Datasets:

kkawamu1

/

fmd_train_val

like 0

FMD_train_91

Federal spending is the highest it's been as a share of our economy in 60 years (and) revenue is the lowest it's been as a share of our economy in 60 years.

11/15/2010

With the rise of the fiscally conservative Tea Party and the recent release of a draft report by the presidentially appointed National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform, the nation's fiscal challenges have surged to the top of the urgent agenda items in Washington. We will examine two comments on federal spending made during the Sunday talk shows on November 14, 2010—one by Sen. Kent Conrad, D-N.D., and the other by Sen.-elect Rand Paul, R-Ky. We will address Conrad's comments here. In an interview on ABC's This Week With Christiane Amanpour, Conrad—who chairs the Senate Budget Committee and serves on the presidentially appointed panel—stated, "If you look at our spending, it's the highest it's been as a share of our economy in 60 years; revenue is the lowest it's been as a share of our economy in 60 years, so we're going to have to work both sides of the equation." Let's examine Conrad's numbers. As we did with Paul's comments, we referred to a historical table from the Office of Management and Budget that shows tax receipts, spending, and the deficit as a percentage of GDP—essentially, as a percentage of the nation's economy as a whole. In 2009, the last full year available, federal spending accounted for 24.7 percent of GDP. That's higher than it has been in any year since 1949—60 years prior. You have to go back to 1946 to find a higher percentage—24.8 percent—and that was a year in which the nation was winding down high rates of spending for World War II. (From 1943 to 1945, during the height of the war, federal spending ranged from 41 percent to 43 percent of GDP.) Clearly, recessions impact how high this percentage can get. The only other years since 1946 in which federal spending exceeded 23 percent of GDP were 1982 and 1983, with 23.1 percent and 23.5 percent, respectively. That was during and immediately after the 1981-82 recession—the last one that rivaled today's in severity. Economic downturns tend to affect this statistic because they slow GDP growth and increase the demand for government services. Even without special stimulus measures, spending rises for mandatory items such as food stamps. Either way, Conrad is correct about spending. What about tax revenue as a percentage of GDP? In 2009, tax receipts accounted for 14.8 percent of GDP. According to the table, tax receipts as a share of GDP were always higher all the way back to 1950, when they accounted for 14.4 percent of GDP. That would be 59 years—not quite 60, but very, very close. The recession also factors into the tax revenue statistic. Both the 2008 stimulus package under President George W. Bush and the 2009 stimulus under President Barack Obama included tax breaks as a major component. Because the statistics show a number so close to 60 years—and because Conrad was speaking during a television interview rather than a prepared speech or written statement—we will give him some leeway and rate the statement True.

True

We'll take a look at two comments on federal spending made on the Nov. 14, 2010, Sunday talk shows -- one by Sen. Kent Conrad, D-N.D., and the other by Sen.-elect Rand Paul, R-Ky. We'll address Conrad's here.In an interview on ABC'sThis Week With Christiane Amanpour, Conrad -- who chairs the Senate Budget Committee and serves on the presidentially appointed panel -- said, If you look at our spending, it's the highest it's been as a share of our economy in 60 years, revenue is the lowest it's been as a share of our economy in 60 years, so we're going to have to work both sides of the equation.Let's take a look at Conrad's numbers.As we did with Paul's item, we turned to a historicaltablefrom the Office of Management and Budget that shows tax receipts, spending and the deficit as a percentage of GDP -- essentially, as a percentage of the nation's economy as a whole.In 2009, the last full year available, federal spending accounted for 24.7 percent of GDP. That's higher than it's been in any year since 1949 -- 60 years prior. You have to go back to 1946 to find a higher percentage -- 24.8 -- and that was a year in which the nation was winding down high rates of spending for World War II. (From 1943 to 1945, the height of the war, federal spending ranged from 41 percent to 43 percent of GDP.)Clearly, recessions have an impact on how high this percentage gets. The only other years since 1946 in which federal spending exceeded 23 percent of GDP came in 1982 and 1983, with 23.1 percent and 23.5 percent, respectively. That was during and immediately after the 1981-82 recession -- the last one that rivaled today's in severity. Economic downturns tend to affect this statistic because theyslowGDP growth and increase the demand for government services. Even without special stimulus measures, spending goes up for mandatory items such as food stamps.Either way, Conrad is correct on spending. What about tax revenue as a percentage of GDP?In 2009, tax receipts accounted for 14.8 percent of GDP. According to the table, tax receipts as a share of GDP were always higher all the way back through 1950, when they accounted for 14.4 percent of GDP. That would be 59 years -- not quite 60, but very, very close.The recession factors into the tax revenue statistic as well. Both the 2008 stimulus package under President George W. Bush and the 2009 stimulus under President Barack Obama included tax breaks as a major component.Because the statistics show a number so close to 60 years -- and because Conrad was speaking during a television interview rather than a prepared speech or written statement -- we'll give him some leeway and rate the statement True.

FMD_train_174

Was Marvin Gaye intentionally making a poor quality album in order to deceive his ex-wife and avoid paying royalties?

09/16/2004

Divorce can be anything from an amicable parting of spouses who realize their partnership just isn't working, to a vicious, protracted fight between two embittered people determined to wreak as much physical, emotional, and economic damage on the other as possible. Unfortunately, the end of singer Marvin Gaye's first marriage came closer to the latter than the former. Marvin Gaye's Divorce In 1962, a 22-year-old Marvin Gaye wed Anna Ruby Gordy, a woman seventeen years his senior and the sister of Motown Record Corporation founder Berry Gordy, Jr. (a marriage, some cynics suggested, calculated to further the fledgling career of Gaye, who recorded for Motown). By the time Anna filed for divorce thirteen years later, the couple had been separated for over two years, and each had accused the other of infidelities. (Marvin's infidelity was hardly a matter of debate, as he was living with a teenage girl seventeen years his junior who was pregnant with his child. Moreover, the son Marvin and Anna Gaye had claimed as their own was actually a child Marvin Gaye had fathered by his wife's fifteen-year-old niece.) The divorce proceedings dragged out over two years as Marvin continually failed to show up for court dates, refused to pay court-ordered support for Anna and their son, and claimed his expenses exceeded his income even as he continued to spend money recklessly, purchasing luxury automobiles, boats, and beachfront properties. By the time Marvin's day of financial reckoning arrived, he had little cash and was well in arrears for a large amount of back taxes, so his attorney worked out a settlement under which Anna would be paid off from the royalties earned by Gaye's next album. Here, My Dear That next album turned out to be Here, My Dear, a harrowing "concept album of divorce" which chronicled the turmoil of Anna and Marvin's relationship. The record's symbolism was hardly subtle: Featuring songs with titles such as "You Can Leave, But It's Going to Cost You," the album bore an inner sleeve which depicted a Monopoly-like board game emblazoned with the word JUDGMENT, across which a male hand passed a broken record to a female hand. On the man's side of the board were only a piano and some recording equipment, while the female's side of the board included money, a house, a Mercedes, and a diamond ring: Although Marvin and Anna's divorce settlement was indeed tied to the royalties generated by Here, My Dear, the common legend surrounding the record -- that Marvin Gaye was ordered by a judge to hand over all his royalties from the album to Anna, and that Marvin was in a position to spitefully deprive Anna of those royalties by intentionally recording an album so bad it would not sell -- is largely untrue. Debunking the Legend First off, the payment-through-royalties scheme was a settlement worked out through mutual agreement, not one devised and mandated by a judge. Second, rarely does a competent attorney accept (or a responsible judge impose) a dissolution of partnership settlement under which the amount of compensation received by one party is completely dependent upon a future endeavor of the other party, precisely because such a settlement could allow one side to cheat the other by deliberately underperforming. (A similar legend about producer Phil Spector is based on this premise.) Phil Spector The circumstances in Marvin Gaye's case were that he agreed to pay Anna a total of $600,000, the first $307,000 coming from the advance against royalties he was guaranteed for his next album, and the remaining $293,000 to be paid out of any royalties earned beyond the advance. But Anna would lose nothing if Gaye's next record sold poorly, because the agreement specified that if the album failed to earn $293,000 within two years, Gaye was obligated to pay Anna the difference himself, and thus he had nothing to gain by tanking the sessions and purposely turning out substandard product. In fact, Gaye was in a position to lose a great deal by deliberately turning out a substandard effort, both because he was entitled to keep any royalties earned after the first $600,000 and because he stood to earn additional monies through publishing rights (rather than record sales) that were not payable to Anna. It is true that Gaye initially considered giving the album less than his best effort, but he soon found that he was incapable of recording with anything less than a complete commitment to his art, and if he had any intent to "get" his ex-wife, it was through the album's lyrics and not its sales: At first, I figured I'd just do a quickie record nothing heavy, nothing even good. Why should I break my neck when Anna was going to wind up with the money anyway? But the more I lived with the notion, the more it fascinated me. Besides, I owed the public my best effort. I'll give her my next album but it'll be something she won't want to play and it'll be something she won't want the world to hear because I'm gonna tell the truth. Critical Reception Although the album was not a smashing commercial success, it was admired in many quarters for its artistic qualities: Despite Marvin's efforts, Here, My Dear was a commercial failure, not because it lacked ideas and sophisticated music, but, perhaps, because it possessed them in abundance. I think Here, My Dear was simply too sophisticated, too boldly honest, too remarkably insightful and too close to the emotional quick to succeed commercially. On "I Met a Little Girl," Gaye appeals to his past: musically, through sweet fifties harmonies, and personally as he narrates meeting Anna, falling in love with her, and the relationship's demise. On "When Did You Stop Loving Me, When Did I Stop Loving You," which appears again as an instrumental and a reprise, Marvin uses a Latin-tinged mellow groove to probe for more than six minutes the philosophical question of love's origin and its end, both passing imperceptibly into existence, and into each other, as Marvin's multiple falsettos lash at the song's rhythms, and Anna: "You said bad things and you lied." On "Anger," Marvin mounts a funky shuffle of percussion and bass to declare the defining vices of a fundamental human passion: "Anger ... can make you old ... can make you sick ... destroys your soul." The songs cross every genre "Anna's Song" is a rhythmically complex patterning of soul-jazz that conjures Coltrane's ballads, while "Funky Space Reincarnation" is disco-funk that dreams of a raceless musical universe. And "Here, My Dear" is a poignant doo-wop love fugue transposed to detail Marvin's sorrowful joys and sad nostalgia in the aftermath of their breakup. Anna Gaye didn't take lightly some of the revelations Marvin expressed through his music on Here, My Dear (especially accusations that she was preventing him from seeing their son and that she had lied to God by breaking their marriage vows), and upon its release she told People magazine that she was considering filing a $5 million invasion of privacy lawsuit, although nothing ever came of her threat. Critical reaction to Here, My Dear was mixed. As Gaye biographer Steve Turner wrote, "Reviewers didn't seem to know whether the double album was a huge joke at the expense of Anna Gaye and Motown, or a work of genius." The record was not a hit, failing to sell well enough to even recoup the advance against royalties paid by Motown, so Marvin Gaye (who was by then officially bankrupt) was obligated to begin making monthly payments to Anna to cover the shortfall. However, Gaye was killed in 1984 still owing Anna the additional $293,000 due her, and monies earned by his estate after his death went to paying off the IRS rather than benefiting his ex-wives and children -- thereby proving the maxim about life's only two certainties. Dyson, Michael Eric. Mercy, Mercy Me: The Art, Loves & Demons of Marvin Gaye. New York: Basic Civitas Books, 2004. ISBN 0-465-01769-X. Mercy, Mercy Me: The Art, Loves & Demons of Marvin Gaye Ritz, David. Divided Soul: The Life of Marvin Gaye. New York: Da Capo Press, 1985. ISBN 0-306-80443-2. Divided Soul: The Life of Marvin Gaye Turner, Steve. Trouble Man: The Life and Death of Marvin Gaye. New York: HarperCollins, 1998. ISBN 0-06-019821-4. Trouble Man: The Life and Death of Marvin Gaye

False

First off, the payment-through-royalties scheme was a settlement worked out through mutual agreement, not one devised and mandated by a judge. Second, rarely does a competent attorney accept (or a responsible judge impose) a dissolution of partnership settlement under which the amount of compensation received by one party is completely dependent upon a future endeavor of the other party, precisely because such a settlement could allow one side to cheat the other by deliberately underperforming. (A similar legend about producer Phil Spector is based on this premise.)Dyson, Michael Eric. Mercy, Mercy Me: The Art, Loves & Demons of Marvin Gaye. New York: Basic Civitas Books, 2004. ISBN 0-465-01769-X. Ritz, David. Divided Soul: The Life of Marvin Gaye. New York: Da Capo Press, 1985. ISBN 0-306-80443-2. Turner, Steve. Trouble Man: The Life and Death of Marvin Gaye. New York: HarperCollins, 1998. ISBN 0-06-019821-4.

FMD_train_1765

Was This McDonald's Burned During Floyd Protests?

05/31/2020

As protests over the May 2020 police-custody death of George Floyd in Minneapolis swept across the U.S., resulting in the burning of structures in many cities, the Breaking9ll Twitter account tweeted a picture of a blazing McDonald's restaurant along with the caption "BREAKING: McDonald's Has Fallen": burning This tweet did not feature a real photograph of a McDonald's set afire during protests over Floyd's death, however. The image was a repurposed photograph of a restaurant in Lebanon, Pennsylvania, that burned in November 2016 after a grease fire started in its kitchen: repurposed The McDonald's at 757 E. Cumberland St. in Lebanon is deemed a complete loss by Lebanon Fire Commissioner Duane Trautman after a grease fire started in the kitchen and spread toward the roof Friday night. Crews were dispatched just after 8 p.m., and according to dispatch reports, a fully involved kitchen fire is what they arrived to. The Breaking 911 Twitter account, which described itself as a "parody account," mimicked the appearance of the real Breaking 911 news site's Twitter feed. The former account has since been suspended by Twitter. Breaking 911 Breaking 911 Asroff, Chris. "McDonald's East Complete Loss After Grease Fire." Lebanon Daily News. 18 November 2016.

False

As protests over the May 2020 police-custody death of George Floyd in Minneapolis swept across the U.S., resulting in the burning of structures in many cities, the Breaking9ll Twitter account tweeted a picture of a blazing McDonald's restaurant along with the caption "BREAKING: McDonald's Has Fallen":This tweet did not feature a real photograph of a McDonald's set afire during protests over Floyd's death, however. The image was a repurposed photograph of a restaurant in Lebanon, Pennsylvania, that burned in November 2016 after a grease fire started in its kitchen:The Breaking 911 Twitter account, which described itself as a "parody account," mimicked the appearance of the real Breaking 911 news site's Twitter feed. The former account has since been suspended by Twitter.

FMD_train_1822

Did Pelosi Pass a Bill Allowing Her Husband To Make Millions Selling USPS Property?

08/29/2020

In late August 2020, readers inquired about a meme circulating on Facebook that claimed falsely that U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi had rigged legislation to help her husband benefit financially from selling off property belonging to the U.S. Postal Service. The meme's text reads: This is Paul Pelosi (aka, Nancys Husband). He owns Financial Leasing Services LLC, a San Francisco based Real Estate and Venture Capitalist Firm. His net worth is 120 million. Why is this important? His wife sits on the House Appropriations committee. This committee appropriates funds to the United States Postal Service ( and others). Why is this important? Easy. She passed a bill to sell off 9 billion dollars ( yes 9 BILLION WITH a [smile emoji] worth of FEDERALLY OWNED POST OFFICE PROPERTY AND AWARDED THE THE CONTRACT TO, none other, Financial Leasing Services LLC. Her husbands firm. Why is this important? The commissions rate was set at 9%. That is almost a 1 BILLION dollar contract. If thats not enough, lets look at the new stimulus package. Nancy wants 25 billion in the stimulus package for the postal service where only 1.25 billion goes to making sure voting ballots are legit. The other 23.5 billion is going to upgrading the facilities so they are more attractive to potential buyers for her husbands firm. Corrupt to the core. It's true that Speaker Pelosi's husband Paul Pelosi owns and operates Financial Leasing Services, a San Francisco-based investment company. Financial disclosures in 2018, the most recent available, show Speaker Pelosi's estimated net worth to be $114 million. owns estimated But Speaker Pelosi doesn't sit on the House Appropriations Committee. Her spokesman Drew Hammill told us by email she hasn't been on the committee since 2002. Furthermore, we found no evidence that a bill to sell off $9 billion-worth of federally-owned U.S. Postal Service property exists. doesn't sit It's true that the U.S. House of Representatives passed a bill that would, if signed into law, provide $25 billion to shore up the Postal Service and rectify delays in mail delivery service, but it doesn't allocate $1.25 billion toward "making sure voting ballots are legit." The funding was originally on the table during negotiations over a coronavirus stimulus package, but those negotiations broke down. Whether the stand-alone Postal Service funding bill will be signed into law by U.S. President Donald Trump seems unlikely. bill originally unlikely The meme seems to be a rehash of a similar one that dates back to 2013 except in that case the subject of the claim was Richard Blum, the husband of U.S. Sen. Diane Feinstein, D-Calif., who like Pelosi hails from San Francisco. similar one Mikkelson, David. "Did Dianne Feinstein Get Her Husbands Company a USPS Contract?" Snopes. 23 April 2013. Rayome, Alison DeNisco. "What the New USPS Bill Means for the Next Stimulus Package." CNET. 24 August 2020. Pramuk, Jacob. "House Passes Bill to Put $25 Billion Into USPS and Reverse Changes Amid Uproar." CNBC. 22 August 2020. Henney, Megan. "How Much Money is Nancy Pelosi Worth?" Yahoo! News. 17 July 2020. Wildermuth, John. "Pelosi's Husband Prefers a Low Profile." San Francisco Chronicle. 1 January 2007.

False

It's true that Speaker Pelosi's husband Paul Pelosi owns and operates Financial Leasing Services, a San Francisco-based investment company. Financial disclosures in 2018, the most recent available, show Speaker Pelosi's estimated net worth to be $114 million.But Speaker Pelosi doesn't sit on the House Appropriations Committee. Her spokesman Drew Hammill told us by email she hasn't been on the committee since 2002. Furthermore, we found no evidence that a bill to sell off $9 billion-worth of federally-owned U.S. Postal Service property exists.It's true that the U.S. House of Representatives passed a bill that would, if signed into law, provide $25 billion to shore up the Postal Service and rectify delays in mail delivery service, but it doesn't allocate $1.25 billion toward "making sure voting ballots are legit." The funding was originally on the table during negotiations over a coronavirus stimulus package, but those negotiations broke down. Whether the stand-alone Postal Service funding bill will be signed into law by U.S. President Donald Trump seems unlikely.The meme seems to be a rehash of a similar one that dates back to 2013 except in that case the subject of the claim was Richard Blum, the husband of U.S. Sen. Diane Feinstein, D-Calif., who like Pelosi hails from San Francisco.

