola in Middle Eastern countries is likely to cause more monetary harm to Arabs and Palestinians than it is to Americans or Israelis.

FMD_train_1761

Oliver North issued a warning about Osama bin Laden in 1987.

11/03/2001

For most of us who watched the televised Joint Hearings Before the Senate Select Committee on Secret Military Assistance to Iran and the Nicaraguan Opposition and the House Select Committee to Investigate Covert Arms Transactions with Iran (better known as the "Iran-Contra hearings," held by Congress to determine whether the Reagan administration had secretly and illegally sold arms to Iran in order to secure the release of American hostages, then used the profits from those sales to fund the contra rebels in Nicaragua) in 1987, the enduring image we came away with was a memory of an unapologetic and resolute Lt. Col. Oliver North delivering testimony in a Marine uniform. North, who was a central figure in the plan to secretly ship arms to Iran despite a U.S. trade and arms embargo, and who as a National Security Council aide directed efforts to raise private and foreign funds for the contras despite a Congressional prohibition on U.S. government agencies' providing military aid to the Nicaraguan rebels, testified before Congress under a grant of limited immunity in July 1987. Although North had been granted limited immunity for his testimony, he was later convicted of criminal charges related to Iran-Contra activities (a conviction that was eventually overturned on the grounds that witnesses had been influenced by his immunized testimony). One of the charges against North was that he had received a $16,000 home security system paid for out of the proceeds of the Iran-Contra affair and had forged documents to cover his receipt of an illegal gratuity. North admitted that he knew the security system was a "gift" but maintained he never inquired about who had paid for it or how it was financed, and he was insistent that he needed the security system because the government had failed to provide adequate protection against international terrorists for him and his family. The terrorist North mentioned in his testimony was not Osama bin Laden, however. To the extent that bin Laden was known to the western world in 1987, it was not as a "terrorist" but as one of the U.S.-backed "freedom fighters" participating in the war against the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan. Osama bin Laden's hatred of the U.S. and conversion to "terrorist" status is not believed to have come about until the Gulf War of 1990-91, when he was outspokenly critical of Saudi Arabian dependence upon the U.S. military and denounced U.S. support of a "corrupt, materialist, and irreligious" Saudi monarchy. (The Saudi Arabian government stripped bin Laden of his citizenship in 1994 for his funding of militant fundamentalist Islamic groups.) occupation Oliver North did not testify about or mention the name Osama bin Laden during the Iran-Contra hearings. He claimed that threats against his life had been made by terrorist Abu Nidal, telling a congressional committee: testify Abu Nidal Abu Nidal is, as I am sure you on the Intelligence Committee know, the principal, foremost assassin in the world today. He is a brutal murderer. And I would like to just, if I may, just read to you a little bit about Mr. Abu Nidal ... "Abu Nidal, the radical Palestinian guerrilla leader, linked to last Friday's attacks in Rome and Vienna" that was the so-called Christmas massacre in which 19 people died and 200 were wounded "is the world's most wanted terrorist." That is the Christian Science Monitor. When you look at his whole career, Abu Nidal makes the infamous terrorist Carlos [the Jackal] look like a Boy Scout. Abu Nidal himself, quoted in Der Spiegel, "Between America and us, there exists a war to the death. In the coming months and years, Americans will be thinking about us." "For sheer viciousness, Abu Nidal has few rivals in the underworld of terrorism." Newseek. Our own State Department, and we have copies of these that we can make available for insertion in the record, but the State Department summary on Abu Nidal, not exactly an overstatement, notes that his followers, who number an estimated 500, have killed as many as 181 persons, and wounded more than 200, in two years. Abu Nidal does not deny these things. We also have an exhibit that we can provide for you that shows what Abu Nidal did in the Christmas Massacres. One of the people killed in the Christmas Massacre and I do not wish to overdramatize this but the Abu Nidal terrorists in Rome who blasted the 11-year-old American Natasha Simpson to her knees, deliberately zeroed in and fired an extra burst at her head just in case. I want you to know that I'd be more than willing ... to meet Abu Nidal on equal terms anywhere in the world. There's an even deal for him. OK? But I am not willing to have my wife and my four children meet Abu Nidal or his organization on his terms. To emphasize his point, North showed the committee a blow-up of a newspaper article detailing the atrocities of Abu Nidal and recalled that an 11-year-old girl named Natasha Simpson, the daughter of an Associated Press news editor, had been gunned down (along with four other Americans) during an attack by an Abu Nidal group on the El Al terminal at the Rome airport in December 1985. North also later claimed that an attempt on his life had been made five months before his congressional testimony at the instigation of Libyan leader Mohmmar Qadaffi: Mohmmar Qadaffi In February 1987, Muammar Ghadaffi ordered his thugs to carry out a threat made against me in 1986. Thankfully, the FBI intercepted the well-armed perpetrators on the way to our home, and my family and I were sequestered for a time on a military base. The orders from Tripoli were delivered to a terrorist cell in Virginia at the offices of The People's Committee for Libyan Students. So no, Oliver North didn't warn us back in 1987 about Osama bin Laden's "potential threat to the security of the world" or suggest that bin Laden be hunted down by "an assassin team," nor was he given the brush-off by a clueless senator "who disagreed with this approach." Eventually, Col. North drafted his own response to this piece of misinformation: FROM THE DESK OF LTCOL OLIVER L. NORTH (USMC) RET.NOVEMBER 28, 2001OVER THE COURSE OF THE LAST SEVERAL WEEKS, I HAVE RECEIVED SEVERAL THOUSAND E-MAILS FROM EVERY STATE IN THE U.S. AND 13 FOREIGN COUNTRIES IN WHICH THE ORIGINATOR PURPORTS TO HAVE RECENTLY VIEWED A VIDEOTAPE OF MY SWORN TESTIMONY BEFORE A CONGRESSIONAL COMMITTEE IN 1987. A COPY OF ONE OF THOSE E-MAILS IS ATTACHED BELOW. AS YOU WILL NOTE, THE ORIGINATOR ATTRIBUTES TO ME CERTAIN STATEMENTS REGARDING USAMA BIN LADEN AND OTHER MATTERS THAT ARE SIMPLY INACCURATE. THOUGH I WOULD LIKE TO CLAIM THE GIFT OF PROPHESY, I DON'T HAVE IT. I DON'T KNOW WHO SAW WHAT VIDEO "AT UNC." (OR ANYWHERE ELSE) BUT, FOR THE RECORD, HERE'S WHAT I DO KNOW: 1. IT WAS THE COMMITTEE COUNSEL, JOHN NIELDS, NOT A SENATOR WHO WAS DOING THE QUESTIONING. 2. THE SECURITY SYSTEM, INSTALLED AT MY HOME, JUST BEFORE I MADE A VERY SECRET TRIP TO TEHRAN, COST, ACCORDING TO THE COMMITTEE, $16K, NOT $60K. 3. THE TERRORIST WHO THREATENED TO KILL ME IN 1986, JUST BEFORE THAT SECRET TRIP TO TEHRAN, WAS NOT USAMA BIN LADEN, IT WAS ABU NIDAL (WHO WORKS FOR THE LIBYANS NOT THE TALIBAN AND NOT IN AFGHANISTAN). 4. I NEVER SAID I WAS AFRAID OF ANYBODY. I DID SAY THAT I WOULD BE GLAD TO MEET ABU NIDAL ON EQUAL TERMS ANYWHERE IN THE WORLD BUT THAT I WAS UNWILLING TO HAVE HIM OR HIS OPERATIVES MEET MY WIFE AND CHILDREN ON HIS TERMS. 5. I DID SAY THAT THE TERRORISTS INTERCEPTED BY THE FBI ON THE WAY TO MY HOUSE IN FEB. 87 TO KILL MY WIFE, CHILDREN AND ME WERE LIBYANS, DISPATCHED FROM THE PEOPLE'S COMMITTEE FOR LIBYAN STUDENTS IN MCLEAN, VIRGINIA. 6. AND I DID SAY THAT THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT HAD MOVED MY FAMILY OUT OF OUR HOME TO A MILITARY BASE (CAMP LEJEUNE, NC) UNTIL THEY COULD DISPATCH MORE THAN 30 AGENTS TO PROTECT MY FAMILY FROM THOSE TERRORISTS (BECAUSE A LIBERAL FEDERAL JUDGE HAD ALLOWED THE LYBIAN ASSASSINS TO POST BOND AND THEY FLED). 7. AND, FYI: THOSE FEDERAL AGENTS REMAINED AT OUR HOME UNTIL I RETIRED FROM THE MARINES AND WAS NO LONGER A "GOVERNMENT OFFICIAL." BY THEN, THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT HAD SPENT MORE THAN $2M PROTECTING THE NORTH FAMILY. THE TERRORISTS SENT TO KILL US WERE NEVER RE-APPREHENDED. SEMPER FIDELIS,OLIVER L. NORTH Variations: One variant of this item concluded with the statement "The senator disagreed with this approach and that was all that was shown of the clip. If anyone is interested, the Senator turned out to be none other than ... Al Gore." Senator Al Gore of Tennessee was not a member of the United States Senate Select Committee on Secret Military Assistance to Iran and the Nicaraguan Opposition and therefore did not take part in the questioning of any witnesses before the Committee. Additional information: Fisk, Robert. "Anti-Soviet Warrior Puts His Army on the Road to Peace." The [London] Independent. 6 December 1993 (p. 10). Fritz, Sara and Karen Tumulty. "North's Attempt at Cover-Up Is Told." Los Angeles Times. 24 June 1987 (p. A1). Ibrahim, Youssef. "Saudi Stripped of Citizenship for Funding Fundamentalists." The [London] Guardian. 11 April 1994 (p. 8). North, Oliver. "Tackling Terrorism." TownHall.com. 9 June 2000. Tackling Terrorism North, Oliver L. Under Fire: An American Story. New York: HarperCollins, 1992 (pp. 341-344). Pincus, Walter. "North Says He and His Superiors Lied About Contra Aid." The Washington Post. 9 July 1987 (p. A1).