FMD_train_900

'Diesel Brothers' Facebook Giveaway Scam Targets Users After Rittenhouse Acquittal

11/23/2021

In mid-November 2021, scammers targeted social media users who shared a popular post from 2020. The Facebook scam improperly used the names and faces of Diesel Power Gear and "Diesel Brothers," a Discovery Channel television show. Their likenesses were used without permission in posts that promised thousands of dollars to entrants who followed certain steps and simply showed that they had downloaded the Stash finance app. On June 26, 2020, Kevin Passons, a pastor at Cornerstone Pentecostal Church in Grand Saline, Texas, and his wife, Kim, shared a meme on Facebook. It was posted in the aftermath of demonstrations that followed the murder of George Floyd. The meme read: "We need to establish a new law. Anybody caught rioting and looting, who is also on welfare, will forfeit their benefits for life. Instead, we'll redirect that money to the businesses that suffered a loss." The post from 2020 received a wave of new shares in November 2021. The meme had been shared thousands of times in the summer of 2020 and continued to receive shares throughout 2021. According to The New York Times, the picture was captured around August 16, 2014. It showed Mustafa Alshalabi cleaning up damage at Sams Meat Market after his store was looted during unrest in Ferguson, Missouri. The violent demonstrations occurred in the aftermath of the fatal shooting of Michael Brown, a Black man who was gunned down by a white police officer. Around November 19, 2021, the months-old Facebook post saw a sizable spike in shares following the verdict that acquitted Kyle Rittenhouse. Rittenhouse was on trial after being accused of shooting and killing two people and wounding another in Kenosha, Wisconsin, on August 25, 2020. After the Rittenhouse acquittal, the June 2020 Facebook post from the Passons was shared at least an additional 100,000 times over the course of just four days. As of November 23, it had a total of 326,000 shares. Within the new shares were a seemingly countless number of comments from scammers named N'k Santri Nalangsa, Akang Erik Terterter, Arra Razqisyaai HarimNna Mull, Ella Sisca, and likely many others. (The Passons had nothing to do with the scam.) The comments often read either "check my profile you win" or "you win check my profile." Other messages included: "Visit my profile, do it with faith. You have become the winner, which I specifically chose." We also noticed: "I chose you specifically, please visit my profile and fill out the registration form." Comments like these were added to posts as soon as Facebook users shared the meme. On the Facebook profiles, the scammers falsely claimed to be affiliated with Diesel Brothers and Diesel Power Gear. They stated that all users needed to do was follow several steps and install the Stash finance app to be entered to win $10,000. The steps also involved visiting a sites.google.com website for registration, as these kinds of scams often do. The scammers' posts included messages like: "DAVE SPARKS OFFICIAL GIVEAWAY FOR ALL COUNTRIES FOR LUCKY EVERYONE TODAY! I will pick random people to get a $10,000 prize for the 20 chosen winners!!! Congratulations to the people I commented 'YOU WIN,' and all you have to do now is follow the prompts and complete the registration according to the procedure; STEP 1: 'LIKE and SHARE this post and send a private message (HELLO)'; STEP 2: 'REGISTER immediately here (The registration link is in the comments)'; STEP 3: 'Please install the STASH application. After it is installed, please open it and complete your personal data correctly. Send proof of registration in the form (screenshot) in the comments column or message when it's finished & say it is done. Wait a few minutes to receive a gift from me because it has to be processed. Prizes will be sent after you have successfully registered the data correctly, and you will each receive a cash prize of $10,000.' This program is sponsored by several films. I hope this is useful because not everyone is as lucky as you. God bless you." To be clear, there was no evidence that Stash Finance, the company behind the app, had anything to do with the scam. Furthermore, it's true that the real Diesel Brothers and Diesel Power Gear Facebook pages have posted about legitimate giveaways in the past. However, this scam from accounts that asked users to visit their profiles should be avoided. Scams like these could lead to phishing, theft of financial or personal information, or other negative outcomes. A glance at the scammers' profiles showed that they likely originated from Indonesia. While some longtime readers might believe that it should be obvious that these offers are not legitimate, it's important to keep in mind that not all Facebook users are alike. The Akang Erik Terterter scammer profile alone had been followed nearly 2,000 times. It's likely that at least a handful of those followers went through the steps in an attempt to sign up for the Diesel Brothers Facebook scam or another one in the past. This one profile alone had nearly 2,000 followers, perhaps showing how many Facebook users fell for this scam or others in the past. Aside from the four accounts we found, there were likely other profiles used for the scam. Facebook limits the number of comments that a user can make in a short period of time. It was evident that the scammers had a stack of accounts that they used in rotation to keep the ruse going. In summary, neither Diesel Brothers nor Diesel Power Gear were giving away thousands of dollars on Facebook to entrants who followed steps and downloaded the Stash finance app. It was simply a scam that appeared to be run from Indonesia.

False

In mid-November 2021, scammers set their sights on social media users who shared a popular post from 2020. The Facebook scam improperly used the names and faces of Diesel Power Gear and "Diesel Brothers," a Discovery Channel television show. Their likeness was used without permission in posts that promised thousands of dollars to entrants who followed steps and simply showed that they downloaded the Stash finance app.On June 26, 2020, Kevin Passons, a pastor at Cornerstone Pentecostal Church in Grand Saline, Texas, and his wife, Kim, shared a meme on Facebook. It was posted in the aftermath of demonstrations that followed the murder of George Floyd. The meme read: "We need to establish a new law. Anybody caught rioting and looting, who is also on welfare, will forfeit their benefits for life. Instead, we'll redirect that money to the businesses that suffered a loss." The post from 2020 received a wave of new shares in November 2021.According to The New York Times, the picture was captured around Aug. 16, 2014. It showed Mustafa Alshalabi cleaning up damage at Sams Meat Market after his store was looted during unrest in Ferguson, Missouri. The violent demonstrations came in the aftermath of the fatal shooting of Michael Brown, a Black man who was gunned down by a white police officer.Around Nov. 19, 2021, the months-old Facebook post saw a sizable spike in shares in the aftermath of the verdict that acquitted Kyle Rittenhouse. Rittenhouse was on trial after being accused of shooting and killing two people and wounding another in Kenosha, Wisconsin, on August 25, 2020.Within the new shares were a seemingly countless number of comments visible from scammers named N'k Santri Nalangsa, Akang Erik Terterter, Arra Razqisyaai HarimNna Mull, Ella Sisca, and likely many others. (The Passons had nothing to do with the scam.) Comments like these were added to posts as soon as Facebook users shared the meme.To be clear, there was no evidence that Stash Finance, the company behind the app, had anything to do with the scam. Further, it's true that the real Diesel Brothers and Diesel Power Gear Facebook pages have posted about legitimate giveaways in the past. However, this scam from accounts that asked users to visit their profiles should be avoided. Scams like these could lead to phishing, theft of financial or personal information, or other negative outcomes. A glance at the scammers' profiles showed that they likely originated from Indonesia.The Akang Erik Terterter scammer profile alone had been followed nearly 2,000 times. It's likely that at least a handful of those followers went through the steps in an attempt to sign up for the Diesel Brothers Facebook scam or another one in the past. This one profile alone had nearly 2,000 followers, perhaps showing how many Facebook users fell for this scam or other ones in the past.

FMD_train_874

Did Dr. Oz Endorse Keto Weight Loss Gummies?

05/30/2023

Despite what online scammers might have you believe, Dr. Mehmet Oz of the former "Dr. Oz" talk show has never endorsed apple cider vinegar (ACV) weight loss gummies or any sort of CBD or keto diet gummies. According to scammy websites where customers can purchase many of these kinds of products, Oz once called keto gummies the "holy grail" of weight loss. However, he never said anything of the sort. A seemingly countless number of product websites falsely claim that Oz gave his endorsement of weight loss gummies. A few recent examples of the Oz scam appearing on order pages included the product namesRetroFit Keto + ACV Gummies, XtremeFit Keto + ACV Gummies, Optimal Keto + ACV Gummies, Speedy Keto + ACV Gummies, Transform Keto + ACV Gummies, and Ketoviva Keto + ACV Gummies. RetroFit Keto + ACV Gummies XtremeFit Keto + ACV Gummies Optimal Keto + ACV Gummies Speedy Keto + ACV Gummies Transform Keto + ACV Gummies Ketoviva Keto + ACV Gummies While some of the websites for these products have since disappeared, we were able to confirm that they all originally promoted Oz's name. Again, these were just a few recent examples. Going back to 2022, it's possible hundreds of more keto gummy product names falsely mentioned that Oz endorsed them. The websites for these purported weight loss products promised that the candy-like gummies can "melt fat fast without diet or exercise." Always remember with online offers that if something seems too good to be true, it probably is. These websites alsofalsely claimed that CBS News, NBC, CNN, Women's Health, Honolulu Magazine, Woman's World, and theDiabetes, Obesity, and Metabolism Journal all endorsed, reviewed, or mentioned the products. In truth, none of them ever did. Parent company information for many keto diet weight loss gummies products is often hard to find. Phone numbers for customer support, if they haven't been omitted from the websites, route to call centers that greet customers in a general sense without announcing any company names. Most of them simply begin with, "Thank you for calling customer service." We previously asked one of the call center agents to reveal parent company information or anything about the whereabouts of the people behind the gummy websites. The person provided no details. In our research, we found that many customers who received these products at their doorstep and found a charge on their credit card said that they had no recollection of ever ordering them. Other commenters said that, in addition to not remembering ordering the keto gummies, they also found no charge on their credit card. It's possible that this could have occurred because ofcard-skimming scams, when a criminal places a device on top of a credit card reader at a place of business, all to secretly capture the card's sensitive data. card-skimming scams Customers who shared their experiences also said that the return address for these weight loss gummy products that bore Oz's name was a nameless "fulfillment center" with a P.O. Box in Smyrna, Tennessee, or Las Vegas, Nevada. Many others also said that Tampa, Florida, was the city mentioned on their packages. Oz While a package at the door is the last step of some of these scams, the first step oftentimes involves an alluring paid ad. This kind of an ad might appear next to an article on a website or on Facebook or Instagram. Clicking on the ad leads to the second step: a fake article that scammers designed to fool readers into believing they're reading from Fox News, CNN, ABC, or other big-name news organizations. While these kinds of fake articles might look like the website for one of those companies, the address bar at the top of the browser reveals the truth that the user is not, in fact, on cnn.com, for example, but instead on a strange scam website that's simply pretending to be CNN simply by featuring its logo and article page design. Within the fake articles are links to the third step in the scam: the aforementioned product order pages that misleadingly mention Oz's name. On these pages people fill out their credit card information, a move that, apparently unbeknownst to the customers, enrolls them in recurring charges of hundreds of dollars per month. As we've done in the past, we'll continue to provide more reporting about these dangerous and costly scams in the future. in the past Note: In the past, Ozfaced allegations of promoting a "magic weight-loss cure" for "green coffee extract." However, this had nothing to do with weight loss gummies. allegations Gabriel, Trip. "'Magic' Weight-Loss Pills and Covid Cures: Dr. Oz Under the Microscope." The New York Times, 26 Dec. 2021, https://www.nytimes.com/2021/12/26/us/politics/dr-oz-medical-advice.html. Liles, Jordan. "Did Oprah Winfrey Suffer a 'Tragedy' and Endorse Keto Weight Loss Gummies?" Snopes, 12 May 2022, https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/oprah-winfrey-tragedy-keto-gummies/. ---. "Oprah Winfrey 'Allegations' Facebook Ads Are False, Nor Did She Ever Endorse 'Weight Loss Gummies.'" Snopes, 13 Jan. 2023, https://www.snopes.com/news/2023/01/13/oprah-winfrey-allegations-weight-loss-gummies/. Smith, Daeshen. "Better Business Bureau Warns Customers to Be Mindful of Card Skimming Schemes." Fox10TV.com, 25 Apr. 2023, https://www.fox10tv.com/2023/04/25/better-business-bureau-warns-customers-be-mindful-card-skimming-schemes/.

False

A few recent examples of the Oz scam appearing on order pages included the product namesRetroFit Keto + ACV Gummies, XtremeFit Keto + ACV Gummies, Optimal Keto + ACV Gummies, Speedy Keto + ACV Gummies, Transform Keto + ACV Gummies, and Ketoviva Keto + ACV Gummies.In our research, we found that many customers who received these products at their doorstep and found a charge on their credit card said that they had no recollection of ever ordering them. Other commenters said that, in addition to not remembering ordering the keto gummies, they also found no charge on their credit card. It's possible that this could have occurred because ofcard-skimming scams, when a criminal places a device on top of a credit card reader at a place of business, all to secretly capture the card's sensitive data.Customers who shared their experiences also said that the return address for these weight loss gummy products that bore Oz's name was a nameless "fulfillment center" with a P.O. Box in Smyrna, Tennessee, or Las Vegas, Nevada. Many others also said that Tampa, Florida, was the city mentioned on their packages.As we've done in the past, we'll continue to provide more reporting about these dangerous and costly scams in the future.Note: In the past, Ozfaced allegations of promoting a "magic weight-loss cure" for "green coffee extract." However, this had nothing to do with weight loss gummies.

FMD_train_1609

Trombone Death

11/10/2004

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

False

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

FMD_train_1299

In the 1950s and 1960s, the minimum wage was such that it would lift you out of poverty.

06/15/2014

In the battle to raise the federal minimum wage, proponents have been arguing that the minimum wage now buys far less than it has in the past, and is no longer high enough to lift someone out of poverty. Duringa May 1 speechon the floor of the U.S. Senate, Jack Reed (D-RI) offered a version of that argument. The federal minimum wage has not been increased since 2009 and today an individual who works 40 hours per week, 52 weeks a year, at the federal minimum wage earns $15,080 per year, and that is nearly $5,000 below the federal poverty level for a family of three, and almost $9,000 below the poverty level for a family of four, he said. People who work hard for a living shouldn't have to live in poverty, and that was not the case in the 50s and the 60s when the minimum wage was such that it would lift you out of poverty, Reed said. And I think that's what we have to do today. Reed supports a proposal to raise the minimum wage to $10.10, which would bring a family of three above the poverty threshold. For this fact check, we are going to examine whether the minimum wage was really high enough in the 1950s and 1960s to pull people out of poverty. We asked Reed's spokesman for the source of his statistic. While we waited for a response, we looked on our own. Forhistorical minimum wage data, we went to the U.S. Department of Labor. During the time period Reed was talking about, the minimum rose six times, starting at 40 cents per hour and eventually reaching $1.60. How much did it take to lift someone out of poverty during that era? That's a much harder question to answer, and it depends on the size of the family, something Reed wasn't specific about. The federal poverty level, the adequacy of which is stillthe subject of debate, wasn't developed until the early 1960s, so it wasn't even in existence during the start of the time period Reed was talking about. Thefirst poverty threshold, in 1963, was about $3,100 for a family of four. Someone earning the minimum wage that year would have earned $2,460, enough for a family of three but not a family of four, according to theSocial Welfare and the Economy pageon the Social Security Administration's Office of Retirement and Disability Policy website. Those data only go back to 1959. We used acost of living calculatorfrom the Bureau of Labor Statistics to get a rough idea of living costs from 1950 through 1958. According to our calculations, throughout the 1950s and 1960s, the minimum wage was high enough to keep an individual above the poverty level The first time it was enough to push a two-person family above the poverty level was in 1956, when it jumped to $1 an hour. But throughout the 1950s and 1960s, in most years, the minimum wage couldnt lift a family of three out of poverty and was never enough for a family of four. When we shared our information with Reed's office, they provided information that confirmed our findings. Reed spokesman Chip Unruh said the senators statement about the minimum wage and poverty levels in the 50s and 60s is accurate. I think it is very clear that Reed is talking about his perception that hard work used to get you a livable wage, he said. The federal poverty rate as measured today didn't always exist as a unit of measurement, but that doesn't mean poverty itself didn't exist . Reed referenced families earlier in his speech, but he also was referencing individuals. Our ruling Sen. Jack Reed, lobbying for an increase in the minimum wage, said that in the 1950s and 1960s, the minimum wage was such that it would lift you out of poverty. We found that during that period, the minimum wage always generated enough income to keep an individual out of poverty. But when it comes to making enough money to support a family -- and Reed made several references to families -- that wasn't always true during those two decades. Based on federal data, the minimum wage didn't become high enough to support a two-person family until about 1956 and it wasn't consistently high enough to lift a family of three until 1967. It never covered a family of four, regarded as a typical family size in that era. One might assume that Reed was talking about families, but the statement we're checking isn't specific. Because that statement is accurate but needs clarification or additional information, we rate itMostly True. (If you have a claim youd likePolitiFact Rhode Islandto check, email us at[email protected]. And follow us on Twitter: @politifactri.)

True

Duringa May 1 speechon the floor of the U.S. Senate, Jack Reed (D-RI) offered a version of that argument.Forhistorical minimum wage data, we went to the U.S. Department of Labor. During the time period Reed was talking about, the minimum rose six times, starting at 40 cents per hour and eventually reaching $1.60.The federal poverty level, the adequacy of which is stillthe subject of debate, wasn't developed until the early 1960s, so it wasn't even in existence during the start of the time period Reed was talking about.Thefirst poverty threshold, in 1963, was about $3,100 for a family of four.Someone earning the minimum wage that year would have earned $2,460, enough for a family of three but not a family of four, according to theSocial Welfare and the Economy pageon the Social Security Administration's Office of Retirement and Disability Policy website.Those data only go back to 1959. We used acost of living calculatorfrom the Bureau of Labor Statistics to get a rough idea of living costs from 1950 through 1958.One might assume that Reed was talking about families, but the statement we're checking isn't specific. Because that statement is accurate but needs clarification or additional information, we rate itMostly True.(If you have a claim youd likePolitiFact Rhode Islandto check, email us at[email protected]. And follow us on Twitter: @politifactri.)

FMD_train_1019

Death of Leelah Alcorn

12/30/2014

Claim: A transgender teenage girl, Leelah Alcorn, committed suicide and left a note explaining why on her Tumblr. Example: [Collected via e-mail, December 2014] I read A suicide letter on Face Book supposedly from a 17 year old transgender named Josh Alcorn. Is this a factual story? Origins: On 29 December 2014, Cincinnati City Council member Chris Seelbach posted an image on Facebook of a transgender teen girl he identified as Leelah Alcorn, aged 17, and stated: Some very sad news to share. Yesterday, a 17 year old committed suicide by jumping in front of a semi on I-71 near the South Lebanon exit. It has come to light that this person likely committed suicide because she was transgender. While Cincinnati led the country this past year as the first city in the mid-west to include transgender inclusive health benefits and we have included gender identity or expression as a protected class for many years.... the truth is.... it is still extremely difficult to be a transgender young person in this country. We have to do better. By reading her letter, Leelah makes it clear she wants her death to, in some way, help "trans civil rights movements." Please join me in making a donation (investment in our trans kids) right now to TransOhio. Appended to the post was the full text of an apparent suicide note left by Leelah Alcorn. Its text was published to the teen's Tumblr account, and it appeared to have been scheduled by her to auto-post to the blog after a particular date and time. That post was followed by an additional note addressing individuals to whom Alcorn was close, and both were visible on her active Tumblr page on the night of 29 December 2014. Tumblr The note began: If you are reading this, it means that I have committed suicide and obviously failed to delete this post from my queue. Please don't be sad, it's for the better. The life I would've lived isn't worth living in ... because I'm transgender. I could go into detail explaining why I feel that way, but this note is probably going to be lengthy enough as it is. To put it simply, I feel like a girl trapped in a boy's body, and I've felt that way ever since I was 4. I never knew there was a word for that feeling, nor was it possible for a boy to become a girl, so I never told anyone and I just continued to do traditionally "boyish" things to try to fit in. When I was 14, I learned what transgender meant and cried of happiness. After 10 years of confusion I finally understood who I was. I immediately told my mom, and she reacted extremely negatively, telling me that it was a phase, that I would never truly be a girl, that God doesn't make mistakes, that I am wrong. If you are reading this, parents, please don't tell this to your kids. Even if you are Christian or are against transgender people don't ever say that to someone, especially your kid. That won't do anything but make them hate them self. That's exactly what it did to me. My mom started taking me to a therapist, but would only take me to christian therapists, (who were all very biased) so I never actually got the therapy I needed to cure me of my depression. I only got more christians telling me that I was selfish and wrong and that I should look to God for help. When I was 16 I realized that my parents would never come around, and that I would have to wait until I was 18 to start any sort of transitioning treatment, which absolutely broke my heart. The longer you wait, the harder it is to transition. I felt hopeless, that I was just going to look like a man in drag for the rest of my life. On my 16th birthday, when I didn't receive consent from my parents to start transitioning, I cried myself to sleep. I formed a sort of a "fuck you" attitude towards my parents and came out as gay at school, thinking that maybe if I eased into coming out as trans it would be less of a shock. Although the reaction from my friends was positive, my parents were pissed. They felt like I was attacking their image, and that I was an embarrassment to them. They wanted me to be their perfect little straight christian boy, and that's obviously not what I wanted. So they took me out of public school, took away my laptop and phone, and forbid me of getting on any sort of social media, completely isolating me from my friends. This was probably the part of my life when I was the most depressed, and I'm surprised I didn't kill myself. I was completely alone for 5 months. No friends, no support, no love. Just my parent's disappointment and the cruelty of loneliness. At the end of the school year, my parents finally came around and gave me my phone and let me back on social media. I was excited, I finally had my friends back. They were extremely excited to see me and talk to me, but only at first. Eventually they realized they didn't actually give a shit about me, and I felt even lonelier than I did before. The only friends I thought I had only liked me because they saw me five times a week. After a summer of having almost no friends plus the weight of having to think about college, save money for moving out, keep my grades up, go to church each week and feel like shit because everyone there is against everything I live for, I have decided I've had enough. I'm never going to transition successfully, even when I move out. I'm never going to be happy with the way I look or sound. I'm never going to have enough friends to satisfy me. I'm never going to have enough love to satisfy me. I'm never going to find a man who loves me. I'm never going to be happy. Either I live the rest of my life as a lonely man who wishes he were a woman or I live my life as a lonelier woman who hates herself. There's no winning. There's no way out. I'm sad enough already, I don't need my life to get any worse. People say "it gets better" but that isn't true in my case. It gets worse. Each day I get worse. That's the gist of it, that's why I feel like killing myself. Sorry if that's not a good enough reason for you, it's good enough for me. As for my will, I want 100% of the things that I legally own to be sold and the money (plus my money in the bank) to be given to trans civil rights movements and support groups, I don't give a shit which one. The only way I will rest in peace is if one day transgender people aren't treated the way I was, they're treated like humans, with valid feelings and human rights. Gender needs to be taught about in schools, the earlier the better. My death needs to mean something. My death needs to be counted in the number of transgender people who commit suicide this year. I want someone to look at that number and say "that's fucked up" and fix it. Fix society. Please. Goodbye,(Leelah) Josh Alcorn A local news outlet reported Alcorn was killed through being struck by a tractor-trailer: reported Joshua Alcorn, 17, of Kings Mills, was in the road near the South Lebanon exit just before 2:30 a.m. when a tractor-trailer operated by Abdullahi Ahmed, 39, of Florence, hit the boy, according to police reports. Alcorn was transported from the scene by the Warren County Coroner's Office. Alcorn's mother acknowledged her death on Facebook, and a photograph of the teen used in news reports matches the physical appearance of the person shown in the picture displayed at the head of this page. The basic circumstances involving the teen, her name, and the details of her death line up with news coverage, and city council member Chris Seelbach later stated several friends of Leelah's and the teen's pastor confirmed she had published the Tumblr message reproduced above. news reports Last updated: 30 December 2014 Cincinnati.com. "Boy, 17, Hit and Killed by Semi on I-71." 28 December 2014.