False

The terrorist North mentioned in his testimony was not Osama bin Laden, however. To the extent that bin Laden was known to the western world in 1987, it was not as a "terrorist" but as one of the U.S.-backed "freedom fighters" participating in the war against the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan. Osama bin Laden's hatred of the U.S. and conversion to "terrorist" status is not believed to have come about until the Gulf War of 1990-91, when he was outspokenly critical of Saudi Arabian dependence upon the U.S. military and denounced U.S. support of a "corrupt, materialist, and irreligious" Saudi monarchy. (The Saudi Arabian government stripped bin Laden of his citizenship in 1994 for his funding of militant fundamentalist Islamic groups.)Oliver North did not testify about or mention the name Osama bin Laden during the Iran-Contra hearings. He claimed that threats against his life had been made by terrorist Abu Nidal, telling a congressional committee:To emphasize his point, North showed the committee a blow-up of a newspaper article detailing the atrocities of Abu Nidal and recalled that an 11-year-old girl named Natasha Simpson, the daughter of an Associated Press news editor, had been gunned down (along with four other Americans) during an attack by an Abu Nidal group on the El Al terminal at the Rome airport in December 1985. North also later claimed that an attempt on his life had been made five months before his congressional testimony at the instigation of Libyan leader Mohmmar Qadaffi:North, Oliver. "Tackling Terrorism." TownHall.com. 9 June 2000.

FMD_train_1329

Do Republican Presidents Lead to Poorer Performance for the Dow Jones?

02/08/2018

After the Dow Jones Industrial Average lost a historic 1,175 points in a single day in February 2018, the left-wing Facebook page Occupy Democrats was keen to point out a trend. In a 6 February meme, the page listed what it called the "Biggest One-Day Drops in Dow Jones History," along with the name of the U.S. president in office at the time of each point drop. According to the meme, each of the largest drops occurred during the presidencies of Donald Trump and George W. Bush—both Republicans. The meme concluded: "Share this for your friends who STILL think Republicans are GOOD for the economy!" The meme correctly lists the seven biggest one-day point drops in Dow Jones history, which all took place during the tenure of two Republican presidents, though it leaves out the eighth, ninth, and tenth, which occurred with Democrats Bill Clinton and Barack Obama in the White House. The main problem with the meme, however, is that its conclusion (that the numbers show which president is good for the economy) overstates the influence of a president— as opposed to macroeconomic and geopolitical forces—on stock market trends. In fact, one-day losses and gains can sometimes happen despite the policies and efforts of the person in the Oval Office. For example, many commentators attributed the 29 September 2008 points drop—the second-biggest ever—to the U.S. House of Representatives' failure to pass a $700 billion bank bailout bill, which President George W. Bush had pushed for. Even if one simply wanted to examine during which presidencies the Dow suffered the largest single-day losses, looking at the largest point drops wouldn't be the way to do it. As the stock market has grown in value over the last century, large point drops have become more common, even if their impact on the overall market value isn't particularly great. To get a clearer picture of the impact of these drops, one would have to measure the drop in percentage terms rather than points. Five of these ten events took place during the era of the Great Depression, and all but one occurred during the tenure of Republican presidents. However, if one were to insist on linking the occupant of the White House to the performance of the stock market, a better way to do it would be to track the average performance of the Dow Jones over the entire course of a presidency, rather than looking at one-day outliers in isolation. To illustrate this, we looked at the average performance of the Dow over the course of the last nine presidential terms. We used Yahoo! Finance data for this, which only goes back as far as 29 January 1985, so we're missing figures for the first week or so of Ronald Reagan's second administration. So while Donald Trump's presidency did see the largest one-day points drop in Dow Jones history, it has also seen the biggest average one-day percentage growth since 1985. However, this is based on only 12 months of data, and the next three years could see that 0.09 percent growth rate drop. The biggest average daily percentage growth over the course of a four-year presidency was 0.08 percent, during Bill Clinton's first administration between 1993 and 1997.

NEI

After the Dow Jones Industrial Average lost a historic 1,175 points in a single day in February 2018, the left-wing Facebook page Occupy Democrats was keen to point out a trend. In a 6 February meme, the page listed what it called the "Biggest One-Day Drops in Dow Jones History," along with the name of the U.S. president in office at the time of each point drop. The main problem with the meme, however, is that its conclusion (that the numbers show which president is good for the economy) overstates the influence of a president -- as opposed to macro-economic and geopolitical forces -- on stock market trends. In fact, one-day losses and gains can sometimes happen despite the policies and efforts of the person in the Oval Office. For example, many commentators attributed the 29 September 2008 points drop -- the second-biggest ever -- to the U.S. House of Representatives' failure to pass a $700 billion bank bailout bill, which President George W. Bush had pushed for. (Sources: Wall Street Journal's Market Data and Yahoo! Finance's downloadable Dow Jones data)

FMD_train_1412

George J. Esseff Essay

09/13/2007

Claim: A private citizen paid over $100,000 to run a full-page ad in the Washington Post defining himself and his Republican values. Example: [Collected via e-mail, 2004] $104,655.60 Ad in the Washington Post Here is someone with the money to fund a rebuttal to what Howard Dean, Democratic National Committee Chairman, said recently that many Republicans have never done an honest day's work in their life. The following full page ad was placed in the Washington Post by a businessman named George J. Esseff, Sr. He paid $104,655.60 to run the ad and only did it because he is sick and tired of the way that "the rich" areportrayed by liberals these days. It is a great read. You're a Republican??? In todays America, ask a growing number of high school and college students; their teachers and professors; the self-anointed media elite and/or hard working men and women of all ethnicities, the question, "What is a Republican?", and you'll be told ". a rich, greedy, egotistical individual, motivated only by money and the desire to accumulate more and more of it, at the expense of the environment . the working poor and all whom they exploit ." I am a Republican . I am none of those things . and I dont know any Republicans who are. WHAT I AM . first and foremost, is a loving husband of some 52 plus years, the father of four and an American who's proud of his country. and his country's heritage. WHAT I AM . is the grandson of immigrants who risked everything, including their lives and those of their children, to escape tyranny in search of freedom. WHAT I AM . is a man who grew up during the Depression and witnessed, first hand, the effects of the Stock Market crash and the soup lines that followed. I watched as both my parents and grand parents, who had very little themselves, share what food they had with a half dozen other families, who had even less. WHAT I AM . is someone who worked his way through college by holding down three and four jobs at a time and then used that education to build a better life. WHAT I AM . is a husband who, at age 24, started his own business for the privilege of working 60, 70 and 80 hours a week, risking everything I had, including my health, in search of a better life for myself and my loved ones. WHAT I AM . is a businessman whose blood, sweat and tears . and plenty of them . made it possible for me to provide a secure living, not only for my family and myself, but also for literally hundreds of my employees throughout the years. Employees, who in turn, were able to buy their own homes, raise their own families and give back to their communities and their country. WHAT I AM . is a man who believes in God; a God who has blessed this country . and all for which it stands. WHAT I AM . is someone who knows, if you doubt miracles exist in todays world, you need only to look into the face of those who received them . and the eyes of those who give them. WHAT I AM . is an American who's proud that his President embraces a belief in God; proud of a President who understands, as "politically incorrect" as it may be, there is evil in this world and for the security and safety of all freedom loving people everywhere, it must be confronted . and it must be defeated. WHAT I AM . is an American who takes comfort in the knowledge that our President refuses to allow decisions concerning the very safety and security of this nation, to be governed by the political whims of foreign governments. WHAT I AM . is tired of hearing from leading Democrats who see only negativity in America; racism in her people; class warfare in her society and "political incorrectness" in her character. WHAT I AM . is a former democrat who now understands that it is the soldier and not the reporter that guarantees us our freedoms of press, speech and dissent. WHAT I AM . is a man who believes in the sanctity of life. A man who is repulsed by the pandering of the political left for votes, at the expense of the unborn. WHAT I AM . is a husband and father who believes in the sanctity of marriage and the preservation of the family unit. WHAT I AM . is a movie go-er who is repulsed by those insecure, socially inept, elementary thinking, ego-inflated "entertainers" who have appointed themselves "experts" in the fields of national security and geo-politics and then use their forum to attack this nation, its leaders and its actions . much to the delight and encouragement of our enemies. WHAT I AM . is an American who understands the difference between "censorship" and "choice". Evidently, these individuals do not, because when these same "celebrities" receive public ridicule for their offensive actions, the first thing they yell is "Censorship!". What they seem incapable of understanding is . the right of free speech and dissent is shared equally by those offended . as well as those who offend. I support and will continue to support those films and performers whom I choose to . and refuse to support those I don't. It is my right as an American . a right I will continue to enthusiastically exercise. WHAT I AM . is a voter, tired of politicians, who, every time their voting records are subjected to public scrutiny, try to divert attention from their political and legislative failures by accusing