True

Appended to the post was the full text of an apparent suicide note left by Leelah Alcorn. Its text was published to the teen's Tumblr account, and it appeared to have been scheduled by her to auto-post to the blog after a particular date and time. That post was followed by an additional note addressing individuals to whom Alcorn was close, and both were visible on her active Tumblr page on the night of 29 December 2014.A local news outlet reported Alcorn was killed through being struck by a tractor-trailer: Alcorn's mother acknowledged her death on Facebook, and a photograph of the teen used in news reports matches the physical appearance of the person shown in the picture displayed at the head of this page. The basic circumstances involving the teen, her name, and the details of her death line up with news coverage, and city council member Chris Seelbach later stated several friends of Leelah's and the teen's pastor confirmed she had published the Tumblr message reproduced above.

FMD_train_1755

Danny Trejo Death Hoax

09/09/2018

On 9 September 2018, the website Your Daily News published an article headlined "Danny Trejo: The Famous Native American Actor Dies at Age 74." Curiously, however, the article provided no details about the time or manner of Trejo's alleged passing, nor did it even mention Trejo's death; it simply offered a summary of the actor's life and career. Danny Trejo was born Dan Trejo in Echo Park, Los Angeles, to Alice (Rivera) and Dan Trejo, a construction worker. With his intimidating, tattooed, muscle-bound appearance, character actor Danny Trejo has built a successful career as the all-purpose hard case throughout his curious and enduring cinematic journey. Beating the odds of repeat offender syndrome after being released from prison, Trejo has risen through the ranks to find himself in high demand as an actor and has even expanded his talents to include a producer credit on his résumé. That lack of information is not surprising, as the article was a hoax—Danny Trejo is not dead and is still actively posting on social media: "Rest in peace Burt Reynolds. You were an icon and one of my heroes." -DT pic.twitter.com/0fKZhaKpuH Danny Trejo (@officialDannyT) September 6, 2018. The only source reporting Trejo's death in September 2018 was Your Daily News, a site that had only been active for a very short time and, as of this writing, was no longer reachable. Moreover, Trejo himself has previously been the subject of celebrity death hoax rumors, which he has personally disclaimed: "DANNY TREJO IS NOT DEAD." Danny Trejo (@officialDannyT) November 8, 2016.

False

Rest in peace Burt Reynolds. You were an icon and one of my heroes. -DT pic.twitter.com/0fKZhaKpuH Danny Trejo (@officialDannyT) September 6, 2018The only source reporting Trejo's death in September 2018 was Your Daily News, a site which had only been active a very short time and as of this writing was no longer reachable.Moreover, Trejo himself has previously been the subject of celebrity death hoax rumors (which he has personally disclaimed): Danny Trejo (@officialDannyT) November 8, 2016

FMD_train_50

Did President Trump Establish a 'Religious Office' in the White House?

05/04/2018

On 3 May 2018, the "Occupy Democrats" Facebook page posted a meme which claimed that the president had violated the constitutional separation of church and state by setting up a "religious office": meme President Trump did sign an executive order in May 2018 to establish a new faith-based initiative within the White House, but nobody from his administration called it a "religious office" that description appears to have come from Occupy Democrats. Furthermore, Trump's initiative represents significant continuity of, rather than a departure from, the previous two administrations. Although every detail and working of the new initiative has not yet been outlined, it certainly does not represent a radical change. Trump's White House Faith and Opportunity Initiative bears a striking resemblance to the White House Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives, which George W. Bush set up in 2001, and which Barack Obama continued during his administration but renamed the White House Office of Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships. set up renamed In brief, Trump's executive order which he signed on 3 May 2018, the National Day of Prayer replaces the White House Office of Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships with the White House Faith and Opportunity Initiative, keeping it within the Executive Office of the President of the United States. executive order The executive order also sets out the following: Beyond that, Trump's order is somewhat vague on the exact workings of the initiative and the duties of the advisor who will lead it: One potentially significant provision in the executive order calls for those in charge of the Faith and Opportunity Initiative to contact the Attorney General if they see potential executive branch violations of a religious liberty memorandum published by Attorney General Jeff Sessions in October 2017. The Sessions memorandum reiterated the positions set out by Trump in an earlier executive order, in which the President wrote: memorandum executive order It shall be the policy of the executive branch to vigorously enforce Federal laws robust protections for religious freedom.... All executive departments and agencies (agencies) shall, to the greatest extent practicable and to the extent permitted by law, respect and protect the freedom of persons and organizations to engage in religious and political speech. President Trump has prioritized enhancing legal protections for religious freedom, including when it comes to obligations placed on faith-based organizations that receive federal funding, the freedom of employers and employees to abstain from practices (particularly in health care) which they feel compromise their religious beliefs, and in calling for an end to the Johnson Amendment, a long-standing provision that bars religious 501 (c)(3) non-profit groups from engaging in electoral activism. prioritized provision In his 2001 executive order establishing the Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives, President George W. Bush emphasized that a driving force behind the policy was a desire to "level the playing field" in the disbursement of federal funding, and enhance the funding opportunities available for religious non-profit organizations especially those focused on poverty, addiction, crime and other social issues: executive order The paramount goal is compassionate results, and private and charitable community groups, including religious ones, should have the fullest opportunity permitted by law to compete on a level playing field, so long as they achieve valid public purposes, such as curbing crime, conquering addiction, strengthening families and neighborhoods, and overcoming poverty. This delivery of social services must be results oriented and should value the bedrock principles of pluralism, nondiscrimination, evenhandedness, and neutrality. The Occupy Democrats meme is largely accurate. In May 2018, Trump did indeed establish an initiative within the White House which would give faith-based organizations what the administration called a "voice in the White House." However, the description of the initiative as a "religious office" did not come from the Trump administration itself, and that is not its official name. called Furthermore, Trump's 2018 initiative represents significant continuity from predecessor offices set up by George W. Bush in 2001 and Barack Obama in 2009, although the exact focus, workings, and influence of Trump's initiative remain to be seen. On 5 May, the "Being Liberal" Facebook page and web site published an article with the headline "Trump quietly signed an Executive Order allowing government to fund religious groups." article This is very misleading, and ignores the fact that the federal government has been providing grants, funding and tax write-offs to religious non-profit organizations for many years, including during the Obama administration. Trump's creation of the White House Faith and Opportunity Initiative did not usher in that state of affairs. Bush, President George W. "Executive Order 13199 -- Establishment of White House Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives." The American Presidency Project/UCSB. 29 January 2001. Obama, President Barack. "Executive Order 13498 -- Amendments to Executive Order 13199 and Establishment of the President's Advisory Council for Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships." Federal Register. 5 February 2009. Trump, President Donald J. "Executive Order on the Establishment of a White House Faith and Opportunity Initiative." White House. 3 May 2018. Sessions, Jeff. "Memorandum for All Executive Departments and Agencies -- Federal Law Protections for Religious Liberty." Office of the U.S. Attorney General. 6 October 2017. Trump, President Donald J. "Presidential Executive Order Promoting Free Speech and Religious Liberty." White House. 4 May 2017. White House. "Fact Sheet -- President Donald J. Trump Stands Up for Religious Freedom In the United States." White House. 3 May 2018. Updated [8 May 2018]: Added examination of "Being Liberal" article.

True

On 3 May 2018, the "Occupy Democrats" Facebook page posted a meme which claimed that the president had violated the constitutional separation of church and state by setting up a "religious office":Trump's White House Faith and Opportunity Initiative bears a striking resemblance to the White House Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives, which George W. Bush set up in 2001, and which Barack Obama continued during his administration but renamed the White House Office of Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships. In brief, Trump's executive order which he signed on 3 May 2018, the National Day of Prayer replaces the White House Office of Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships with the White House Faith and Opportunity Initiative, keeping it within the Executive Office of the President of the United States. The Sessions memorandum reiterated the positions set out by Trump in an earlier executive order, in which the President wrote:President Trump has prioritized enhancing legal protections for religious freedom, including when it comes to obligations placed on faith-based organizations that receive federal funding, the freedom of employers and employees to abstain from practices (particularly in health care) which they feel compromise their religious beliefs, and in calling for an end to the Johnson Amendment, a long-standing provision that bars religious 501 (c)(3) non-profit groups from engaging in electoral activism.In his 2001 executive order establishing the Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives, President George W. Bush emphasized that a driving force behind the policy was a desire to "level the playing field" in the disbursement of federal funding, and enhance the funding opportunities available for religious non-profit organizations especially those focused on poverty, addiction, crime and other social issues:The Occupy Democrats meme is largely accurate. In May 2018, Trump did indeed establish an initiative within the White House which would give faith-based organizations what the administration called a "voice in the White House." However, the description of the initiative as a "religious office" did not come from the Trump administration itself, and that is not its official name.On 5 May, the "Being Liberal" Facebook page and web site published an article with the headline "Trump quietly signed an Executive Order allowing government to fund religious groups."

FMD_train_1899

Did WEF Participant Shout Profanities at Klaus Schwab During 2024 Davos Meeting?

01/17/2024

In mid-January 2024, a viral video purportedly showed a participant at the 2024 World Economic Forum (WEF) in Davos, Switzerland, saying [expletive] you onstage to WEF Chairman Klaus Schwab. video The participant appears to stare down Schwab while standing on stage and adds, [expletive] your new world order. We the people were born free, we will stay free, and you and all of your globalist friends including everyone in this room can go [expletive] yourselves. The video was also uploaded to YouTube: It appeared to originate from Damon Imani, a content creator, on Jan. 16, 2024, as it had his name as a watermark on the top left. (@damonimani/X) Many online users reposted the video, including this post in French with the caption: A guest like no other, Damon Imani on stage at #WEF in Davos. reposted this post Some people appeared to think the video was authentic. It is a work of satire, however, as pointed out by Imani, the original creator and the man in the video. In a post below the original video, he wrote, Satire but true. This video is also available on Rumble here and Klaus Schwab can go f himself. Based on that statement, and the lack of any evidence at all confirming the incident happened, we rate this claim as Labeled Satire. creator According to his website (emphasis, ours): Damon Imani is an Iranian producer and artist based in Denmark, who creates video content related to various topics, including societal issues, news, and current events. Known for his satirical approach, Imani draws attention to societal and political issues through his work. With the tense political climate of the world in the 2016-20 era, Imani's content gained traction from social media users from both sides, as well as public figures such as Donald Trump, Joe Rogan, Alex Jones, Elon Musk, and many other influential figures. His work has also been featured in major media outlets such as USA Today, InfoWars, The Associated Press, BPR Politics And Business, and many more. It is also obvious from the contrast in lighting on Imani's face compared with the lighting on Schwab that Imani edited himself onto the WEF stage. Posting on X after his video gained more attention, Imani complained about the language of the community note being placed under his original video, writing, I've requested additional review. Even the language of this CN is laughable; 1. It links to my own notice. Duh! 2. Makes opinion based argument that I can't use "breaking" for something that's not breaking. This is a straightforward hijack of Community Notes to demonetize a very smart immigrant. writing This is not the first time we have fact checked false claims involving Schwab. The WEF, as we have reported in the past, is an influential, international, non-governmental organization known for fostering private-public partnerships around economy, international development, and more. The organization, which Schwab founded in 1971, is the target of many conspiracy theories surrounding its real-life ties to elite networks that online rumor-mongers believe are nefariously planning to create totalitarian regimes. first time reported influential founded conspiracy For background, here is why we sometimes write about satire/humor. why Ibrahim, Nur. Did WEF Say Humans Will All Wear a Uniform By 2030? Snopes, 7 July 2023, https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/wef-fashion-humans-uniforms/.Accessed 17 Jan. 2024. Imani, Damon. New? Start Here! Damon Imani, 15 Oct. 2018, https://damonimani.com/about.Accessed 17 Jan. 2024. Kasprak, Alex. Was World Economic Forum Vice Chairman Aboard the Collapsed Titan Submersible? Snopes, 23 June 2023, https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/wef-titan-submersible/.Accessed 17 Jan. 2024. LaMagdeleine, Izz Scott. No, the World Economic Forum Hasnt Ordered Governments to Legalize Marriage With Animals. Snopes, 7 Mar. 2023, https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/wef-legalize-marriage-animals/.Accessed 17 Jan. 2024. "World Economic Forum Archives." Snopes. https://www.snopes.com/tag/world-economic-forum/. Accessed 17 Jan. 2024.

False

In mid-January 2024, a viral video purportedly showed a participant at the 2024 World Economic Forum (WEF) in Davos, Switzerland, saying [expletive] you onstage to WEF Chairman Klaus Schwab.Many online users reposted the video, including this post in French with the caption: A guest like no other, Damon Imani on stage at #WEF in Davos.Some people appeared to think the video was authentic. It is a work of satire, however, as pointed out by Imani, the original creator and the man in the video. In a post below the original video, he wrote, Satire but true. This video is also available on Rumble here and Klaus Schwab can go f himself. Based on that statement, and the lack of any evidence at all confirming the incident happened, we rate this claim as Labeled Satire.Posting on X after his video gained more attention, Imani complained about the language of the community note being placed under his original video, writing, I've requested additional review. Even the language of this CN is laughable; 1. It links to my own notice. Duh! 2. Makes opinion based argument that I can't use "breaking" for something that's not breaking. This is a straightforward hijack of Community Notes to demonetize a very smart immigrant.This is not the first time we have fact checked false claims involving Schwab. The WEF, as we have reported in the past, is an influential, international, non-governmental organization known for fostering private-public partnerships around economy, international development, and more. The organization, which Schwab founded in 1971, is the target of many conspiracy theories surrounding its real-life ties to elite networks that online rumor-mongers believe are nefariously planning to create totalitarian regimes.For background, here is why we sometimes write about satire/humor.

FMD_train_1200

Is Russia Building an 'Immigrant Village' for Conservative Americans and Canadians?

01/19/2024

In May 2023, several American publications asserted that a "special village" for conservative Americans and Canadians was in development. Vice News described the potential village as a "MAGA colony." The New Republic reported that "Russian authorities" were apparently planning the creation of of "a special village outside Moscow dedicated to conservative-minded Americans and Canadians." described reported (The New Republic) A Russian immigration lawyer named Timur Beslangurov, who owns the domain name movetorussia.ru, is responsible for the claim. He has provided no concrete evidence the project is happening, but he made the assertion at the 11th St. Petersburg International Legal Forum, an event in which "representatives of the Russian and foreign legal community, business, and government [...] discussed the role and place of law in the modern world." Legal Forum State-run Russian media outlet RIA Novosti, a sponsor of the forum, ran a story about his remarks on May 11, 2023. Beslangurov claimed that tens of thousands of people wanted to move to Russia and that the project would be (or had been) financed by future settlers of the village and was approved by a regional government (via Google translate): a story A village will be built in the Moscow region for Americans and Canadians who want to immigrate to Russia, said Timur Beslangurov, a partner at the law firm VISTA Immigration, which provides assistance in obtaining Russian documents. [...] According to Beslangurov, tens of thousands of people would like to move to Russia - foreigners without Russian roots. According to him, although the project is financed by future settlers, the approval of the regional government was required. The project, he claimed, would begin sometime in 2024. As reported by Novosti, these westerners want to move to to avoid the "radical values" of their home countries and return to their Christian roots (via Google translate): reported The reason is the inculcation of radical values: today they have 70 genders, it is not known what will happen next. Many normal people emigrate, including considering Russia, but are faced with huge bureaucratic problems of Russian migration legislation, the lawyer explained. According to him, among those wishing to move there are also traditional Catholics who very strongly believe in the prophecy that Russia will remain the only Christian country in the world. Outside of these lofty statements made at a Kremlin-backed legal conference, Beslangurov has not provided any evidence of the project's reality. In May 2023, he told Vice News he had no information to give them: told VICE News contacted Beslangurov asking for further information on the reported project, and to speak with some of the hundreds of potential Western immigrants he said existed to help verify his claims, but he replied that he wasnt able to provide further information at this stage. By email, Snopes asked Beslangurov if any progress had been made on the village and if plans to begin construction in 2024 were on track. "Yes, we are working to make this happen," he responded. Beslangurov is not a "Russian authority," but a private lawyer who provides services for foreigners who wish to move to Russia. While he is evidently well connected, he is not an official voice of the Russian government. According to his Linkedin profile, he does "work closely with the federal agencies and the members and committees involved in the development of laws," however. profile Beslangurov's statements echo similar statements made by the Kremlin seemingly geared at western conservatives. The New Republic wrote that "Beslangurovs remarks [...] mirror the broader posturing of Russias government as traditional in comparison to the Wests supposed loose liberalism." wrote Beslangurov has regularly been cited on issues related to immigration to Russia and expatriate life in the international press. In 2022, he argued to the Daily Beast that "nothing good would happen" with western sanctions against Russia in response to their invasion of Ukraine and that the move would push Russia closer to China and India. In early 2023, his name appeared in an Indian outlet where he promoted a golden visa program aimed at recruiting Indian investors with offers of Russian residency. argued promoted Because no Russian "authority" is actively part of this project, and because the one person responsible for making the claim has thus far declined to provide evidence to support it, Snopes rates it Unproven. Chaudhury, Dipanjan Roy. Russian Golden Visa: Russian Gov Aims to Lure Indian Investors with New Residency Program. The Economic Times, 29 Jan. 2023. The Economic Times - The Times of India, https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/nri/migrate/russian-golden-visa-russian-gov-lures-indian-investors-with-new-residency-program/articleshow/97419768.cms. Hume, Tim. Russia Wants to Build a MAGA Colony for US Conservatives, Lawyer Claims. Vice, 12 May 2023, https://www.vice.com/en/article/xgwdew/russia-maga-colony. Kirsch, Noah. In Tears: Hollywoods Messy Breakup With Russias Weeping Elite. The Daily Beast, 3 Mar. 2022. www.thedailybeast.com, https://www.thedailybeast.com/celebrity-insider-bob-van-ronkel-on-hollywoods-messy-breakup-with-russias-oligarchs. Recap of the 11th St. Petersburg International Legal Forum. https://legalforum.info/en/news/itogi-xi-peterburgskogo-mezhdunarodnogo-juridicheskogo-foruma/. Accessed 19 Jan. 2024. Thakker, Prem, et al. Russia Wants to Build a Safe Space for Conservative Americans to Move To. The New Republic, 1 Nov. 2022. The New Republic, https://newrepublic.com/post/172710/russia-build-safe-space-conservative-americans-move. , . . , 20230511T1229, https://realty.ria.ru/20230511/derevnya-1871001155.html. Update [Jan. 20, 2024]: Added comment from Beslangurov.

NEI

In May 2023, several American publications asserted that a "special village" for conservative Americans and Canadians was in development. Vice News described the potential village as a "MAGA colony." The New Republic reported that "Russian authorities" were apparently planning the creation of of "a special village outside Moscow dedicated to conservative-minded Americans and Canadians."A Russian immigration lawyer named Timur Beslangurov, who owns the domain name movetorussia.ru, is responsible for the claim. He has provided no concrete evidence the project is happening, but he made the assertion at the 11th St. Petersburg International Legal Forum, an event in which "representatives of the Russian and foreign legal community, business, and government [...] discussed the role and place of law in the modern world."State-run Russian media outlet RIA Novosti, a sponsor of the forum, ran a story about his remarks on May 11, 2023. Beslangurov claimed that tens of thousands of people wanted to move to Russia and that the project would be (or had been) financed by future settlers of the village and was approved by a regional government (via Google translate):The project, he claimed, would begin sometime in 2024. As reported by Novosti, these westerners want to move to to avoid the "radical values" of their home countries and return to their Christian roots (via Google translate):Outside of these lofty statements made at a Kremlin-backed legal conference, Beslangurov has not provided any evidence of the project's reality. In May 2023, he told Vice News he had no information to give them:Beslangurov is not a "Russian authority," but a private lawyer who provides services for foreigners who wish to move to Russia. While he is evidently well connected, he is not an official voice of the Russian government. According to his Linkedin profile, he does "work closely with the federal agencies and the members and committees involved in the development of laws," however.Beslangurov's statements echo similar statements made by the Kremlin seemingly geared at western conservatives. The New Republic wrote that "Beslangurovs remarks [...] mirror the broader posturing of Russias government as traditional in comparison to the Wests supposed loose liberalism."Beslangurov has regularly been cited on issues related to immigration to Russia and expatriate life in the international press. In 2022, he argued to the Daily Beast that "nothing good would happen" with western sanctions against Russia in response to their invasion of Ukraine and that the move would push Russia closer to China and India. In early 2023, his name appeared in an Indian outlet where he promoted a golden visa program aimed at recruiting Indian investors with offers of Russian residency.

FMD_train_1072

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

10/30/2020

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

False

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

FMD_train_1197

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

05/08/2015

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

False

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

FMD_train_1156

Was an image of Patti LaBelle utilized by Fox News in the midst of their tribute to Aretha Franklin?