their opponents of "attack ads" and "negative campaigning" . and the news media who allow them to get away with it. WHAT I AM . is a Catholic who loves his God and his Faith . and who's been taught to respect all religions whose teachings are based in love, peace and charity. As such, I am embarrassed and ashamed of those individuals, in both private and public life, whose decisions and actions are devoid of any sense of character or morals; individuals who are only driven by what's best for them . rather than what's right . often times at the expense of many . including our national security. WHAT I AM . is a realist who understands that the terrorist attack that murdered hundreds of innocent Russian children could have occurred here, in our heartland. That's why I sincerely believe America needs now, more than ever, a President who sees with a clear and focused vision and who speaks with a voice when heard by both friend and foe alike, is understood, respected and believed. WHAT I AM . is eternally grateful to Ronald Reagan for having the bravery to speak out against Communism and the courage of his convictions in leading the fight to defeat it; and George W. Bush for the vision, courage, conviction and leadership he has shown in America's war on terrorism amidst both the constant and vicious, personal and political attacks both he and his family are made to endure. WHAT I AM . is a human being, full of numerous faults and failures, but a man nonetheless, who, though not always successful, has continually strived to do "what's right" instead of "what's easy". A man who is challenging the religious leaders of all faiths, to not only preach to their congregations the fundamentals of "what's right" and "what's wrong", but to also then hold them accountable for their actions in both the public and private sectors. WHAT I AM . is disgusted with the Courts who, on one hand, call the murder of a pregnant woman a "double homicide" but then refer to the abortion of her baby as, "pro-choice". WHAT I AM . is someone deeply troubled by a political party which embraces a candidate whose primary "leadership" qualities center around his protesting of the Vietnam war and his labeling the honorable men and women who fought in it, (50,000 of whom gave their lives in that action), as rapists, and war criminals. That same political party then stepped forward this year to block the appearance of a true Vietnam war hero, retired Admiral and former United States Senator, Jeremiah Denton, (a man who spent seven years and seven torturous months in a North Vietnam prison), from speaking before an open session of the California legislature as part of that state's 4th of July celebration. The reason Democrats gave for refusing to allow this American hero to speak before their state legislature was because of the "conservative" nature of his views. As an American, that troubles me deeply . as well it should you. WHAT I AM . is a man who feels the need to spend, $104,655.60 (tax paid) of his own money, to purchase this advertisement, in order to set the story straight. Some may say this money would have been better spent feeding the world's poor. At the risk of sounding self-serving, as an American and as a Republican, for the last six decades of my life, I have done exactly that . and more. Following the examples of my parents and grand parents, I have used my earnings to feed the poor, shelter the homeless, provide housing for the elderly and medical care for the sick . and continue to do so . and I'm not alone in that work. WHAT I AM . is someone who is paying for this announcement, at my sole expense, in hopes of opening the eyes of those led blindly by ill-informed elements of our great nation, who, through either ignorance, or malicious intent, repeatedly attack and belittle those of us who belong to a political party that holds true to the belief, " . the rights of the governed, exceed the power of the government". For those interested, I am speaking only as a tax-paying individual who is in no way associated with The Republican National Committee, nor with any of its directors, or delegates. WHAT I AM . is a man who understands, "the American way of life" is a message of self-empowerment for all. WHAT I AM . is an American who is grateful that our nation gives each of us the opportunity of self-determination and the right to benefit from the fruits of self achievement. WHAT I AM . is an American who wants to preserve that way of life for all who seek it. WHAT I AM . is blessed to be an American . and proud to be Republican. For a free reprint of this "Open Letter," go to www.whatiam.net Origins: On Wednesday, 20 October 2004, the above-quoted text appeared as a full-page advertisement in the Washington Post. It was paid for by 74-year-old George Esseff of Westlake Village, California, who shelled out $104,655.60 of his own money to run the ad explaining himself and his Republican values to the Post's approximately 740,000 weekday readers. (As noted at the end of the ad, its text was simultaneously posted on the web at www.whatiam.net.) www.whatiam.net According to the Ventura County Star, the idea for the ad came to Mr. Esseff "in the middle of a sleepless night," because he "had been wounded by recent rhetoric painting Republicans as greedy egotists exploiting the poor and the environment" and was "tired of being treated like a doormat by news media." He deliberately placed the ad in the Washington Post, which is generally considered a liberal newspaper, because he was interested in getting his message out to "left-of-center or undecided voters" in the days before the 2004 presidential election. While I was researching this piece, I was surprised to find that Mr. Esseff is in fact a neighbor of ours (in the sense that he lives in the town adjacent to the one where we reside). I also discovered that when he noted in his ad that he has "used [his] earnings to feed the poor, shelter the homeless, provide housing for the elderly and medical care for the sick," he was not exaggerating among his many charitable efforts, George Esseff and his wife, Rosemary, donated over $1 million towards the construction of a low-income housing complex in my hometown of Thousand Oaks, California. Last updated: 3 August 2005 Sources: Cason, Colleen. "Man's Ad Sings Praises of GOP." Ventura County Star. 27 October 2004.