08/17/2018

On 16 August 2018, Aretha Franklin, the iconic Grammy Award-winning singer known as the "Queen of Soul," passed away at the age of 76. As fans took to social media to share their memories of the late soul singer, many of them noticed a curious graphic that had been shared by the official Fox News Twitter account. The news network used the same graphic in their television broadcast about Franklin's death. This graphic was of particular interest because while the foreground picture is that of Aretha Franklin, the woman in the green jacket seen in the background is not the Queen of Soul. That is actually an image of singer Patti LaBelle performing at the "Women of Soul: In Performance at the White House" concert in 2014. Jessica Santostefano, Vice President of the Media Desk at Fox News, issued an apology for the mistake. She stated, "We sincerely apologize to Aretha Franklin's family and friends. Our intention was to honor the icon using a secondary image of her performing with Patti LaBelle in the full-screen graphic, but the image of Ms. Franklin was obscured in that process, which we deeply regret." LaBelle and Franklin both performed at a 2014 White House concert, but the network's explanation for the error seemed questionable to some viewers because Franklin didn't appear at all in the photograph of LaBelle that formed the basis of the graphic. The original photograph, which was taken during LaBelle's performance of "Somewhere Over the Rainbow" by Reuters photographer Jonathan Ernst, can be seen below.

True

On 16 August 2018, Aretha Franklin, the iconic Grammy Award-winning singer known as the "Queen of Soul," passed away at the age of 76. As fans took to social media to share their memories of the late soul singer, many of them noticed a curious graphic that had been shared by the official Fox News Twitter account:The news network used the same graphic in their television broadcast about Franklin's death:This graphic was of particular interest because while the foreground picture is that of Aretha Franklin, the woman in the green jacket seen in the background is not the Queen of Soul. That is actually an image of singer Patti LaBelle performing at the "Women of Soul: In Performance at the White House concert in 2014:Yep here's video pic.twitter.com/IIkMDuKB7e Zachary Pleat (@zpleat) August 16, 2018Jessica Santostefano, Vice President -- Media Desk at Fox News, issued an apology for the mistake:LaBelle and Franklin both performed at a 2014 White House concert, but the network's explanation for the error seemed questionable to some viewers because Franklin didn't appear at all in the photograph of LaBelle that formed the basis of the graphic. The original photograph, which was taken during LaBelle's performance of "Somewhere Over the Rainbow" by Reuters photograph Jonathan Ernst, can be seen below:

FMD_train_1861

All of Donald Trump's achievements within a mere four-month timeframe?

05/24/2017

In May 2017, a Reddit user posted a graphic that purported to list all of President Trump's accomplishments during his first four months in office. It was then widely shared on social media: "Reddit TRUMP ACCOMPLISHMENTS ..Retweet the hell out of this to annoy @ABC @CBS @cnn @cnbc @MSNBC @nbc @nytimes @washingtonpost #dishonestmedia." Creating homebrew visual aids touting the accomplishments (or failures) of top politicians is a popular online pastime, not least because it's a cheap and easy way to propagandize, and because there are no pesky standards of fairness and accuracy to meet. As we've noted with regard to previous specimens (for example, a late-2016 meme touting the alleged economic achievements of President Obama), the graphic format lends itself to the display of cherry-picked facts to make a simplistic case with no semblance of context or nuance. In this case, the claim is that, despite all the carping in the mainstream press about "chaos" and "ineptitude" in the Oval Office, President Trump has actually accomplished quite a lot during his first four months as chief executive. Thus, you will not find mention of major campaign promises Trump has had difficulty keeping so far, such as instituting a Muslim immigration ban and building a wall on the Mexican border. Also, since it's very much a partisan case being made, there will be disagreement over what constitutes an "accomplishment." Some feats, such as reducing unemployment, are uncontroversial, while others, such as dismantling entire government agencies, aren't likely to be regarded as accomplishments by those who find the functions of those agencies critical. Here are the claims: 4.4 percent - lowest since May 2007. As reported in the Washington Post, government data released on May 5, 2017, indicated that the national unemployment rate hit a new low in April: The U.S. job market rebounded strongly last month, and the unemployment rate fell to the lowest level seen in a decade, government data released Friday morning showed, calming fears that had bubbled up in the past month about the state of the economy. Employers added 211,000 jobs in April as the unemployment rate ticked down to 4.4 percent, the lowest level since May 2007. It bears pointing out that the jobless rate had already been on a steady decline since 2010. Further, unemployment hit a previous nine-year low of 4.6 percent in December 2016 when President Obama was still in office. It climbed back up to 4.8 percent in January, dipped to 4.7 percent in February, and to 4.5 percent in March 2017. To what degree short-term improvements in the economy since January can be attributed to a new chief executive whose economic policies remain nascent is perennially up for debate, though according to The New York Times' senior economic correspondent Neil Irwin, a "Trump effect" that is buoying corporate hiring policies after the election cannot be ruled out. So does Mr. Trump deserve any credit for solid economic results? If you think the economy is driven by concrete, specific policies around taxes, spending, monetary policy, and regulation, the answer is no. If you think that what really matters is the mood in the executive suite, then just maybe. This is a mostly accurate, partial list of corporations that have announced investments in American facilities and/or jobs since the election of Donald Trump. With the exception of Bayer AG (which announced $8 billion in new investments, not $1 billion as claimed), the dollar amounts match those cited in press reports between January and April 2017 (sources: Softbank, Exxon Mobil Corp., Hyundai-Kia, Apple, Fiat Chrysler, General Motors, Bayer AG, Toyota, LG Electronics). It's not necessarily accurate to characterize all of these commitments as "accomplishments" of President Trump, however. As CBS Moneywatch's Irina Ivanova reported in January 2017, few of the jobs companies are promising to create in the U.S. can be attributed to a sudden renewed commitment to USA Inc. inspired by Trump's America First policies. Indeed, the businesses Trump has been quick to praise have been careful not to characterize their recent hiring announcements as new. And as usual with corporate investments of this scale, such plans are typically months or even years in the making, suggesting they long predate the presidential election. For example, Fiat Chrysler said their promise of a $1 billion investment in Michigan and Ohio plants, projected to create 2,000 jobs, was the "second phase" of an industrialization plan announced in 2016. GM's $1 billion investment was "several years in the making," according to sources cited by CBS. The largest of all the announced commitments, SoftBank's pledge of $50 billion, was also in the works long before Trump won the election: Another widely publicized corporate initiative that Trump trumpeted—a promise by SoftBank to create 50,000 high-tech jobs in the U.S.—was the result of a tech fund the company announced on October 14, three weeks before the election. Given the massive tech industry in the U.S., economists say much of the planned $50 billion investment would have found its way to the states regardless of who occupied the White House. You don't just decide overnight to invest $3 billion, said Nathan Jensen, a professor at the University of Texas who studies interactions between government and corporations. Bayer AG's commitment to an $8 billion investment and the creation of 3,000 U.S. jobs was announced by the Trump transition team after the president-elect met in January 2017 with the CEOs of Bayer AG and Monsanto, who are planning a merger. Transition spokesman Sean Spicer credited Trump's negotiating skills for the pledge, but some analysts were skeptical that the companies had actually promised anything that wasn't already on the table when plans for the merger were first revealed in September 2016. Bayer and Monsanto said in a joint statement after Spicer's remarks that the "combined company expects to spend approximately $16 billion in R&D in agriculture over the next six years with at least half of this investment made in the United States." That amounts to about $2.7 billion a year, which roughly equates to what the combined companies already spend in that area globally, [Wall Street analyst Jeremy] Redenius said. As for the U.S. breakdown, he estimates it's likely close to half already; Monsanto spends $1.5 billion a year, the majority of which is in the U.S., he said, and Bayer already invests in R&D here as well. "Not an increase, but not substantially cutting," he said of the global figure. The merger, which awaits U.S. regulatory approval, is not likely to be completed until 2018, CNBC reported. It is true that the U.S. Treasury reported a $182 billion budget surplus in April 2017, the largest April surplus since 2001 (and the second-largest in history), according to MarketWatch. It's unclear exactly how that surplus is attributable to President Trump, however. April is typically a surplus month because of tax receipts. In addition, citing a Congressional Budget Office (CBO) review as its source, the Associated Press reported that the April 2017 surplus was "inflated" because of a tax deadline change allowing corporations to pay federal taxes in April that in previous years were paid in March. It remains to be seen what effect Trump's policies will have on the budget deficit for 2017 as a whole (the fiscal year ends on September 30). The CBO projects a 4.6 percent drop in the deficit from what it was in 2016, but that is based on laws and policies already in effect when Trump took office. The stock market can be fickle. As of April 29, the Dow Jones Industrial Average was at 20,940.51, 6.12 percent higher than when Trump took office—positive movement, unquestionably. That number had risen to 20,981.94 by May 16, then plummeted 372 points the next day as the market was shaken by news that Trump had shared classified information with Russian diplomats in the White House and attempted to divert FBI Director James Comey from an investigation of Trump's alleged ties to Russia before he fired him. It's true that the Consumer Confidence Index, a metric assessing how ordinary consumers feel about the strength of the economy, hit 125.6 in March 2017, its highest point since 2000. It is also true that it fell five points to 120.3 the following month. Even so, it showed that consumers (as of April) had more confidence in the economy under Trump than under Obama, during whose administration the index never exceeded 113.7 (although it did manage to rise to that point after bottoming out in 2009 at 25). As of May 17, 2017, President Trump had signed 34 bills passed by Congress, a comparatively high number in such a short period of time (since Franklin Delano Roosevelt, who signed 76 pieces of legislation in his first 100 days, only Harry Truman, at 55, signed more). That's not to say that all of the legislation signed by Trump between January and May 2017 was necessarily noteworthy, however. One bill changed the name of a Veterans Affairs outpatient clinic in Pago Pago, American Samoa; another renamed a VA health center in Pennsylvania; another approved the location of a memorial honoring Desert Storm and Desert Shield veterans; three appointed citizen regents to the board of the Smithsonian Institution. Nor should it be assumed that Trump's signing of a given bill meant he or his administration was actively involved in its passage. Thirteen such bills nullifying federal regulations enacted during the Obama administration (such as H.J. Res. 69, reversing a U.S. Fish and Wildlife rule pertaining to Alaska's National Wildlife Refuges and S.J. Res. 34, reversing FCC Internet privacy rules) were rushed through Congress and quickly signed because they made use of the Congressional Review Act of 1996, which imposes a 60-day limit on the time allowed to overrule previously passed laws. This is true. Gorsuch was confirmed by the U.S. Senate on April 7, 2017. This is true. Trump fulfilled a campaign promise by signing an executive order withdrawing the U.S. from the Trans-Pacific Partnership international trade agreement on January 23, 2017, one day after announcing he would renegotiate it. Despite President Obama's fervent support for the deal, many groups, including labor unions, were critical of the TPP, and CNN reported that its chances of approval by Congress were already "bleak." The number of illegal border crossings from Mexico into the U.S. in February 2017 was indeed down 40 percent from the previous month, according to statistics provided by the Department of Homeland Security, and that downward trend, which had actually started the previous November, continued in March and April 2017. It's true that in March 2017, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) awarded a $100 million grant to the state of Michigan to upgrade the drinking water infrastructure in Flint, which experienced a lead pollution crisis potentially affecting as many as 100,000 people beginning in 2014. There has been some dispute, however, over whether this ought to be labeled a "Trump accomplishment" or an "Obama accomplishment." As we noted in a previous article, funding for the grant came from a bill signed by President Obama in 2016, though the monies weren't officially awarded until after he left office, hence some prefer to credit it to Trump. Although President Trump pledged to "strengthen" overseas relationships going into office and he had already met with several important foreign leaders by mid-May 2017, it is too soon to tell to what degree his promise will bear fruit. The president-elect got off to a rocky start with China in December by accepting a congratulatory call from the leader of Taiwan, which China views as a province, not an independent nation, and with which the U.S. does not have diplomatic relations. China lodged a formal complaint. In April, Trump met with Chinese President Xi Jinping, with whom he said he made "tremendous progress" but no breakthroughs. A trade deal negotiated by the Trump administration with China in May was rated "pretty good" by The Wall Street Journal. Japanese Prime Minister Abe, who has met twice with Trump, issued a joint statement with him reaffirming the "unshakable alliance" between the U.S. and Japan. That is despite Trump having called Japan a "currency manipulator" during the presidential campaign and pulling out of the TPP, which Abe supported. Whether the "very, very good chemistry" Trump says he has with Abe will improve the relationship between the two countries over the long haul remains to be seen. U.S.-Russia relations have been strained for many years, a situation not improved by Russia's attempts to meddle in the U.S. presidential election, nor by the fact that Trump associates are under investigation for possible collusion in that effort. A U.S. missile strike by Trump against Syria, with whose government Russia is closely allied, was strongly condemned by Russian leaders, who warned there could be "extremely serious" consequences. British Prime Minister Theresa May was the first foreign leader to visit the Trump White House, and their cordial meeting was portrayed by both countries as a renewal of the "special relationship" between the U.S. and the U.K. According to the BBC, Obama was seen by many Britons as more interested in the European Union as a whole than in the U.K. itself, while Trump, who was in favor of Brexit, is perceived as the opposite. President Trump has employed what the Washington Post calls "hard-line rhetoric" against North Korea, including threats of force, in hopes of squelching that country's increasing militarism, a strategy some experts dismiss as "macho posturing" that could escalate into a Cuban Missile Crisis-like confrontation. In April 2017, Trump ordered U.S. missile strikes against an air base in Syria in response to an alleged chemical weapons attack on civilians by the Syrian government, which has been known to brutalize its own people during the ongoing civil war there. Trump's gesture came up short, however, in that the Syrian Air Force was able to launch a new attack against rebel forces from that same base just hours later. In April 2017, President Trump negotiated the release of U.S. citizen Aya Hijazi, her Egyptian husband, and four other humanitarian workers from a prison in Cairo, Egypt, where they had been locked up since 2014, without evidence or trial, on charges of child abuse and trafficking. Although it is true that President Trump signed an executive order on March 13, 2017, directing the heads of executive branch departments to eliminate all "unnecessary" agencies and reorganize those that remain to improve their "efficiency, effectiveness, and accountability," the order gave said department heads six months from the date of signing to come up with suggestions for this process, so not much fat has been trimmed thus far despite the groundwork being laid. Regarding efforts to "reign in" the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), a CNN report confirms that's been among Trump's top priorities from the start. President Donald Trump made a campaign trail promise to eliminate the Environmental Protection Agency—a department once looked to as an important national force tackling climate change—and during his first 100 days in office has held true to his word, taking swift strides towards dismantling the agency and rolling back regulations. Alongside EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt, a former Oklahoma attorney general who once worked tangentially with the fossil fuel industry to oppose Obama-era regulations, the Trump administration has so far issued a flurry of EPA-focused executive orders, proposed employee buyouts, handed down a social media gag order, and is proposing significant cuts to the EPA budget. The National Federation of Independent Business (NFIB), a small business advocacy group, has hailed Trump's commitment to cutting "burdensome regulations," while environmental protection groups see it as a threat to public health and the future of the planet. The controversial Dakota Access Pipeline project, halted under President Obama, was revived by President Trump and will begin commercial operations on June 1, 2017. Trump also issued an executive order directing a review of lands designated as national monuments. Specifically, the review will consider all national monument designations of federal public lands since 1996 that are 100,000 acres or larger. Mr. Trump singled out former President Barack Obama's egregious use of federal power in using the Antiquities Act to unilaterally place swaths of American land and water under federal control, adding, "it's time we ended this abusive practice." As with many of the other items discussed above, whether or not one regards this as an "accomplishment" (as opposed, say, to a travesty) will depend almost entirely on one's political views going in.

NEI

In May 2017, a Reddit user posted a graphic that purported to list all of President Trump's accomplishments during his first four months in office. It was then widely shared on social media:TRUMP ACCOMPLISHMENTS ..Retweet the hell out of this to annoy @ABC @CBS @cnn @cnbc @MSNBC @nbc @nytimes @washingtonpost #dishonestmedia. pic.twitter.com/ITArBQgcmJ Small Biz for Trump (@SmallBiz4Trump) May 15, 2017Creating homebrew visual aids touting the accomplishments (or failures) of top politicians is a popular online pastime, not least because it's a cheap and easy way to propagandize, and because there are no pesky standards of fairness and accuracy to meet. As we've noted with regard to previous specimens (for example, a late-2016 meme touting the alleged economic achievements of President Obama), the graphic format lends itself to the display of cherry-picked facts to make a simplistic case with no semblance of context or nuance.As reported in the Washington Post, government data released on 5 May 2017 indicated that the national unemployment rate hit a new low in April:It bears pointing out that the jobless rate had already been on a steady decline since 2010. Further, unemployment hit a previous nine-year low of 4.6 percent in December 2016 when President Obama was still in office. It climbed back up to 4.8 percent in January, dipped to 4.7 percent in February, and to 4.5 percent in March 2017.To what degree short-term improvements in the economy since January can be attributed to a new chief executive whose economic policies remain nascent is perennially up for debate, though according to The New York Times' senior economic correspondent Neil Irwin, a "Trump effect" that is buoying corporate hiring policies after the election cannot be ruled out:This is a mostly-accurate, partial list of corporations who have announced investments in American facilities and/or jobs since the election of Donald Trump. With the exception of Bayer AG (which announced $8 billion in new investments, not $1 billion as claimed), the dollar amounts match those cited in press reports between January and April 2017 (sources: Softbank, Exxon Mobil Corp., Hyundai-Kia, Apple, Fiat Chrysler, General Motors, Bayer AG, Toyota, LG Electronics).It's not necessarily accurate to characterize all of these commitments as "accomplishments" of President Trump, however. As CBS Moneywatch's Irina Ivanova reported in January 2017:For example, Fiat Chrysler said their promise of a $1 billion investment in Michigan and Ohio plants, projected to create 2,000 jobs, was the "second phase" of an industrialization plan announced in 2016. GM's $1 billion investment was "several years in the making," according to sources cited by CBS.Bayer AG's commitment to an $8 billion investment and the creation of 3,000 U.S. jobs was announced by the Trump transition team after the president-elect met in January 2017 with the CEOs of Bayer AG and Monsanto, who are planning a merger. Transition spokesman Sean Spicer credited Trump's negotiating skills for the pledge, but some analysts were skeptical that the companies had actually promised anything that wasn't already on the table when plans for the merger were first revealed in September 2016:The merger, which awaits U.S. regulatory approval, is not likely to be completed until 2018, CNBC reported.It is true that the U.S. Treasury reported a $182 billion budget surplus in April 2017, the largest April surplus since 2001 (and the second-largest in history), according to MarketWatch. It's unclear exactly how that surplus is attributable to President Trump, however. April is typically a surplus month because of tax receipts. In addition, citing a Congressional Budget Office (CBO) review as its source, Associated Press reported that the April 2017 surplus was "inflated" because of a tax deadline change allowing corporations to pay federal taxes in April that in previous years were paid in March. The stock market can be fickle. As of April 29, the Dow Jones Industrial Average was at 20,940.51, 6.12 percent higher than when Trump took office positive movement, unquestionably. That number had risen to 20,981.94 by 16 May, then plummeted 372 points the next day as the market was shaken by news that Trump had shared classified information with Russian diplomats in the White House and attempted to divert FBI Director James Comey from an investigation of Trump's alleged ties to Russia before he fired him.It's true that the Consumer Confidence Index, a metric assessing how ordinary consumers feel about the strength of the economy, hit 125.6 in March 2017, its highest point since 2000. It is also true that it fell five points to 120.3 the following month. Even so, it showed that consumers (as of April) had more confidence in the economy under Trump than under Obama, during whose administration the index never exceeded 113.7 (although it did manage to rise to that point after bottoming out in 2009 at 25).As of 17 May 2017, President Trump had signed 34 bills passed by Congress, a comparatively high number in such a short period of time (since Franklin Delano Roosevelt, who signed 76 pieces of legislation in his first 100 days, only Harry Truman, at 55, signed more).That's not to say that all of the legislation signed by Trump between January and May 2017 was necessarily noteworthy, however. One bill changed the name of a Veterans Affairs outpatient clinic in Pago Pago, American Samoa; another renamed a VA health center in Pennsylvania; another approves the location of a memorial honoring Desert Storm and Desert Shield veterans; three appointed citizen regents to the board of the Smithsonian Institution.This is true. Gorsuch was confirmed by the U.S. Senate on 7 April 2017.This is true. Trump fulfilled a campaign promise by signing an executive order withdrawing the U.S. from the Trans-Pacific Partnership international trade agreement on 23 January 2017, one day after announcing he would renegotiate it. Despite President Obama's fervent support for the deal, many groups, including labor unions, were critical of the TPP, and CNN reported that its chances of approval by Congress were already "bleak." The number of illegal border crossings from Mexico into the U.S. in February 2017 were indeed down 40 percent from the previous month, according to statistics provided by the Department of Homeland Security, and that downward trend, which had actually started the previous November, continued in March and April 2017. This U.S. Customs and Border Protection chart shows how striking the change was compared to the previous five years:It's true that in March 2017, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) awarded a $100 million grant to the state of Michigan to upgrade the drinking water infrastructure in Flint, which experienced a lead pollution crisis potentially affecting as many as 100,000 people beginning in 2014. There has been some dispute, however, over whether this ought to be labeled a "Trump accomplishment" or an "Obama accomplishment." As we noted in a previous article, funding for the grant came from a bill signed by President Obama in 2016, though the monies weren't officially awarded until after he left office, hence some prefer to credit it to Trump.China: The president-elect got off to a rocky start with China in December by accepting a congratulatory call from the leader of Taiwan, which China views as a province,not an independent nation, and with which the U.S. does not have diplomatic relations. China lodged a formal complaint. In April, Trump met with Chinese President Xi Jinping, with whom he said he made "tremendous progress" but no breakthroughs. A trade deal negotiated by the Trump administration with China in May was rated "pretty good" by The Wall Street Journal.U.K.: British Prime Minister Theresa May was the first foreign leader to visit the Trump White House, and their cordial meeting was portrayed by both countries as a renewal of the "special relationship" between the U.S and the U.K. According to the BBC, Obama was seen by many Britons as more interested in the European Union as a whole than in the U.K. itself, while Trump, who was in favor of Brexit, is perceived as the opposite.Tough on Korea? President Trump has employed what the Washington Post calls "hard-line rhetoric" against North Korea, including threats of force, in hopes of squelching that county's increasing militarism, a strategy some experts dismiss as "macho posturing" that could escalate into a Cuban Missile Crisis-like confrontation. Tough on Syria? In April 2017, Trump ordered U.S. missile strikes against an air base in Syria in response to an alleged chemical weapons attack on civilians by the Syrian government, which has been known to brutalize its own people during the ongoing civil war there. Trump's gesture came up short, however, in that the Syrian Air Force was able to launch a new attack against rebel forces from that same base just hours later.Humanitarian workers in Egypt: In April 2017 President Trump negotiated the release of U.S.. citizen Aya Hijazi, her Egyptian husband, and four other humanitarian workers from a prison in Cairo, Egypt, where they had been locked up since 2014, without evidence or trial, on charges of child abuse and trafficking. Although it is true that President Trump signed an executive order on 13 March 2017 directing the heads of executive branch departments to eliminate all "unnecessary" agencies and reorganize those that remain to improve their "efficiency, effectiveness, and accountability," the order gave said department heads six months from the date of signing to come up with suggestions for this process, so not much fat has been trimmed thus far despite the groundwork being laid.Regarding efforts to "reign in" the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), a CNN report confirms that's been among Trump's top priorities from the start:The National Federation of Independent Business (NFIB), a small business advocacy group, has hailed Trump's commitment to cutting "burdensome regulations," while environmental protection groups see it as a threat to public health and the future of the planet.The controversial Dakota Access Pipeline project, halted under President Obama, was revived by President Trump and will begin commercial operations on 1 June 2017. Trump also issued an executive order directing a review of lands designated as national monuments:Specifically, the review will consider all national monument designations of federal public lands since 1996 that are 100,000 acres or larger. Mr Trump singled out former President Barack Obamas egregious use of federal power in using the Antiquities Act to unilaterally place swaths of American land and water under federal control, adding, its time we ended this abusive practice.

FMD_train_642

Did Sgt. Al Powell Stop a Terrorist Attack at Nakatomi Plaza?

11/28/2018

The names "Nakotami Plaza" and "Sgt. Al Powell" may ring a bell to those familiar with 1980s action films, but for those not in the know the following meme may have proved a tad confusing. The meme reads: "This is Sgt. Al Powell. He was integral in stopping a terrorist attack in Los Angeles at Nakatomi Plaza on Christmas in 1988. How many of you will share to honor his heroism?" meme Was there really a terrorist attack at Nakatomi Plaza over Christmas in 1988? Was Sgt. Powell really responsible for thwarting that attempted act of evil? Well, not really, unless you incorrectly insist that the 1988 action flick Die Hard was a documentary. The text of this meme refers to the plot of the 1988 movie starring Bruce Willis in which actor Reginald VelJohnson played Sgt. Al Powell, a beat cop who helped John McClane (Willis' character) take down terrorists holding a group of people hostage at Nakatomi Plaza. Here's a clip from the movie featuring both Sgt. Al Powell and John McClane (WARNING: movie violence): While this meme was certainly made in jest, it was also apparently made in a rush. The included photograph which supposedly shows Sgt. Al Powell from Die Hard actually pictures Carl Winslow from the television show Family Matters. Both characters were played by Reginald VelJohnson. Carl Winslow This isn't the first time that a piece of pop culture has been repurposed as jape to spread misinformation on the internet. In May 2016 we investigated an image supposedly picturing a group of Vietnam soldiers only to find that the photograph showed the cast of the movie Tropic Thunder. image

False

The names "Nakotami Plaza" and "Sgt. Al Powell" may ring a bell to those familiar with 1980s action films, but for those not in the know the following meme may have proved a tad confusing. The meme reads: "This is Sgt. Al Powell. He was integral in stopping a terrorist attack in Los Angeles at Nakatomi Plaza on Christmas in 1988. How many of you will share to honor his heroism?"While this meme was certainly made in jest, it was also apparently made in a rush. The included photograph which supposedly shows Sgt. Al Powell from Die Hard actually pictures Carl Winslow from the television show Family Matters. Both characters were played by Reginald VelJohnson.This isn't the first time that a piece of pop culture has been repurposed as jape to spread misinformation on the internet. In May 2016 we investigated an image supposedly picturing a group of Vietnam soldiers only to find that the photograph showed the cast of the movie Tropic Thunder.

FMD_train_1476

Is This a Photo of the Nashville RV Explosion Suspect?

12/27/2020

On Christmas morning of 2020, a recreational vehicle exploded on the streets of Nashville near a building owned by AT&T. exploded A few days later, the FBI identified a person of interest in connection with the explosion, Anthony Quinn Warner, who was believed to have been "paranoid about 5G technology" Anthony Quinn Warner 5G technology While the FBI was pursuing its investigation, social media users circulated a photograph said to depict Warner, a picture purportedly showing him wearing a "Trump 2020" cap: However, this photograph was a hoax, one which bore no resemblance to a picture of Warner published by CBS News that was reported as confirmed by "law enforcement sources": CBS News

False

On Christmas morning of 2020, a recreational vehicle exploded on the streets of Nashville near a building owned by AT&T.A few days later, the FBI identified a person of interest in connection with the explosion, Anthony Quinn Warner, who was believed to have been "paranoid about 5G technology" However, this photograph was a hoax, one which bore no resemblance to a picture of Warner published by CBS News that was reported as confirmed by "law enforcement sources":

FMD_train_706

Was 'Coronavirus' Replaced with 'Chinese Virus' in Trump's Notes?

03/19/2020

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, U.S. President Donald Trump faced widespread scrutiny for various aspects of his administration's response to the economic and public health crisis triggered by the COVID-19 pandemic. Among other points of criticism was his repeated insistence on referring to the disease as the "Chinese virus," despite widely-accepted public health authority guidelines that warn against naming disease outbreaks after nations or regions of the world, due to the unfounded stigmatization such names can cause. scrutiny Chinese virus guidelines The president used that name again during a White House briefing on March 19. Afterwards, social media users shared a photograph purportedly taken at the event, which appeared to show that Trump was even ignoring the guidance of his aides in insisting on referring to COVID-19 as the "Chinese virus." Washington Post photographer Jabin Botsford tweeted the following: briefing tweeted Those images were authentic. The original, official photograph was taken by Botsford himself and published by the Getty Images agency on March 19. The website described the image as follows: published "A close up of President Donald J. Trump's notes shows where Corona was crossed out 'Corona' and replaced with 'Chinese' Virus as he speaks with his coronavirus task force in response to the COVID-19 coronavirus pandemic during a briefing in the James S. Brady Press Briefing Room at the White House on Thursday, March 19, 2020 in Washington, DC." Photo by Jabin Botsford/The Washington Post via Getty Images Trump did call COVID-19 the "Chinese virus" in his March 19 remarks, although perhaps ironically, he referred to it simply as "the virus" in the place where "Corona" had been scratched out and replaced in handwriting by "Chinese" in his notes. As shown in the video below, he actually said at that point: "As you know, my administration is working every day to protect the American people and the American economy from the virus [...]": It's not clear who made the handwritten edit in black marker on March 19, but the handwriting style certainly appeared consistent with that seen in notes which Trump famously held in his hand as he spoke to reporters in November 2019 at the height of Congressional hearings held in advance of his own impeachment trial: held Left: Mark Wilson/Getty Images. Right: Jabin Botsford/The Washington Post via Getty Images Lucey, Catherine. "Trump's Message on Virus Draws Scrutiny." The Wall Street Journal. 5 March 2020. Rogers, Katie; Jakes, Lara. "Trump Defends Calling the Coronavirus the 'Chinese Virus.'" The New York Times. 18 March 2020. World Health Organization. "WHO Issues Best Practices for Naming New Human Infectious Diseases." 8 May 2015. Palma, Bethania. "Did Trump Use Notes to Self in Sharpie Pen That Said 'I Want Nothing.'" Snopes. 22 November 2019.

True

Snopes is still fighting an infodemic of rumors and misinformation surrounding the COVID-19 pandemic, and you can help. Find out what we've learned and how to inoculate yourself against COVID-19 misinformation. Read the latest fact checks about the vaccines. Submit any questionable rumors and advice you encounter. Become a Founding Member to help us hire more fact-checkers. And, please, follow the CDC or WHO for guidance on protecting your community from the disease. In March 2020, U.S. President Donald Trump faced widespread scrutiny for various aspects of his administration's response to the economic and public health crisis triggered by the COVID-19 pandemic. Among other points of criticism was his repeated insistence on referring to the disease as the "Chinese virus," despite widely-accepted public health authority guidelines that warn against naming disease outbreaks after nations or regions of the world, due to the unfounded stigmatization such names can cause.The president used that name again during a White House briefing on March 19. Afterwards, social media users shared a photograph purportedly taken at the event, which appeared to show that Trump was even ignoring the guidance of his aides in insisting on referring to COVID-19 as the "Chinese virus." Washington Post photographer Jabin Botsford tweeted the following:Those images were authentic. The original, official photograph was taken by Botsford himself and published by the Getty Images agency on March 19. The website described the image as follows: Photo by Jabin Botsford/The Washington Post via Getty ImagesIt's not clear who made the handwritten edit in black marker on March 19, but the handwriting style certainly appeared consistent with that seen in notes which Trump famously held in his hand as he spoke to reporters in November 2019 at the height of Congressional hearings held in advance of his own impeachment trial: Left: Mark Wilson/Getty Images. Right: Jabin Botsford/The Washington Post via Getty Images

FMD_train_532

Says Donald Trump contradicted his own administration when he said the decision to allow blueprints for 3D-printed guns to be distributed doesnt seem to make much sense.

08/02/2018

A federal judge issued a temporary restraining order to block the online publication of blueprints outlining how to create untraceable and undetectable 3D-printed firearms. The blueprints were originally scheduled for an August 1 release after a government settlement ended five years of litigation. However, word of the release prompted panic as legislators and officials scrambled to block the action. Before the federal judge's ruling, at least 21 attorneys general filed suit to stop the blueprints from going live. As the conversation heated up, President Donald Trump weighed in on Twitter, stating, "I am looking into 3-D Plastic Guns being sold to the public. Already spoke to NRA, doesn't seem to make much sense!" Politicians and pundits seized upon the president's words as proof that he was unfamiliar with a decision from his own administration. "Trump: My own administration's latest decision doesn't seem to make much sense!" read a July 31 headline from Addicting Info, a liberal website. This story was flagged as part of Facebook's efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. Trump's last-minute statement gave us pause, so we decided to look at the settlement. Was the Trump administration actually behind it? The White House did not respond to a request for comment, though Trump's press secretary later stated that he did not have a chance to weigh in. On May 5, 2013, Defense Distributed uploaded blueprints online that could be used to make a working 3D-printed gun called The Liberator, along with a 53-second video of founder Cody Wilson firing one. Wilson soon received a letter from the Obama administration's State Department demanding that he remove the files from the internet. The letter stated that the technical data amounted to an illegal gun export in violation of the Arms Export Control Act and International Traffic in Arms Regulations, as it could be accessed in countries where the United States does not sell weapons. The State Department instructed Wilson to take down the files until he applied for specific approval of the gun's multiple components. By that point, the blueprints had already been downloaded 100,000 times. In response, Wilson filed a lawsuit against the State Department with the help of the Second Amendment Foundation, a gun rights organization, seeking a preliminary injunction to allow continued publication of the gun files online. Under both the Obama and Trump administrations, the government maintained its assertion that the technical data constituted an illegal gun export. Wilson countered that the government's intervention violated his First Amendment right to free speech. Ultimately, both district and appeals courts rejected Wilson's injunction request. However, as the case turned to the First Amendment claim, the government made an unexpected settlement offer. With the settlement, reached in June and announced on July 10, the government waived the relevant export restrictions and allowed Wilson to post the blueprints online as early as August 1. Specifically, the State Department announced that it was in the interest of the security and foreign policy of the United States to temporarily modify the U.S. Munitions List to exclude the technical data for the 3-D-printed guns. Defense-related items on the munitions list face tight restrictions because they offer a critical military or intelligence advantage to the United States. The U.S. Commerce Department manages a separate export list with fewer restrictions. It is unclear what role Trump or the White House played in the settlement decision, though White House Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders said during an August 1 press briefing that the Department of Justice instructed the State Department to settle without White House approval. The State Department has stated that its role in this issue relates solely to the regulation of exports of certain types of firearms and any related technical data. However, the move to shift the 3D-printed guns' technical data outside of the State Department's purview was not without precedent. The government's decision came amid a longstanding but relatively behind-the-scenes administrative project, started under the Obama administration and known as export control reform, to restructure the regulations governing exports of weapons and technologies. Just as the litigation against Wilson can be traced back to the Obama years, so too can the export control changes that may have opened the door for the State Department's settlement. Beginning in 2009, the Obama administration launched an overhaul of export control to refine regulations for items that were subject to both the State Department's International Traffic in Arms Regulations and the Commerce Department's Export Administration Regulations. The goal of the reform was to streamline export controls by transferring commercially available items, such as consumer guns, off the USML and onto the less restrictive Commerce Control List. The State Department began reviewing the munitions list, sifting through each category and removing items that were not considered military-sensitive. By 2016, it had finished reviewing all but three categories: firearms, ammunition, and artillery. However, reform of those final categories stalled before it could become policy. A proposed rule would have handed jurisdiction of commercial firearms export controls to the Commerce Department in 2012, but it was delayed following the Sandy Hook school shooting. That proposed rule did not regain momentum until 2018, under Trump. On May 24, the Departments of State and Commerce simultaneously published proposals in the Federal Register to amend the final three categories of the munitions list. The proposed revisions would keep military-grade weapons under State Department jurisdiction and place commercially available firearms under the purview of the Commerce Department. According to the New York Times, these proposals strongly resemble the Obama administration's 2012 version. CNN reported that the government is currently reviewing them. This may explain the State Department's sudden decision to settle its case with Wilson. By recommending that commercial firearm exports move under Commerce Department oversight, the May 24 proposals would likely free Wilson's blueprints from the International Traffic in Arms Regulations that previously restricted them. "My guess is that it was somehow wrapped up in the movement of items from the (U.S. Munitions List) to the (Commerce Control List)," said Rachel Stohl, managing director at the Stimson Center and an expert in the international arms trade. "If you deregulate the weapons themselves, it would follow that the technical specs could be deregulated as well." Stohl added that the settlement was unexpected and that the State and Commerce Departments have been less than forthcoming on these details. For his part, Wilson has agreed to refrain from posting his blueprints for at least another month while the multi-state lawsuit travels through the courts. A headline suggested that the government settlement that would have made 3D-printable guns available for download was actually a Trump administration decision, and that Trump said that it didn't make much sense. We could not independently determine the extent of Trump's involvement, although Sanders stated that the president was not afforded the opportunity to approve the settlement decision. However, the State Department under Trump did initiate the settlement after previously taking steps to clear a path for it. The Obama administration's export control reform made those steps possible, and it is not far-fetched to consider the Trump administration's move a continuation of that initiative.

True

A federal judgeissueda temporary restraining order to block the online publication of blueprints outlining how to create untraceable and undetectable 3D-printed firearms.As conversation heated up, President Donald Trump weighed in onTwitter. I am looking into 3-D Plastic Guns being sold to the public, he said. Already spoke to NRA, doesnt seem to make much sense!Trump: My own administrations latest decision doesnt seem to make much sense! said a July 31headlinefrom Addicting Info, a liberal website.This story was flagged as part of Facebooks efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about ourpartnershipwith Facebook.)On May 5, 2013, Defense Distributeduploadedblueprints online that could be used to make a working 3D-printed gun called The Liberator, as well as a 53-secondvideoof founder Cody Wilson firing one.Wilson soon received aletterfrom the Obama administrations State Department demanding that he remove the files from the internet. The letter said the technical data amounted to an illegal gun export in violation of theArms Export Control ActandInternational Traffic in Arms Regulations, because it could be accessed in countries where the United States does not sell weapons.In response, Wilson filed alawsuitagainst the State Department with the help of Second Amendment Foundation, a guns-rights organization, in which he sought a preliminary injunction to allow continued publication of the gun files online.With thesettlement, reached in June and announced July 10, the government waived the relevant export restrictions and allowed Wilson to post the blueprints online as early as Aug. 1.Specifically, the State Departmentannouncedthat it was in the interest of the security and foreign policy of the United States to temporarily modify theU.S. Munitions Listto exclude the technical data for the 3-D-printed guns.But the move to shift the 3D-printed guns technical data outside of the State Departments purview was not without precedent. The governments decision came amid a longstanding but relatively behind-the-scenes administrative project started under the Obama administration and known as export control reform to restructure the regulations governing exports of weapons and technologies.Beginning in 2009, the Obama administrationlaunchedan overhaul of export control in order to refine regulations for items that were subject to both the State Departments International Traffic in Arms Regulations and the Commerce Departments Export Administration Regulations.The State Department began reviewing the munitions list, sifting through each category and removing items that were not considered military-sensitive. By 2016, it had finished reviewing all but threecategories: firearms, ammunition and artillery.However, reform of those final categories stalled before it could become policy. Aproposed rulewould have handed jurisdiction of commercial firearms export controls to the Commerce Department in 2012, but it was delayed following the Sandy Hook school shooting.That proposed rule did notregainmomentum until 2018, under Trump. On May 24, the Departments ofStateandCommercesimultaneously publishedproposalsin the Federal Register to amend the final three categories of the munitions list.According to theNew York Times, these proposals strongly resemble the Obama administrations 2012 version. CNNreportedthat the government is currently reviewing them.

FMD_train_1948

Congress Eliminates Child Tax Credit, Mortgage Deduction and EITC from Tax Code

11/13/2014

Claim: Congress has eliminated the child tax credit, the earned income tax credit (EITC), and mortgage deductions from the tax code under pressure from lobby groups and the Koch brothers. Example: [Collected via Twitter, November 2014] Are u kidding!? Congress Eliminates Child Tax Credit, Mortgage Deduction & E.I.T.C Origins: On 11 November 2014, the National Report published an article claiming a "heavy burst of lobbying" by groups including the Koch brothers' Koch Industries preceded a vote whereby Congress rescinded several common tax breaks long afforded to millions of Americans. article According to the article, the child tax credit, the earned income tax credit and the mortgage interest deduction were all forms of "entitlement payouts" that had been eliminated beginning with the 2014 fiscal year to allow "job creators" to flourish: The deeply unpopular congress, whose approval rating hovers around a historic low of 10%, has voted to remove the child tax credit, the earned income tax credit and the mortgage interest deduction from the tax code starting with the 2014 fiscal year. The move is almost assured to solidify the perception of the 113rd Congress of the United States as deeply disconnected from the struggles and desires of the populace it is supposed to serve. The move, long championed by entitlement reform advocates like congressman Paul Ryan R-Wisconsin and Ted Cruz R-Texas, will cut entitlement payouts by a staggering 177 billion dollars. 54.33 billion dollars in savings will be realized from discontinuing the earned income tax credit, which generally pays those making less than 12 thousand dollars yearly large cash tax rebates far in excess of the actual tax they paid. 69.7 billion will be saved from the mortgage interest tax deduction, which critics say primarily favors top income earners. The elimination of the child tax credit, which critics say serves no fair purpose, will result in an additional 54 billion dollar savings. The article was nothing but a chain-yanking spoof, however: The National Report is a well-known fake news outlet notorious for publishing click-baiting, completely false stories such as "15 Year Old Who 'SWATTED' Gamer Convicted of Domestic Terrorism," "Solar Panels Drain the Sun's Energy, Experts Say," and "Vince Gilligan Announces Breaking Bad Season 6." 15 Year Old Who 'SWATTED' Gamer Convicted of Domestic Terrorism Solar Panels Drain the Sun's Energy, Experts Say Vince Gilligan Announces Breaking Bad Season 6 The article also quoted economist "Paul Horner" on Congress' purported tax credit repeal. If that name sounds familiar, it's because Paul Horner is a National Report writer whose name is used as a recurring character in various stories published by the site. Last updated: 13 November 2014 <

NEI

Origins: On 11 November 2014, the National Report published an article claiming a "heavy burst of lobbying" by groups including the Koch brothers' Koch Industries preceded a vote whereby Congress rescinded several common tax breaks long afforded to millions of Americans. The article was nothing but a chain-yanking spoof, however: The National Report is a well-known fake news outlet notorious for publishing click-baiting, completely false stories such as "15 Year Old Who 'SWATTED' Gamer Convicted of Domestic Terrorism," "Solar Panels Drain the Sun's Energy, Experts Say," and "Vince Gilligan Announces Breaking Bad Season 6."