True

at www.whatiam.net.)

FMD_train_1681

Lifetime passes for complimentary fast food

01/24/2016

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

False

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

FMD_train_711

Daily Snopes

10/14/2015

This page features a daily collection of links to news articles and websites of interest to readers of our website. Due to the ephemeral nature of this type of material, some of the links may expire within a few days of being posted here. Stories are chosen for inclusion based purely on their appeal to our readers; we make no claims about the reliability of the information linked from this page. All of the links included here are viewable at no charge, although some publications may require a free one-time registration to access their articles. Because They Got High (21 September 2015) FACT CHECK: Did Republican presidential candidate Carly Fiorina say that half of reported rapes were women regretting something they did while high or drunk? One Misdirection (26 August 2015) FACT CHECK: Did Joey Fatone pen an open letter to One Direction? Boston's Nasty Snowpile Still Hasn't Melted (CityLab) We're coming up on July, and New England temperatures are in the 70s, yet Boston's snow doesn't seem to know that. It's still there, sitting in a cold, corpulent mound that occasionally melts just enough to discharge garbage. Woman, 88, Charged With Assaulting Police Officer (Associated Press) An 88-year-old woman has been charged with assaulting police who responded to her home, which turned out to be the wrong address. Beekeepers Set Out to Remove a Million Bees from Home (Associated Press) Beekeepers have quite the task ahead of them as they remove an estimated 1 million honey bees that have taken up residence at a home. Firefighter Accused of Reporting Fake Fire to Earn Paycheck (Associated Press) An auxiliary firefighter reported a fake fire so he could head to the scene and earn a paycheck, but a different department was dispatched instead, and he is now facing charges. Handsome Gorilla Delights Female Zoo-Goers (UPI) Zoo officials said young women hoping to get into the good graces of the gorilla with the chiseled features and brooding poses might be disappointed to learn he has two wives of his own species, Ai and Nene. Cow Puts the MOO-ves on Comrade During Live News Broadcast (UPI) A TV reporter delivering a live report from a local farm was interrupted by a pair of frisky bovines copulating in the background. 8-Foot-Wide Vortex Opens Up in Lake (UPI) The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers shared video of an 8-foot-wide vortex that officials said could swallow a boat. Woman Trying to Kiss Llama Gets Face Full of Spit (UPI) A woman leaning in to kiss a llama learned a valuable lesson in the form of a face full of spit. Queen's Guard Draws Gun on Tourist Who Touched Him (UPI) A video features a tourist making an important discovery: You can mock a Queen's Guard, but don't ever touch one. Airplane Wheel Crashes Into Apartment Roof (UPI) Aviation authorities are investigating after an airplane wheel fell from a private jet and crashed through the roof of an apartment building. Trashed Golfer Gets Head Stuck in Garbage Can (UPI) A golfer who stuck his head in a trash bin as an alcohol-fueled joke ended up with his noggin stuck in the garbage. Subway Long Jump Attempt Fails (UPI) A video going viral online features a man attempting to long jump over the train tracks at a subway station and failing. Illegally Parked Car Covered in Post-Its (UPI) A video shows the car covered in blue and white sticky notes to draw the International Symbol of Access—a stick figure in a wheelchair—on the back and side of the vehicle after it was illegally parked in an accessible space. Something's Rotten: Stench from Fridge Sends 11 to Hospital (Associated Press) A smelly refrigerator sent nearly a dozen people to the hospital. Men Hospitalized, Recovering After Rare Beaver Attack (Reuters) Two hikers who were assaulted by a beaver after they climbed onto its dam have been hospitalized for injuries incurred during the rare attack. Theater Switches Horror Movie for Disney Film (Associated Press) Parents and children settled into their seats for a new animated Disney film got a quick jolt when a horror movie came on the screen instead. Break-In Suspect Left Wallet Behind (Associated Press) Sheriff's deputies had little trouble identifying a break-in suspect whose wallet and ID were left at the scene. 