FMD_train_1011

Did Russia Post Navalny's Death Notice Just 2 Minutes After Official Time of Death?

02/16/2024

On Feb. 16, 2024, the Russian prison service announced the death of Alexei Navalny, President Vladimir Putin's most outspoken and formidable opponent. The former lawyer was 47 years old and was serving a 19-year prison sentence on charges of extremism in an isolated penal colony above the Arctic Circle. The notice, released by the prison service of the Yamalo-Nenets region and translated from Russian by Reuters, read as follows: "On Feb. 16, 2024, in penal colony number 3, convict Alexei Navalny felt unwell after a walk, almost immediately losing consciousness. The medical staff of the institution arrived immediately, and an ambulance team was called. All necessary resuscitation measures were carried out, which did not yield positive results. Doctors of the ambulance stated the death of the convict. The causes of death are being established." The notice indicated it was last updated at 2:19 p.m. on Feb. 16. According to a Feb. 17 tweet by Navalny's spokesperson, Kira Yarmysh, he was "murdered," and the official time of his death was 2:17 p.m. on Feb. 16, "according to the official message to Alexey's mother." An employee of the colony stated that Navalny's body is now in Salekhard, having been picked up by investigators from the IC. Ivan Zhdanov, the director of Navalny's Anti-Corruption Foundation, tweeted on Feb. 17 that when Navalny's lawyer and mother arrived at the colony, they were told that the cause of Navalny's death was "sudden death syndrome." On Feb. 19, Navalny's anti-corruption foundation posted an update reaffirming that his official time of death was 2:17. The Kremlin has not been transparent in releasing more specific details regarding the exact cause of Navalny's death; therefore, information surrounding the exact cause and time of his death cannot be absolutely confirmed without an independent investigation. Because of this, we rate this claim as "Unproven." If more information surrounding the details of his death is confirmed, this story will be updated accordingly. Many world leaders, including Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, German Chancellor Olaf Scholz, and U.S. President Joe Biden, publicly pointed to Putin as being behind Navalny's death. Navalny's wife, Yulia Navalnaya, spoke at the Munich Security Conference within hours of the announcement of her husband's death. In her speech, she stated that she did not know whether to believe the report of his death because "we cannot trust Putin and the Putin government. They always lie." Just one day before the announcement of his death, on Feb. 15, Navalny was seen in a video-link court hearing in which he joked with the judge about sending him money because he was running out of funds due to the judge's decisions.

NEI

On Feb. 16, 2024, the death of Russian President Vladimir Putin's most outspoken and formidable opponent, Alexei Navalny, was announced by the Russian prison service.The former lawyer was 47, and he was serving a 19-year prison sentence on charges of extremism in an isolated penal colony above the Arctic Circle.The notice, released by the prison service of the Yamalo-Nenets region andtranslated from Russian by Reuters, read as follows: (@Kira_Yarmysh) February 17, 2024Ivan Zhdanov,the director of Navalny's Anti-Corruption Foundation, tweeted on Feb. 17 that when Navalny's lawyer and mother arrived at the colony, they were told that the cause of Navalny's death was "sudden death syndrome."On Feb. 19, Navalny's anti-corruption foundation posted an updatein which they reaffirm that his official time of death was 2:17, pictured below:Many world leaders including Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, German Chancellor Olaf Scholz, and U.S. President Joe Biden publicly pointed to Putin as being behind Navalny's death. Navalny's wife, Yulia Navalnaya, spoke at the Munich Security Conference within hours of the announcement of her husband's death. In her speech, she stated that she did not know whether to believe the report of his death because"we cannot trust Putin and the Putin government. They always lie."Just one day beforethe announcement of his death, on Feb. 15, Navalny was seen in a video-link court hearing in which he joked with the judge about sending him money because he was running out of funds due to the judge's decisions.

FMD_train_853

Facebook Listens?

05/27/2014

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

False

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

FMD_train_821

Are These Real Pics of Elderly Women With Giant, Crocheted Cats?

07/31/2023

In July 2023, a series of imageswent viral depicting elderly women with what appeared to begiant crocheted cats. went viral The images were reposted on social media platforms such as Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, Reddit, and 9GAG, gaining millions of views. We also found them on Chinese and Russian-speaking websites. Facebook Twitter Instagram Reddit 9GAG Chinese Russian The pictures in question were originally posted on July 3, 2023, by Instagram account @ai.artandcat. In the bio section of that profile, we found a link to aFacebook pagetitled, "Lydia's AI Art and Cats," with a user namedLydia Masterova marked as the page's owner. Masterova had a history online of sharing AI-generated pictures. posted @ai.artandcat page Wywietl ten post na Instagramie Post udostpniony przez Cats and art (@ai.artandcat) Post udostpniony przez Cats and art (@ai.artandcat) Masterova's images of crocheted cats had telltale signs of being generated by artificial intelligence (AI) software. For instance, the women in the photographs had abnormally large hands or an incorrect number of toes. Each picture depicted an elderly lady with white hair; however, the women did not appear to be the same person as various characteristics, such as their hairstyles and eyeglasses, varied significantly. (Instagram account @ai.artandcat) (Instagram account @ai.artandcat) AI-detection tools, such as AI or Not and IIlluminarty, confirmed the images were created using artificial intelligence software. Therefore, we have rated this claim as "Fake." AI or Not IIlluminarty In July 2023, Masterova shared a message via herInstagramaccount and Facebook page thatintroduced herself and explained that she started creating AI-generated content to distract herself from the war in Ukraine, which is where she is from: Instagram Facebook Here's a bit about me (and giant crochet cats). My name is Lydia, and I'm from Ukraine ??. A couple of months ago, to distract myself from the horrors of war, I immersed myself in the imaginative world of AI. Before that, I was a cat photographer and had always loved cats and animals in general, so it was only natural to start with them. At first, I incorporated cats into paintings by famous artists, hence the word "art" in my page name. However, I soon realized that almost everyone had already drawn the Mona Lisa with a cat or as a cat. Then, I attempted to draw hybrids of cats and other animals, but AI struggled to achieve that.When my parents, family, and friends in Ukraine were under bombing, I thought posting random stuff on my Facebook account was inappropriate, so I created a new page and Instagram account.And now, let's talk about these giant crocheted cats! She said her passion for various crafts inspired her to create the images of crocheted items. Since posting the images, she acknowledged they have circulated online without proper attribution, or disclaimers to note that they're not real. In the Instagram and Facebook post, she said she did not write captions for her original posts sharing the AI-generated images because"it's considered a bad form to use watermarks" in online groups dedicated to such content, and she did not have access to a computer to do so.The message continued: I used to do lots of various crafts, from crocheting and knitting to sewing soft toys. Now, I draw whatever comes to my mind first. During my vacation in early July, these crocheted cats were born. In AI groups, it's considered a bad form to use watermarks. It was very late at night, and I couldn't access a computer, so I posted them on my page and in the Midjourney Cat group without a caption. By morning, I found that the images had spread across various pages and groups. People from Europe, Asia, Australia, and even South Africa write to me saying they find these cats in crochet groups. I never posted them as actual crochet, and unfortunately, I can't do anything about it. Every day, I come across posts with titles like "My 80-year-old grandma finally finished her cat," and so on. Someone even posted it on National Geographic. When I tried to message them, 90% didn't reply, and a couple of times, I received rude responses, claiming that since it's AI, I have no rights to these images. But a few pages did credit me in their posts, though still with headlines not of my creation. Lesson learned. Now, I'll always add captions. The cat photographs aside,most of Masterova's images on Facebook and Instagram appeared tohavea watermark, including a series of elderly women riding what appeared to be crocheted motorcycles. That series was captioned, "Badass grandmas on their crochet bikes." most have (Facebook page Lydia's AI Art and Cats) Masterova said the viral crochet images have brought her new attention online, including from people who do not like her work: Before the crochet cats, I had around 100 followers, and now the haters have come. Some send me to hell, others wish for my hard drive to burn, and some think using AI is stealing from real artists. It's just a hobby. I don't sell anything. I don't make money. I simply come up with nonexistent things, using my imagination. If someone doesn't like it, they can always scroll past it. AsAI-generated content becomes more prevalent on social media, it's worth knowing how to spot such images. We encourage you to read our tips. AI-generated read our tips

False

In July 2023, a series of imageswent viral depicting elderly women with what appeared to begiant crocheted cats.The images were reposted on social media platforms such as Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, Reddit, and 9GAG, gaining millions of views. We also found them on Chinese and Russian-speaking websites.The pictures in question were originally posted on July 3, 2023, by Instagram account @ai.artandcat. In the bio section of that profile, we found a link to aFacebook pagetitled, "Lydia's AI Art and Cats," with a user namedLydia Masterova marked as the page's owner. Masterova had a history online of sharing AI-generated pictures.Post udostpniony przez Cats and art (@ai.artandcat)AI-detection tools, such as AI or Not and IIlluminarty, confirmed the images were created using artificial intelligence software. Therefore, we have rated this claim as "Fake."In July 2023, Masterova shared a message via herInstagramaccount and Facebook page thatintroduced herself and explained that she started creating AI-generated content to distract herself from the war in Ukraine, which is where she is from:The cat photographs aside,most of Masterova's images on Facebook and Instagram appeared tohavea watermark, including a series of elderly women riding what appeared to be crocheted motorcycles. That series was captioned, "Badass grandmas on their crochet bikes."AsAI-generated content becomes more prevalent on social media, it's worth knowing how to spot such images. We encourage you to read our tips.

FMD_train_987

No, 'Dog the Bounty Hunter' has not passed away.

11/29/2019

In late 2019, readers asked us about blog posts that were widely shared on social media and falsely claimed that the reality television star Duane Chapman, known as "Dog the Bounty Hunter," had died either by suicide or from a pulmonary embolism. Those reports were false. Beginning on Nov. 20, admirers of Chapman and his late wife, Beth, who died in June after herself being the subject of death hoaxes, began posting tributes to him and sharing one of two blog posts. hoaxes The first purported to be hosted by a website with the domain name whatnow.actual-events.com, but when internet users clicked on the story on social media, they were redirected to the domain newspanel.suzeraincollections.com. There, the story carried the headline "Duane 'Dog' Chapman Died of Pulmonary Embolism. He Didn't Survive His Second Attack. He Was 66 -- WGN." first The highly dubious website falsely attributed the claim about Chapman's death to WGN America, a real U.S. television network that broadcast the Chapmans' most recent reality show "Dog's Most Wanted." The hoax article also misleadingly used WGN America's logo in a sharebait video that purported to be a television news report about Chapman's death, but that paused after a few seconds and required users to share the article on social media in order to continue watching: In reality, WGN America had no connection to the story and did not report on Chapman's death in November 2019, because Chapman did not die in November 2019. The specific claim that Chapman had died from a pulmonary embolism (a blocked artery in the lungs) was rather insidious. At first glance, it appeared especially plausible to many fans of the television star because he was in fact diagnosed with that very problem in September 2019. diagnosed The second blog post shared by social media users was even more distasteful than the first. It falsely and misleadingly used the logo of BBC News, a highly reputable and widely trusted information source, to report that Chapman had taken his own life. In this instance, social media users shared an article that appeared to be hosted on the domain bbc-newsroom.actualeventstv.com, but which redirected to news-room.easystepsdiy.info. On social media, the post carried the headline "Duane 'Dog' Chapman Died of Suicide After Depression Attack on His Sickness -- BBC News" but when users redirected to the source, the article's headline proclaimed: shared proclaimed "Breaking: (Actual Suicide Video) Duane 'Dog' Chapman Died of Suicide After Depression Attack on His Sickness -- BBC News." Despite the extremely distasteful claim that the video in the article contained footage of Chapman's suicide, it contained nothing of the sort and, just as in the first article, the video stopped after a second or two and required viewers to share the post on social media in order to continue watching. The claim that Chapman had taken his own life was, like the claim he had died of a pulmonary embolism, particularly insidious. In the season finale of "Dog's Most Wanted," broadcast by WGN America on Nov. 6, Chapman spoke about the recent death of his wife from cancer, and the considerable difficulty he was experiencing in coping with her loss. At one moment in the episode, he reportedly discussed how he had contemplated taking his own life, such was his grief. People magazine quoted Chapman as saying: People "I just hope that I dont live very much longer without her, because now she made the first step, shes through the gate," he added. She paved a way for me. I want to take a [god damn] pain pill so bad. I feel like if I did something to myself right now and passed away suicidal and I got to heaven and was like, Hi honey, and would she go, You [dumb ass], why would you do that? Or would she go, Wow, youre here. Ill be like Of course Im here. You left me. Im here. So, am I obligated to do that? Because of that widely reported revelation, a report that Chapman had died by suicide would have appeared somewhat plausible to many readers. The dubious nature of the websites involved, and the absence of any corroborating evidence or reports by actual news organizations, meant that some readers would have immediately recognized the stories as hoaxes. However, a significant number were taken in by them, and shared them on social media, to the extent that Chapman himself intervened. He provided the gossip website TMZ a photograph of himself holding the Nov. 19 edition of the Denver Post, and a handwritten sign that read "I'm alive!" Chapman then posted a screenshot of that article to his own Instagram page the next day. photograph Instagram If you need help, call the National Suicide Prevention Lifeline: 1-800-273-8255. Or contact Crisis Text Line by texting HOME to 741741. Kasprak, Alex. "Outdated: Beth Chapman Death Hoax." Snopes.com. 22 April 2019. Lee, Ashley. "Dog the Bounty Hunter Reveals Pulmonary Embolism Diagnosis." The Los Angeles Times. 28 September 2019. Dugan, Christina. "Dog the Bounty Hunter Contemplates Suicide After Wife Beth's Death on 'Dog's Most Wanted' Finale." People. 6 November 2019. TMZ. "Dog the Bounty Hunter: Nope, He's Not Dead...Look, I'm Alive!" 20 November 2019.

False

Those reports were false. Beginning on Nov. 20, admirers of Chapman and his late wife, Beth, who died in June after herself being the subject of death hoaxes, began posting tributes to him and sharing one of two blog posts. The first purported to be hosted by a website with the domain name whatnow.actual-events.com, but when internet users clicked on the story on social media, they were redirected to the domain newspanel.suzeraincollections.com. There, the story carried the headline "Duane 'Dog' Chapman Died of Pulmonary Embolism. He Didn't Survive His Second Attack. He Was 66 -- WGN." The specific claim that Chapman had died from a pulmonary embolism (a blocked artery in the lungs) was rather insidious. At first glance, it appeared especially plausible to many fans of the television star because he was in fact diagnosed with that very problem in September 2019.In this instance, social media users shared an article that appeared to be hosted on the domain bbc-newsroom.actualeventstv.com, but which redirected to news-room.easystepsdiy.info. On social media, the post carried the headline "Duane 'Dog' Chapman Died of Suicide After Depression Attack on His Sickness -- BBC News" but when users redirected to the source, the article's headline proclaimed: At one moment in the episode, he reportedly discussed how he had contemplated taking his own life, such was his grief. People magazine quoted Chapman as saying:He provided the gossip website TMZ a photograph of himself holding the Nov. 19 edition of the Denver Post, and a handwritten sign that read "I'm alive!" Chapman then posted a screenshot of that article to his own Instagram page the next day.

FMD_train_630

Is This Kobe Bryant Playing 'Moonlight Sonata'?

01/29/2020

In the days following Kobe Bryant's death in January 2020, the internet was flooded with tributes, memorial videos, and, of course, a fair share of misinformation. One video that drew a skeptical eye supposedly showed the NBA icon playing Beethoven's "Moonlight Sonata" or "Piano Sonata No. 14." This video is actually from a 2013 advertisement for the Lenovo technology company. In the final seconds of the video, the logo for "Lenovo" appears on the screen. This commercial, which features Bryant and the Loring String Quartet performing the "Moonlight Sonata," won a Bronze Telly Award. While commercials often stretch the truth to attract viewers (we've covered several commercials that were later circulated as genuine videos), Bryant was indeed capable of playing the "Moonlight Sonata." In fact, the commercial was reportedly inspired by a brief video Bryant posted to Facebook in 2013 with the message: "Just got to Miami, felt like the Sonata. Thanks to my lil bro Darius for taking video." Bryant shared another social media post a few months earlier that showed him sitting at a piano, captioned, "Beethoven's Moonlight Sonata calms me down when I reach my breaking point." Reporter Ramona Shelburne recounted Bryant's love for the "Moonlight Sonata" in a 2016 article published by ESPN. Shelburne explained that Bryant first learned to play it as a gift for his wife, Vanessa, in 2011. The two were heading for a divorce, and Bryant wanted to make a grand gesture to win her back. If playing the composition wasn't enough, Bryant learned this classic piece by ear. Here's an excerpt from Shelburne's report: "I wanted to play something nice for Vanessa," he says. They'd been fighting again. Vanessa filed divorce papers in 2011. Kobe was desperate to hold on to her. He wanted a grand gesture. "Sitting down and taking lessons would be too easy," he says. "So I taught myself by ear." It was harder than he thought. His fingers had been broken and jammed so many times over the years that they didn't really bend anymore. [...] Taking lessons would be easier, yes. They'd also be a way of learning to read sheet music so he could play other songs besides "Moonlight Sonata." But Kobe had to teach himself how to play to prove his love to Vanessa and reinforce his own sense of exceptionalism. "That's the song I wanted to learn," he says. "There's so much beauty and agony. If you watch Muse, we use the chords from 'Moonlight Sonata.'"