16 Police Forces Respond to Wedding Brawl (UPI) More than a dozen different police departments responded to a wedding brawl that grew violently out of control. Sex Sounds Rile Neighbors (UPI) A note posted at a housing complex blasts loud lovemaking neighbors for "Oh God" exclamations confused by children and seniors for "religion or suicide." Loose Dog at Motel Leads to Drug Arrest (Associated Press) A loose dog at a motel led to a room with a bathtub containing marijuana and the arrest of the dog's owner. Robbers Chased Away by Shopkeeper Wielding Vacuum Cleaner (Reuters) A shop assistant in a late-night convenience store chased away two armed robbers demanding money with the hose of a vacuum cleaner she was using to clean her shop. Police Apologize After Sex Talk Broadcast from Helicopter (Reuters) Police apologized after a lewd conversation about sex was broadcast from the loudspeakers of a police helicopter to a neighborhood below. Gumbo Seasoning Dispute Gets Spicy (Panama City (FL) News Herald) A man was arrested on charges of aggravated battery with a deadly weapon after a work squabble over gumbo seasoning quickly escalated into an armed engagement. Mermaids, Other Creatures Turn Out for Parade (Associated Press) Tens of thousands of revelers turned out for Coney Island's 33rd annual Mermaid Parade despite gray skies and steady drizzle. Newlyweds Win $15 Million in Lottery (Associated Press) Newlyweds are planning to buy a house, pay off student loans, and buy a truck after winning $15 million on an instant scratch-off ticket. City Slaps Car Sculpture with a Ticket (CityLab) There must be a traffic officer out there with either no sense of humor or an excellent one, because this weirdly bent truck—an obvious work of public art—just got a parking ticket. Skinny Jeans Send Woman to Hospital with Nerve Damage (UPI) A doctor has warned against the dangers of so-called "skinny jeans," citing a patient who collapsed after a day of strenuous activity while wearing tight pants. 'Fridgehenge' Welcomes Solstice with Refrigerators (UPI) An appliance store owner celebrated the summer solstice by creating "Fridgehenge," a Stonehenge-inspired monument made from refrigerators. Brave Kitty Stares Down Mountain Lion (Reuters) A video of an unfazed, fluffy house cat staring down a large mountain lion as the predator paws at a kitchen window has gone viral. Bleating Beauties: Village Holds Goat Pageant (UPI) A village celebrated the 645th anniversary of its founding by holding a beauty pageant for the most attractive local goats. Flight Video Catches Cat Stowing Away on Plane Wing (UPI) A pilot shared video from an ultralight plane flight featuring a feline stowaway crawling out from inside a wing after takeoff. Smuggler Hides Cigarettes in Buddha Statues (Sky News) Officers found five colored fiberglass statues of Buddha, all filled with cigarettes. Pilots Warned of 70,000 Homing Pigeons (Associated Press) Airplane pilots have been advised to fly with special care after 70,000 homing pigeons were released to participate in a race back to their homes. Bank Robber Who Stopped for Biscuits Gets Prison (Associated Press) A man who was arrested for robbing a bank when he stopped to eat biscuits at a nearby restaurant will spend two to four years in prison. Man Drives Himself to Station, Asks for DUI Arrest (Associated Press) A man drove under the influence of alcohol to a small-town police station, where he requested that officers arrest him. 66 Surfers Set Record for Most People Riding a Board at Once (Associated Press) Surf champions and local heroes were among those who hung loose on a custom-built, 42-foot board. Father Sends Lookalike to Paternity Test (International Business Times) A young father who did not want to pay child support was called highly manipulative in court after he sent a look-alike to his DNA paternity test. Cabbie Drives Taxi Down Three Flights of Stairs (UPI) A taxi driver who apparently got confused on a college campus became a viral star when he decided to drive his cab down three flights of stairs.