True

In the days after Kobe Bryant's death in January 2020, the internet was flooded with tributes, memorial videos, and, of course, a fair share of misinformation. One video that drew a skeptical eye supposedly showed the NBA icon playing Beethoven's "Moonlight Sonata" or "Piano Sonata No. 14":This is a video from a 2013 advertisement for Lenovo technology company. In the final seconds of the above-displayed video, the logo for "Lenovo" appears on the screen. This video, which features Bryant and the Loring String Quartet playing the "Moonlight Sonata," won a Bronze Telly Award. While commercials often stretch the truth in order to draw in viewers (we've covered several commercials that were later circulated as genuine videos), Bryant was truly capable of playing the "Moonlight Sonata." In fact, the above-displayed commercial was reportedly inspired by a brief video Bryant posted to Facebook in 2013 with the message: "Just got to Miami, felt like the Sonata. Thanks to my lil bro Darius for taking video."Bryant shared another social media post a few months earlier that showed him sitting at a piano. That image was captioned, "Beethoven's Moonlight Sonata calms me down when I reach my breaking point." Here's an excerpt from Shelburne's report:

FMD_train_1340

Beto O'Rourke's 'Reality Check'

09/01/2018

Democratic congressman Beto O'Rourke of Texas came to national prominence in 2018 through his high-profile campaign to unseat incumbent Republican U.S. senator Ted Cruz. During the course of his campaign, the Democratic candidate has been confronted with various claims and allegations about himself and his family. One such meme, entitled "'Beto' Reality Check," was shared widely on Facebook in August 2018:A spokesperson for O'Rourke's campaign described the meme as "factually incorrect in countless ways" and largely referred us to several existing news reports about the allegations. The following is our breakdown of the five sections contained in the meme.O'Rourke adopted the name "Beto" to appeal to Latino voters: The meme claimed:NOT HISPANIC"Robert O'Rourke" became "Beto" for his political campaigns and on the ballot, a tactic that gives the false impression he's Latino, misleading voters in a state with many Hispanics.In fact, O'Rourke was known as "Beto" long before he entered political life, although his birth name is Robert and he appears to use both first names interchangeably. (For example, his July 2018 Federal Election Commission "Statement of Candidacy" lists his name as "Robert Beto O'Rourke.")O'Rourke told CNN that his parents referred to him as Beto "from day one," and that it "just stuck." Others have noted that the name is likely derived from a pronunciation of the Spanish "Roberto," and O'Rourke himself described it as "a nickname for Robert in El Paso." (According to the U.S. Census Bureau, around 78 percent of El Paso county residents listed themselves as being of Mexican heritage in 2016.)O'Rourke's family is of Irish heritage. According to the New York Times, his family "came over from Ireland four generations ago to work on the railroad." His father Pat O'Rourke was a prominent El Paso County official during the 1980s.A 1986 article about Pat O'Rourke in the El Paso Times referred to his then 14-year-old son as "Beto O'Rourke." In 1999, six years before O'Rourke ran for El Paso city council, the same newspaper referred to "web site designer Beto O'Rourke" in a short article about his I.T. business Stanton Street Design.After checking the archives of the El Paso Times, we found multiple references to "Beto O'Rourke" between 1986 and 2004, when O'Rourk was either a child or a businessman and had never run for political office.In March, the campaign of O'Rourke's Republican opponent, Ted Cruz, launched a radio jingle that poked fun at the name "Beto" and included the following lyrics: "I remember reading stories/Liberal Robert wanted to fit in/So he changed his name to 'Beto'/And hid it with a grin ...":FIRST LISTEN: our new 60-second statewide radio ad introducing our liberal opponent, Congressman Robert ORourke, to Texas voters.Help #KeepTexasRed: https://t.co/PVsiCtbbyL #CruzCrew #TXSen pic.twitter.com/OxK61gZ0ek Ted Cruz (@tedcruz) March 7, 2018The next day, O'Rourke posted a photograph of himself as a young boy, wearing a sweater with the nickname "Beto" stitched into it, establishing that, contrary to false accusation, he did not "change his name" for political reasons:pic.twitter.com/1IO1dgmCkv Beto O'Rourke (@BetoORourke) March 7, 2018O'Rourke used his father's connections to avoid trial for two felonies: UNPROVENThe meme claimed:FELONY ARREST RECORDAs an adult in his mid-20s, O'Rourke was caught breaking into the University of Texas El Paso. Charged with breaking and entering and burglary, he mysteriously avoided trial. A few years later, arrested for drunk driving, he again walked with a "deal." Being the song of a powerful, politically connected County Judge apparently has benefits. O'Rourke dismisses his felony convictions as "youthful pranks" and "mistakes"; it's old news, move along, nothing to see here.O'Rourke has indeed been arrested for burglary and drunk driving, a history which he has discussed several times over the course of his political career, as his spokesperson told us: "While charges were dismissed, this is something that Beto has always publicly addressed -- during his initial run for the city council, his run for Congress, in profiles written about him, during dozens of interviews, and at town halls across the state during this campaign."In a 27 August 2018 op-ed for the Houston Chronicle and San Antonio Express-News, O'Rourke himself wrote:Twenty-three years ago I was arrested for attempted forcible entry after jumping a fence at the University of Texas at El Paso. I spent a night in the El Paso County Jail, was able to make bail the next day, and was released. Three years later, I was arrested for drunk driving -- a far more serious mistake for which there is no excuse.According to El Paso county jail records, O'Rourke was arrested for attempted burglary on 19 May 1995, when he was 22 years old. He was released from custody the same day. Court records show that the prosecutor dropped the charge in February 1996.O'Rourke was also arrested for driving while intoxicated on 27 September 1998, the day after his 26th birthday. He completed a "misdemeanor diversion program" (namely "DWI school") in October 1999, and the charge was dropped.In August 2018, the Houston Chronicle and San Antonio Express-News cited police reports, including a witness account, which suggested that the incident leading to O'Rourke's DWI arrest was relatively serious and involved a collision with another vehicle and a possible attempt by O'Rourke to leave the scene:State and local police reports obtained by the Chronicle and Express-News show that ORourke was driving drunk at what a witness called a high rate of speed in a 75 mph zone on Interstate 10 about a mile from the New Mexico border. He lost control and hit a truck, sending his car careening across the center median into oncoming lanes. The witness, who stopped at the scene, later told police that ORourke had tried to drive away from the scene. O'Rourke recorded a 0.136 and 0.134 on police breathalyzers, above a blood-alcohol level of 0.10, the state legal limit at the time.In the case of his DWI arrest, O'Rourke did not face prison time because he completed an alternative adjudication program. It's not clear why the attempted burglary charge was dropped in 1996 (we asked the O'Rourke campaign about this but didn't receive a response to that particular question in time for publication). However, we could find no evidence that O'Rourke's father had any role in either case, nor did the meme offer any evidence.Congressman O'Rourke's father Pat was the El Paso County judge until 1986 -- a kind of chief executive of the county's governing body, the Commissioners Court -- so he had not held office for nine years by the time of his son's attempted burglary arrest.O'Rourke violated 'insider trading' laws: The meme claimed:INSIDER TRADING VIOLATIONSAfter being sent a memo specifically prohibiting investment in Twitter's IPO [initial public offering], O'Rourke made a tidy one-day profit on it. When uncovered by a government watchdog, he quickly turned himself in. This violation of the STOCK Act (Stop Trading on Congressional Knowledge) is apparently a habit, as there are several other instances of this behavior; he characterizes them as mistakes.Despite the meme's claim, O'Rourke has never been charged with, or convicted of, violating any laws related to insider trading, including the STOCK Act, which bars members of the U.S. Congress from benefiting from financial transactions made on the basis of information they received in their capacity as members of Congress.But this section of the meme does contain elements of truth in that -- after the matter was brought to light by a third party -- O'Rourke reported his potential violation of rules to the House Ethics Committee (for stock transactions he maintained were executed by his broker without his knowledge), and the matter was resolved without any charges being brought against him:U.S. Rep. Beto ORourke alerted the House Ethics Committee that he might have violated a new law restricting members of Congress from engaging in certain stock transactions.It is the first case to come before the committee involving a 2012 law that prohibits members of Congress from participating in initial public offerings, or IPOs, other than what is available to members of the public generally, said Melanie Sloan, executive director of the Committee for Ethics and Responsibility in Washington, a watchdog group.ORourke, a Democrat whose district covers a portion of western Texas, reported the possible violation after Legistorm, an online news site that tracks congressional issues, informed him that his Nov. 15 disclosure saying he participated in the Twitter IPO earlier in the month might indicate a violation of a 2012 law called the Stop Trading on Congressional Knowledge Act, or STOCK Act.The freshman congressman also reported that, through his stockbroker, he participated in six other initial public offerings this year. In an interview, ORourke said he didnt see a Nov. 5 memo from the House Ethics Committee warning members of Congress about participating in IPOs.On 27 November 2013, O'Rourke wrote on Facebook that the ethics committee had informed him they would consider the issue resolved once he sold off any remaining shares that he bought during any IPOs, and sent the U.S. Treasury a check equal to the amount he earned in profits from those IPO-related shares:Upon receiving the letter from the Committee today I instructed my broker to sell all remaining shares, which he did. I then sent a check for the full amount of the profit from all IPO trades this year to the U.S. Treasury by overnight mail. Copies of the trades and the check have been sent to the Ethics Committee.I apologize to the House of Representatives and to the people I represent for not exercising due diligence. I will be much more thorough in the future concerning financial transactions and do my best to ensure that I am in full compliance with all rules covering members of Congress.Records filed with the Clerk of the House of Representatives show that O'Rourke bought between $1,000 and $15,000 worth of shares in Twitter on 7 November 2013 (the first day the company was traded on the stock market), before selling off between $1,000 and $15,000 in shares later that day.Records also indicate that on 27 November 2013, O'Rourke again sold off between $1,000 and $15,000 worth of Twitter shares "pursuant to the recommendations made by House Ethics Committee in a letter from 11/27/13."A condom full of "white powder" was found in O'Rourke's father's car: trueThe meme claimed:FATHER'S DRUG SCANDALO'Rourke's father, while county judge, had a 2-way radio installed in his Jeep. Installers discovered a condom packed with a "white powder" concealed in his vehicle and called police. Much to the dismay of investigating officers, the Captain on duty, a friend and political ally of O'Rourke, flushed the evidence down the toilet and dropped the charges. The Captain was subsequently suspended and tried for tampering with evidence.This section of the meme relates to incidents which took place in 1983, when Beto O'Rourke was 10 years old, and which had absolutely nothing to do with him.Nevertheless, it's true that in February 1983, El Paso County Sheriff's Captain Willie Hill told two police officers to get rid of a condom full of white powder which they had found in Pat O'Rourke's car while they were installing a radio in it. The officers suspected the powder to be heroin or cocaine, but the substance was never tested to determine its true nature.Hill was temporarily suspended but was reinstated after being acquitted on a misdemeanor charge of evidence tampering. (The prosecutor had earlier dropped a charge of misconduct against him.) Hill testified that he made a snap decision about the discovery of the powder, which he strongly suspected had been planted there to embarrass or undermine either O'Rourke or one of the officers installing the radio.O'Rourke and Hill were friends, as O'Rourke (then county judge) told the El Paso Times: "Because he's a good man, it would be an injustice if Willie were to suffer grievous consequences from this whole episode. You have an honest and honorable man implicated by pure fluke. And that's just damn right not fair."O'Rourke was involved in a family business that was prosecuted for tax violations: The meme claimed:FAMILY BUSINESS FEDERALLY PROSECUTEDO'Rourke's family business "Charlotte's Furniture," a store "Beto," his mother and sister are involved with, was charged in 2010 with altering records to avoid IRS reporting. Investigators found they accepted cash payments, in one instance over $630,000 from an unnamed individual (that's a LOT of furniture)! Found guilty on 15 counts, the sentence was a $250,000 fine and 5 years' probation. Around the time O'Rourke announced as a senate candidate, the business was shuttered and its records became unavailable. O'Rourke passes the prosecution off as a "mistake"; it's been covered, move along, nothing to see here.The meme got the basic facts right about the federal tax case against Charlotte's, but it falsely claimed that Congressman O'Rourke was personally "involved" in the company. He was not.In 2010, Charlotte's Inc., an El Paso furniture store company started by O'Rourke's grandmother in 1951, was convicted of "structuring transactions to evade reporting requirements, a tax-related felony. The company was charged as a corporate entity, but the Congressman's mother, Melissa O'Rourke, acted as its authorized representative.The company pled guilty to accusations that it had restructured transactions in order to present relatively large cash payments as having been made in installments of less than $10,000. Anti-money laundering provisions of U.S. law require that a business reveal the identity of any individual who makes a cash payment above that threshold.In total, Charlotte's and its employees illegally restructured $630,000 in payments, all from one customer, in this way between May 2005 and October 2006. The identity of that customer is not known. U.S. District Court judge Kathleen Cardone gave a sentence of five years' probation and a $500,000 fine, with $250,000 of that suspended.In 2017, Melissa O'Rourke announced that she intended to close down the business but denied the decision was connected to her son's U.S. Senate campaign or the 2010 conviction.According to Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts records for 2017, Congressman O'Rourke had no formal role with Charlotte's Inc., whose directors were Melissa O'Rourke and the Congressman's sister Charlotte O'Rourke.Records for 2005 and 2006 (when the I.R.S. reporting violations took place) as well as 2010 (when the conviction happened) show that Congressman O'Rourke had no formal role with the company at those times, either.The Congressman is part owner of the property where Charlotte's was located. According to O'Rourke's 2013 congressional financial disclosure, his mother gifted him an ownership stake worth between $1 million and $5 million in Peppertree Square, a shopping center on North Mesa St. in El Paso.However, his part ownership of the Peppertree Square property (which does not appear to entail any management function in any of the businesses located there) did not accrue until 31 December 2012, more than six years after the conclusion of the I.R.S. reporting violations at Charlotte's. One such meme, entitled "'Beto' Reality Check," was shared widely on Facebook in August 2018: meme A spokesperson for O'Rourke's campaign described the meme as "factually incorrect in countless ways" and largely referred us to several existing news reports about the allegations. The following is our breakdown of the five sections contained in the meme. The meme claimed: NOT HISPANIC "Robert O'Rourke" became "Beto" for his political campaigns and on the ballot, a tactic that gives the false impression he's Latino, misleading voters in a state with many Hispanics. In fact, O'Rourke was known as "Beto" long before he entered political life, although his birth name is Robert and he appears to use both first names interchangeably. (For example, his July 2018 Federal Election Commission "Statement of Candidacy" lists his name as "Robert Beto O'Rourke.") Statement O'Rourke told CNN that his parents referred to him as Beto "from day one," and that it "just stuck." Others have noted that the name is likely derived from a pronunciation of the Spanish "Roberto," and O'Rourke himself described it as "a nickname for Robert in El Paso." (According to the U.S. Census Bureau, around 78 percent of El Paso county residents listed themselves as being of Mexican heritage in 2016.) CNN noted listed O'Rourke's family is of Irish heritage. According to the New York Times, his family "came over from Ireland four generations ago to work on the railroad." His father Pat O'Rourke was a prominent El Paso County official during the 1980s. New York Times A 1986 article about Pat O'Rourke in the El Paso Times referred to his then 14-year-old son as "Beto O'Rourke." In 1999, six years before O'Rourke ran for El Paso city council, the same newspaper referred to "web site designer Beto O'Rourke" in a short article about his I.T. business Stanton Street Design. article article After checking the archives of the El Paso Times, we found multiple references to "Beto O'Rourke" between 1986 and 2004, when O'Rourk was either a child or a businessman and had never run for political office. In March, the campaign of O'Rourke's Republican opponent, Ted Cruz, launched a radio jingle that poked fun at the name "Beto" and included the following lyrics: "I remember reading stories/Liberal Robert wanted to fit in/So he changed his name to 'Beto'/And hid it with a grin ...": FIRST LISTEN: our new 60-second statewide radio ad introducing our liberal opponent, Congressman Robert ORourke, to Texas voters. Help #KeepTexasRed: https://t.co/PVsiCtbbyL #CruzCrew #TXSen pic.twitter.com/OxK61gZ0ek #KeepTexasRed https://t.co/PVsiCtbbyL #CruzCrew #TXSen pic.twitter.com/OxK61gZ0ek Ted Cruz (@tedcruz) March 7, 2018 March 7, 2018 The next day, O'Rourke posted a photograph of himself as a young boy, wearing a sweater with the nickname "Beto" stitched into it, establishing that, contrary to false accusation, he did not "change his name" for political reasons: pic.twitter.com/1IO1dgmCkv pic.twitter.com/1IO1dgmCkv Beto O'Rourke (@BetoORourke) March 7, 2018 March 7, 2018 The meme claimed: FELONY ARREST RECORD As an adult in his mid-20s, O'Rourke was caught breaking into the University of Texas El Paso. Charged with breaking and entering and burglary, he mysteriously avoided trial. A few years later, arrested for drunk driving, he again walked with a "deal." Being the song of a powerful, politically connected County Judge apparently has benefits. O'Rourke dismisses his felony convictions as "youthful pranks" and "mistakes"; it's old news, move along, nothing to see here. O'Rourke has indeed been arrested for burglary and drunk driving, a history which he has discussed several times over the course of his political career, as his spokesperson told us: "While charges were dismissed, this is something that Beto has always publicly addressed -- during his initial run for the city council, his run for Congress, in profiles written about him, during dozens of interviews, and at town halls across the state during this campaign." In a 27 August 2018 op-ed for the Houston Chronicle and San Antonio Express-News, O'Rourke himself wrote: op-ed Twenty-three years ago I was arrested for attempted forcible entry after jumping a fence at the University of Texas at El Paso. I spent a night in the El Paso County Jail, was able to make bail the next day, and was released. Three years later, I was arrested for drunk driving -- a far more serious mistake for which there is no excuse. According to El Paso county jail records, O'Rourke was arrested for attempted burglary on 19 May 1995, when he was 22 years old. He was released from custody the same day. Court records show that the prosecutor dropped the charge in February 1996. records records O'Rourke was also arrested for driving while intoxicated on 27 September 1998, the day after his 26th birthday. He completed a "misdemeanor diversion program" (namely "DWI school") in October 1999, and the charge was dropped. arrested In August 2018, the Houston Chronicle and San Antonio Express-News cited police reports, including a witness account, which suggested that the incident leading to O'Rourke's DWI arrest was relatively serious and involved a collision with another vehicle and a possible attempt by O'Rourke to leave the scene: cited State and local police reports obtained by the Chronicle and Express-News show that ORourke was driving drunk at what a witness called a high rate of speed in a 75 mph zone on Interstate 10 about a mile from the New Mexico border. He lost control and hit a truck, sending his car careening across the center median into oncoming lanes. The witness, who stopped at the scene, later told police that ORourke had tried to drive away from the scene. O'Rourke recorded a 0.136 and 0.134 on police breathalyzers, above a blood-alcohol level of 0.10, the state legal limit at the time. In the case of his DWI arrest, O'Rourke did not face prison time because he completed an alternative adjudication program. It's not clear why the attempted burglary charge was dropped in 1996 (we asked the O'Rourke campaign about this but didn't receive a response to that particular question in time for publication). However, we could find no evidence that O'Rourke's father had any role in either case, nor did the meme offer any evidence. Congressman O'Rourke's father Pat was the El Paso County judge until 1986 -- a kind of chief executive of the county's governing body, the Commissioners Court -- so he had not held office for nine years by the time of his son's attempted burglary arrest. judge governing body The meme claimed: INSIDER TRADING VIOLATIONS After being sent a memo specifically prohibiting investment in Twitter's IPO [initial public offering], O'Rourke made a tidy one-day profit on it. When uncovered by a government watchdog, he quickly turned himself in. This violation of the STOCK Act (Stop Trading on Congressional Knowledge) is apparently a habit, as there are several other instances of this behavior; he characterizes them as mistakes. Despite the meme's claim, O'Rourke has never been charged with, or convicted of, violating any laws related to insider trading, including the STOCK Act, which bars members of the U.S. Congress from benefiting from financial transactions made on the basis of information they received in their capacity as members of Congress. STOCK Act But this section of the meme does contain elements of truth in that -- after the matter was brought to light by a third party -- O'Rourke reported his potential violation of rules to the House Ethics Committee (for stock transactions he maintained were executed by his broker without his knowledge), and the matter was resolved without any charges being brought against him: violation U.S. Rep. Beto ORourke alerted the House Ethics Committee that he might have violated a new law restricting members of Congress from engaging in certain stock transactions. It is the first case to come before the committee involving a 2012 law that prohibits members of Congress from participating in initial public offerings, or IPOs, other than what is available to members of the public generally, said Melanie Sloan, executive director of the Committee for Ethics and Responsibility in Washington, a watchdog group. ORourke, a Democrat whose district covers a portion of western Texas, reported the possible violation after Legistorm, an online news site that tracks congressional issues, informed him that his Nov. 15 disclosure saying he participated in the Twitter IPO earlier in the month might indicate a violation of a 2012 law called the Stop Trading on Congressional Knowledge Act, or STOCK Act. The freshman congressman also reported that, through his stockbroker, he participated in six other initial public offerings this year. In an interview, ORourke said he didnt see a Nov. 5 memo from the House Ethics Committee warning members of Congress about participating in IPOs. On 27 November 2013, O'Rourke wrote on Facebook that the ethics committee had informed him they would consider the issue resolved once he sold off any remaining shares that he bought during any IPOs, and sent the U.S. Treasury a check equal to the amount he earned in profits from those IPO-related shares: wrote Upon receiving the letter from the Committee today I instructed my broker to sell all remaining shares, which he did. I then sent a check for the full amount of the profit from all IPO trades this year to the U.S. Treasury by overnight mail. Copies of the trades and the check have been sent to the Ethics Committee. I apologize to the House of Representatives and to the people I represent for not exercising due diligence. I will be much more thorough in the future concerning financial transactions and do my best to ensure that I am in full compliance with all rules covering members of Congress. Records filed with the Clerk of the House of Representatives show that O'Rourke bought between $1,000 and $15,000 worth of shares in Twitter on 7 November 2013 (the first day the company was traded on the stock market), before selling off between $1,000 and $15,000 in shares later that day. filed Records also indicate that on 27 November 2013, O'Rourke again sold off between $1,000 and $15,000 worth of Twitter shares "pursuant to the recommendations made by House Ethics Committee in a letter from 11/27/13." indicate The meme claimed: FATHER'S DRUG SCANDAL O'Rourke's father, while county judge, had a 2-way radio installed in his Jeep. Installers discovered a condom packed with a "white powder" concealed in his vehicle and called police. Much to the dismay of investigating officers, the Captain on duty, a friend and political ally of O'Rourke, flushed the evidence down the toilet and dropped the charges. The Captain was subsequently suspended and tried for tampering with evidence. This section of the meme relates to incidents which took place in 1983, when Beto O'Rourke was 10 years old, and which had absolutely nothing to do with him. Nevertheless, it's true that in February 1983, El Paso County Sheriff's Captain Willie Hill told two police officers to get rid of a condom full of white powder which they had found in Pat O'Rourke's car while they were installing a radio in it. The officers suspected the powder to be heroin or cocaine, but the substance was never tested to determine its true nature. Hill was temporarily suspended but was reinstated after being acquitted on a misdemeanor charge of evidence tampering. (The prosecutor had earlier dropped a charge of misconduct against him.) Hill testified that he made a snap decision about the discovery of the powder, which he strongly suspected had been planted there to embarrass or undermine either O'Rourke or one of the officers installing the radio. being acquitted O'Rourke and Hill were friends, as O'Rourke (then county judge) told the El Paso Times: "Because he's a good man, it would be an injustice if Willie were to suffer grievous consequences from this whole episode. You have an honest and honorable man implicated by pure fluke. And that's just damn right not fair." El Paso Times The meme claimed: FAMILY BUSINESS FEDERALLY PROSECUTED O'Rourke's family business "Charlotte's Furniture," a store "Beto," his mother and sister are involved with, was charged in 2010 with altering records to avoid IRS reporting. Investigators found they accepted cash payments, in one instance over $630,000 from an unnamed individual (that's a LOT of furniture)! Found guilty on 15 counts, the sentence was a $250,000 fine and 5 years' probation. Around the time O'Rourke announced as a senate candidate, the business was shuttered and its records became unavailable. O'Rourke passes the prosecution off as a "mistake"; it's been covered, move along, nothing to see here. The meme got the basic facts right about the federal tax case against Charlotte's, but it falsely claimed that Congressman O'Rourke was personally "involved" in the company. He was not. In 2010, Charlotte's Inc., an El Paso furniture store company started by O'Rourke's grandmother in 1951, was convicted of "structuring transactions to evade reporting requirements, a tax-related felony. The company was charged as a corporate entity, but the Congressman's mother, Melissa O'Rourke, acted as its authorized representative. felony The company pled guilty to accusations that it had restructured transactions in order to present relatively large cash payments as having been made in installments of less than $10,000. Anti-money laundering provisions of U.S. law require that a business reveal the identity of any individual who makes a cash payment above that threshold. restructured provisions In total, Charlotte's and its employees illegally restructured $630,000 in payments, all from one customer, in this way between May 2005 and October 2006. The identity of that customer is not known. U.S. District Court judge Kathleen Cardone gave a sentence of five years' probation and a $500,000 fine, with $250,000 of that suspended. sentence In 2017, Melissa O'Rourke announced that she intended to close down the business but denied the decision was connected to her son's U.S. Senate campaign or the 2010 conviction. announced According to Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts records for 2017, Congressman O'Rourke had no formal role with Charlotte's Inc., whose directors were Melissa O'Rourke and the Congressman's sister Charlotte O'Rourke. records Records for 2005 and 2006 (when the I.R.S. reporting violations took place) as well as 2010 (when the conviction happened) show that Congressman O'Rourke had no formal role with the company at those times, either. Records The Congressman is part owner of the property where Charlotte's was located. According to O'Rourke's 2013 congressional financial disclosure, his mother gifted him an ownership stake worth between $1 million and $5 million in Peppertree Square, a shopping center on North Mesa St. in El Paso. disclosure However, his part ownership of the Peppertree Square property (which does not appear to entail any management function in any of the businesses located there) did not accrue until 31 December 2012, more than six years after the conclusion of the I.R.S. reporting violations at Charlotte's. O'Rourke, Robert Beto. "Statement of Candidacy." Federal Election Commission. 9 July 2018. Bradner, Eric. "With Primary Ending, Cruz Takes Opening Shot at Beto O'Rourke's Name." CNN. 7 March 2018. Stanton, John. "Juarez's Biggest Booster Is an Irish-American Congressman." BuzzFeed News. 14 October 2014. Draper, Robert. "Texas, Three Ways." The New York Times. 14 November 2014. Scharrer, Gary. "O'Rourke Goes Out Talking." The El Paso Times. 8 December 1986. The El Paso Times. "Consumers Dial Up Web Site." 16 June 1999. O'Rourke, Beto. "Texas Should Lead the Way on True Criminal Justice Reform." The Houston Chronicle. 27 August 2018. Diaz, Kevin. "Police Reports Detail Beto O'Rourke's 1998 DWI Arrest." The Houston Chronicle. 31 August 2018. Cruz, Laura. "Friends, Family Say Goodbye to O'Rourke." The El Paso Times. 7 July 2001. The White House. "Fact Sheet: The STOCK Act -- Bans Members of Congress from Insider Trading." 4 April 2012. The El Paso Times. "Congressman May Have Broken Ethics Rules with Twitter Stock Purchase." 26 November 2013. Landis, David. "Jurors Decided Hill Negligent, Not Criminal." The El Paso Times. 23 December 1983. Scharrer, Gary. "O'Rourke Expresses Sorrow Over Charge." The El Paso Times. 29 October 1983. Legal Information Institute. "U.S. Code, Title 31, Subtitle IV, Chapter 53, Subchapter II, Section 5324 -- Structuring Transactions to Evade Reporting Requirement Prohibite." Cornell Law School. Accessed 31 August 2018. U.S. District Court, Western District of Texas, El Paso Division. "U.S.A. vs Charlotte's Inc. -- Information." 4 May 2010. U.S. District Court, Western District of Texas, El Paso Division. "U.S.A. vs Charlotte's Inc. -- Amended Judgment." 8 June 2010. Villa, Pablo. "Charlotte's Furniture Store to Close This Year, Owner Says." The El Paso Times. 4 August 2017. Correction [4 September 2018]: This article has been updated to more accurately describe the role of El Paso County judge.