NEI

Because They Got High (21 September 2015) One Misdirection (26 August 2015) Boston's Nasty Snowpile Still Hasn't Melted (CityLab) Woman, 88, Charged With Assaulting Police Officer (Associated Press) Beekeepers Set Out to Remove a Million Bees from Home (Associated Press) Firefighter Accused of Reporting Fake Fire to Earn Paycheck (Associated Press) Handsome Gorilla Delights Female Zoo-Goers (UPI) Cow Puts the MOO-ves on Comrade During Live News Broadcast (UPI) 8-Foot-Wide Vortex Opens Up in Lake (UPI) Woman Trying to Kiss Llama Gets Face Full of Spit (UPI) Queen's Guard Draws Gun on Tourist Who Touched Him (UPI) Airplane Wheel Crashes Into Apartment Roof (UPI) Trashed Golfer Gets Head Stuck in Garbage Can (UPI) Subway Long Jump Attempt Fails (UPI) Illegally Parked Car Covered in Post-Its (UPI) Something's Rotten: Stench from Fridge Sends 11 to Hospital (Associated Press) Men Hospitalized, Recovering After Rare Beaver Attack (Reuters) Theater Switches Horror Movie for Disney Film (Associated Press) Break-In Suspect Left Wallet Behind (Associated Press) 16 Police Forces Respond to Wedding Brawl (UPI) Sex Sounds Rile Neighbors (UPI) Loose Dog at Motel Leads to Drug Arrest (Associated Press) Robbers Chased Away by Shopkeeper Wielding Vacuum Cleaner (Reuters) Police Apologize After Sex Talk Broadcast from Helicopter (Reuters) Gumbo Seasoning Dispute Gets Spicy (Panama City (FL) News Herald) Mermaids, Other Creatures Turn Out for Parade (Associated Press) Newlyweds Win $15 Million in Lottery (Associated Press) City Slaps Car Sculpture with a Ticket (CityLab) Skinny Jeans Send Woman to Hospital with Nerve Damage (UPI) 'Fridgehenge' Welcomes Solstice with Refrigerators (UPI) Brave Kitty Stares Down Mountain Lion (Reuters) Bleating Beauties: Village Holds Goat Pageant (UPI) Flight Video Catches Cat Stowing Away on Plane Wing (UPI) Smuggler Hides Cigarettes in Buddha Statues (Sky News) Pilots Warned of 70,000 Homing Pigeons (Associated Press) Bank Robber Who Stopped for Biscuits Gets Prison (Associated Press) Man Drives Himself to Station, Asks for DUI Arrest (Associated Press) 66 Surfers Set Record for Most People Riding a Board at Once (Associated Press) Father Sends Lookalike to Paternity Test (International Business Times) Cabbie Drives Taxi Down Three Flights of Stairs (UPI)

FMD_train_997

Did All Democrats Vote Against a 2.8 Percent Social Security COLA Increase?

10/18/2018

In mid-October 2018, Facebook users shared an inaccurate meme asking, "Were any of you aware that ALL the Democrats voted AGAINST the 2.8% Social Security cost of living increase?" No Democrats, or any other legislators for that matter, voted for or against the 2.8 percent cost of living allowance (COLA) increase that Social Security recipients will see beginning in 2019. Since 1975, COLA increases have kicked in automatically and are based on changes in the consumer price index, a figure calculated by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. Here's how the Social Security Administration has summarized the history of COLA increases: Most people are aware that there are annual increases in Social Security benefits to offset the corrosive effects of inflation on fixed incomes. These increases, now known as Cost of Living Allowances (COLAs), are such an accepted feature of the program that it is difficult to imagine a time when there were no COLAs. But in fact, when Ida May Fuller received her first $22.54 benefit payment in January of 1940, this would be the same amount she would receive each month for the next 10 years. For Ida May Fuller and the millions of other Social Security beneficiaries like her, the amount of that first benefit check was the amount they could expect to receive for life. It was not until the 1950 Amendments that Congress first legislated an increase in benefits. Current beneficiaries had their payments recomputed, and Ida May Fuller, for example, saw her monthly check increase from $22.54 to $41.30. These recomputations were effective for September 1950 and appeared for the first time in the October 1950 checks. A second increase was legislated for September 1952. Together, these two increases almost doubled the value of Social Security benefits for existing beneficiaries. From that point on, benefits were increased only when Congress enacted special legislation for that purpose. In 1972, the law was changed to provide, beginning in 1975, for automatic annual cost-of-living allowances (i.e., COLAs) based on the annual increase in consumer prices. No longer do beneficiaries have to await a special act of Congress to receive a benefit increase, and no longer does inflation drain value from Social Security benefits. The latest increase will affect 62 million Social Security and Supplemental Security Income (SSI) recipients starting in January 2019. It's the largest increase since 2012, when beneficiaries saw a 3.6 percent boost.

False

No Democrats, or any other legislators for that matter, voted for or against the 2.8 percent cost of living allowance (COLA) increase that Social Security recipients will see beginning in 2019. Since 1975, COLA increases have kicked in automatically and are based on changes in the consumer price index, a figure calculated by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics.Here's how the Social Security Administration has summarized the history of COLA increases:In 1972 legislation the law was changed to provide, beginning in 1975, for automatic annual cost-of-living allowances (i.e., COLAs) based on the annual increase in consumer prices. No longer do beneficiaries have to await a special act of Congress to receive a benefit increase and no longer does inflation drain value from Social Security benefits.The latest increase will affect 62 million Social Security and Supplemental Security Income (SSI) recipients starting in January 2019. It's the largest increase since 2012, when beneficiaries saw a 3.6 percent boost.