NEI

One such meme, entitled "'Beto' Reality Check," was shared widely on Facebook in August 2018:A spokesperson for O'Rourke's campaign described the meme as "factually incorrect in countless ways" and largely referred us to several existing news reports about the allegations. The following is our breakdown of the five sections contained in the meme.O'Rourke adopted the name "Beto" to appeal to Latino voters: The meme claimed:NOT HISPANIC"Robert O'Rourke" became "Beto" for his political campaigns and on the ballot, a tactic that gives the false impression he's Latino, misleading voters in a state with many Hispanics.In fact, O'Rourke was known as "Beto" long before he entered political life, although his birth name is Robert and he appears to use both first names interchangeably. (For example, his July 2018 Federal Election Commission "Statement of Candidacy" lists his name as "Robert Beto O'Rourke.")O'Rourke told CNN that his parents referred to him as Beto "from day one," and that it "just stuck." Others have noted that the name is likely derived from a pronunciation of the Spanish "Roberto," and O'Rourke himself described it as "a nickname for Robert in El Paso." (According to the U.S. Census Bureau, around 78 percent of El Paso county residents listed themselves as being of Mexican heritage in 2016.)O'Rourke's family is of Irish heritage. According to the New York Times, his family "came over from Ireland four generations ago to work on the railroad." His father Pat O'Rourke was a prominent El Paso County official during the 1980s.A 1986 article about Pat O'Rourke in the El Paso Times referred to his then 14-year-old son as "Beto O'Rourke." In 1999, six years before O'Rourke ran for El Paso city council, the same newspaper referred to "web site designer Beto O'Rourke" in a short article about his I.T. business Stanton Street Design.After checking the archives of the El Paso Times, we found multiple references to "Beto O'Rourke" between 1986 and 2004, when O'Rourk was either a child or a businessman and had never run for political office.In March, the campaign of O'Rourke's Republican opponent, Ted Cruz, launched a radio jingle that poked fun at the name "Beto" and included the following lyrics: "I remember reading stories/Liberal Robert wanted to fit in/So he changed his name to 'Beto'/And hid it with a grin ...":FIRST LISTEN: our new 60-second statewide radio ad introducing our liberal opponent, Congressman Robert ORourke, to Texas voters.Help #KeepTexasRed: https://t.co/PVsiCtbbyL #CruzCrew #TXSen pic.twitter.com/OxK61gZ0ek Ted Cruz (@tedcruz) March 7, 2018The next day, O'Rourke posted a photograph of himself as a young boy, wearing a sweater with the nickname "Beto" stitched into it, establishing that, contrary to false accusation, he did not "change his name" for political reasons:pic.twitter.com/1IO1dgmCkv Beto O'Rourke (@BetoORourke) March 7, 2018O'Rourke used his father's connections to avoid trial for two felonies: UNPROVENThe meme claimed:FELONY ARREST RECORDAs an adult in his mid-20s, O'Rourke was caught breaking into the University of Texas El Paso. Charged with breaking and entering and burglary, he mysteriously avoided trial. A few years later, arrested for drunk driving, he again walked with a "deal." Being the song of a powerful, politically connected County Judge apparently has benefits. O'Rourke dismisses his felony convictions as "youthful pranks" and "mistakes"; it's old news, move along, nothing to see here.O'Rourke has indeed been arrested for burglary and drunk driving, a history which he has discussed several times over the course of his political career, as his spokesperson told us: "While charges were dismissed, this is something that Beto has always publicly addressed -- during his initial run for the city council, his run for Congress, in profiles written about him, during dozens of interviews, and at town halls across the state during this campaign."In a 27 August 2018 op-ed for the Houston Chronicle and San Antonio Express-News, O'Rourke himself wrote:Twenty-three years ago I was arrested for attempted forcible entry after jumping a fence at the University of Texas at El Paso. I spent a night in the El Paso County Jail, was able to make bail the next day, and was released. Three years later, I was arrested for drunk driving -- a far more serious mistake for which there is no excuse.According to El Paso county jail records, O'Rourke was arrested for attempted burglary on 19 May 1995, when he was 22 years old. He was released from custody the same day. Court records show that the prosecutor dropped the charge in February 1996.O'Rourke was also arrested for driving while intoxicated on 27 September 1998, the day after his 26th birthday. He completed a "misdemeanor diversion program" (namely "DWI school") in October 1999, and the charge was dropped.In August 2018, the Houston Chronicle and San Antonio Express-News cited police reports, including a witness account, which suggested that the incident leading to O'Rourke's DWI arrest was relatively serious and involved a collision with another vehicle and a possible attempt by O'Rourke to leave the scene:State and local police reports obtained by the Chronicle and Express-News show that ORourke was driving drunk at what a witness called a high rate of speed in a 75 mph zone on Interstate 10 about a mile from the New Mexico border. He lost control and hit a truck, sending his car careening across the center median into oncoming lanes. The witness, who stopped at the scene, later told police that ORourke had tried to drive away from the scene. O'Rourke recorded a 0.136 and 0.134 on police breathalyzers, above a blood-alcohol level of 0.10, the state legal limit at the time.In the case of his DWI arrest, O'Rourke did not face prison time because he completed an alternative adjudication program. It's not clear why the attempted burglary charge was dropped in 1996 (we asked the O'Rourke campaign about this but didn't receive a response to that particular question in time for publication). However, we could find no evidence that O'Rourke's father had any role in either case, nor did the meme offer any evidence.Congressman O'Rourke's father Pat was the El Paso County judge until 1986 -- a kind of chief executive of the county's governing body, the Commissioners Court -- so he had not held office for nine years by the time of his son's attempted burglary arrest.O'Rourke violated 'insider trading' laws: The meme claimed:INSIDER TRADING VIOLATIONSAfter being sent a memo specifically prohibiting investment in Twitter's IPO [initial public offering], O'Rourke made a tidy one-day profit on it. When uncovered by a government watchdog, he quickly turned himself in. This violation of the STOCK Act (Stop Trading on Congressional Knowledge) is apparently a habit, as there are several other instances of this behavior; he characterizes them as mistakes.Despite the meme's claim, O'Rourke has never been charged with, or convicted of, violating any laws related to insider trading, including the STOCK Act, which bars members of the U.S. Congress from benefiting from financial transactions made on the basis of information they received in their capacity as members of Congress.But this section of the meme does contain elements of truth in that -- after the matter was brought to light by a third party -- O'Rourke reported his potential violation of rules to the House Ethics Committee (for stock transactions he maintained were executed by his broker without his knowledge), and the matter was resolved without any charges being brought against him:U.S. Rep. Beto ORourke alerted the House Ethics Committee that he might have violated a new law restricting members of Congress from engaging in certain stock transactions.It is the first case to come before the committee involving a 2012 law that prohibits members of Congress from participating in initial public offerings, or IPOs, other than what is available to members of the public generally, said Melanie Sloan, executive director of the Committee for Ethics and Responsibility in Washington, a watchdog group.ORourke, a Democrat whose district covers a portion of western Texas, reported the possible violation after Legistorm, an online news site that tracks congressional issues, informed him that his Nov. 15 disclosure saying he participated in the Twitter IPO earlier in the month might indicate a violation of a 2012 law called the Stop Trading on Congressional Knowledge Act, or STOCK Act.The freshman congressman also reported that, through his stockbroker, he participated in six other initial public offerings this year. In an interview, ORourke said he didnt see a Nov. 5 memo from the House Ethics Committee warning members of Congress about participating in IPOs.On 27 November 2013, O'Rourke wrote on Facebook that the ethics committee had informed him they would consider the issue resolved once he sold off any remaining shares that he bought during any IPOs, and sent the U.S. Treasury a check equal to the amount he earned in profits from those IPO-related shares:Upon receiving the letter from the Committee today I instructed my broker to sell all remaining shares, which he did. I then sent a check for the full amount of the profit from all IPO trades this year to the U.S. Treasury by overnight mail. Copies of the trades and the check have been sent to the Ethics Committee.I apologize to the House of Representatives and to the people I represent for not exercising due diligence. I will be much more thorough in the future concerning financial transactions and do my best to ensure that I am in full compliance with all rules covering members of Congress.Records filed with the Clerk of the House of Representatives show that O'Rourke bought between $1,000 and $15,000 worth of shares in Twitter on 7 November 2013 (the first day the company was traded on the stock market), before selling off between $1,000 and $15,000 in shares later that day.Records also indicate that on 27 November 2013, O'Rourke again sold off between $1,000 and $15,000 worth of Twitter shares "pursuant to the recommendations made by House Ethics Committee in a letter from 11/27/13."A condom full of "white powder" was found in O'Rourke's father's car: trueThe meme claimed:FATHER'S DRUG SCANDALO'Rourke's father, while county judge, had a 2-way radio installed in his Jeep. Installers discovered a condom packed with a "white powder" concealed in his vehicle and called police. Much to the dismay of investigating officers, the Captain on duty, a friend and political ally of O'Rourke, flushed the evidence down the toilet and dropped the charges. The Captain was subsequently suspended and tried for tampering with evidence.This section of the meme relates to incidents which took place in 1983, when Beto O'Rourke was 10 years old, and which had absolutely nothing to do with him.Nevertheless, it's true that in February 1983, El Paso County Sheriff's Captain Willie Hill told two police officers to get rid of a condom full of white powder which they had found in Pat O'Rourke's car while they were installing a radio in it. The officers suspected the powder to be heroin or cocaine, but the substance was never tested to determine its true nature.Hill was temporarily suspended but was reinstated after being acquitted on a misdemeanor charge of evidence tampering. (The prosecutor had earlier dropped a charge of misconduct against him.) Hill testified that he made a snap decision about the discovery of the powder, which he strongly suspected had been planted there to embarrass or undermine either O'Rourke or one of the officers installing the radio.O'Rourke and Hill were friends, as O'Rourke (then county judge) told the El Paso Times: "Because he's a good man, it would be an injustice if Willie were to suffer grievous consequences from this whole episode. You have an honest and honorable man implicated by pure fluke. And that's just damn right not fair."O'Rourke was involved in a family business that was prosecuted for tax violations: The meme claimed:FAMILY BUSINESS FEDERALLY PROSECUTEDO'Rourke's family business "Charlotte's Furniture," a store "Beto," his mother and sister are involved with, was charged in 2010 with altering records to avoid IRS reporting. Investigators found they accepted cash payments, in one instance over $630,000 from an unnamed individual (that's a LOT of furniture)! Found guilty on 15 counts, the sentence was a $250,000 fine and 5 years' probation. Around the time O'Rourke announced as a senate candidate, the business was shuttered and its records became unavailable. O'Rourke passes the prosecution off as a "mistake"; it's been covered, move along, nothing to see here.The meme got the basic facts right about the federal tax case against Charlotte's, but it falsely claimed that Congressman O'Rourke was personally "involved" in the company. He was not.In 2010, Charlotte's Inc., an El Paso furniture store company started by O'Rourke's grandmother in 1951, was convicted of "structuring transactions to evade reporting requirements, a tax-related felony. The company was charged as a corporate entity, but the Congressman's mother, Melissa O'Rourke, acted as its authorized representative.The company pled guilty to accusations that it had restructured transactions in order to present relatively large cash payments as having been made in installments of less than $10,000. Anti-money laundering provisions of U.S. law require that a business reveal the identity of any individual who makes a cash payment above that threshold.In total, Charlotte's and its employees illegally restructured $630,000 in payments, all from one customer, in this way between May 2005 and October 2006. The identity of that customer is not known. U.S. District Court judge Kathleen Cardone gave a sentence of five years' probation and a $500,000 fine, with $250,000 of that suspended.In 2017, Melissa O'Rourke announced that she intended to close down the business but denied the decision was connected to her son's U.S. Senate campaign or the 2010 conviction.According to Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts records for 2017, Congressman O'Rourke had no formal role with Charlotte's Inc., whose directors were Melissa O'Rourke and the Congressman's sister Charlotte O'Rourke.Records for 2005 and 2006 (when the I.R.S. reporting violations took place) as well as 2010 (when the conviction happened) show that Congressman O'Rourke had no formal role with the company at those times, either.The Congressman is part owner of the property where Charlotte's was located. According to O'Rourke's 2013 congressional financial disclosure, his mother gifted him an ownership stake worth between $1 million and $5 million in Peppertree Square, a shopping center on North Mesa St. in El Paso.However, his part ownership of the Peppertree Square property (which does not appear to entail any management function in any of the businesses located there) did not accrue until 31 December 2012, more than six years after the conclusion of the I.R.S. reporting violations at Charlotte's.One such meme, entitled "'Beto' Reality Check," was shared widely on Facebook in August 2018:In fact, O'Rourke was known as "Beto" long before he entered political life, although his birth name is Robert and he appears to use both first names interchangeably. (For example, his July 2018 Federal Election Commission "Statement of Candidacy" lists his name as "Robert Beto O'Rourke.")O'Rourke told CNN that his parents referred to him as Beto "from day one," and that it "just stuck." Others have noted that the name is likely derived from a pronunciation of the Spanish "Roberto," and O'Rourke himself described it as "a nickname for Robert in El Paso." (According to the U.S. Census Bureau, around 78 percent of El Paso county residents listed themselves as being of Mexican heritage in 2016.)O'Rourke's family is of Irish heritage. According to the New York Times, his family "came over from Ireland four generations ago to work on the railroad." His father Pat O'Rourke was a prominent El Paso County official during the 1980s.A 1986 article about Pat O'Rourke in the El Paso Times referred to his then 14-year-old son as "Beto O'Rourke." In 1999, six years before O'Rourke ran for El Paso city council, the same newspaper referred to "web site designer Beto O'Rourke" in a short article about his I.T. business Stanton Street Design.Help #KeepTexasRed: https://t.co/PVsiCtbbyL #CruzCrew #TXSen pic.twitter.com/OxK61gZ0ek Ted Cruz (@tedcruz) March 7, 2018pic.twitter.com/1IO1dgmCkv Beto O'Rourke (@BetoORourke) March 7, 2018In a 27 August 2018 op-ed for the Houston Chronicle and San Antonio Express-News, O'Rourke himself wrote:According to El Paso county jail records, O'Rourke was arrested for attempted burglary on 19 May 1995, when he was 22 years old. He was released from custody the same day. Court records show that the prosecutor dropped the charge in February 1996.O'Rourke was also arrested for driving while intoxicated on 27 September 1998, the day after his 26th birthday. He completed a "misdemeanor diversion program" (namely "DWI school") in October 1999, and the charge was dropped.In August 2018, the Houston Chronicle and San Antonio Express-News cited police reports, including a witness account, which suggested that the incident leading to O'Rourke's DWI arrest was relatively serious and involved a collision with another vehicle and a possible attempt by O'Rourke to leave the scene:Congressman O'Rourke's father Pat was the El Paso County judge until 1986 -- a kind of chief executive of the county's governing body, the Commissioners Court -- so he had not held office for nine years by the time of his son's attempted burglary arrest.Despite the meme's claim, O'Rourke has never been charged with, or convicted of, violating any laws related to insider trading, including the STOCK Act, which bars members of the U.S. Congress from benefiting from financial transactions made on the basis of information they received in their capacity as members of Congress.But this section of the meme does contain elements of truth in that -- after the matter was brought to light by a third party -- O'Rourke reported his potential violation of rules to the House Ethics Committee (for stock transactions he maintained were executed by his broker without his knowledge), and the matter was resolved without any charges being brought against him:On 27 November 2013, O'Rourke wrote on Facebook that the ethics committee had informed him they would consider the issue resolved once he sold off any remaining shares that he bought during any IPOs, and sent the U.S. Treasury a check equal to the amount he earned in profits from those IPO-related shares:Records filed with the Clerk of the House of Representatives show that O'Rourke bought between $1,000 and $15,000 worth of shares in Twitter on 7 November 2013 (the first day the company was traded on the stock market), before selling off between $1,000 and $15,000 in shares later that day.Records also indicate that on 27 November 2013, O'Rourke again sold off between $1,000 and $15,000 worth of Twitter shares "pursuant to the recommendations made by House Ethics Committee in a letter from 11/27/13."Hill was temporarily suspended but was reinstated after being acquitted on a misdemeanor charge of evidence tampering. (The prosecutor had earlier dropped a charge of misconduct against him.) Hill testified that he made a snap decision about the discovery of the powder, which he strongly suspected had been planted there to embarrass or undermine either O'Rourke or one of the officers installing the radio.O'Rourke and Hill were friends, as O'Rourke (then county judge) told the El Paso Times: "Because he's a good man, it would be an injustice if Willie were to suffer grievous consequences from this whole episode. You have an honest and honorable man implicated by pure fluke. And that's just damn right not fair."In 2010, Charlotte's Inc., an El Paso furniture store company started by O'Rourke's grandmother in 1951, was convicted of "structuring transactions to evade reporting requirements, a tax-related felony. The company was charged as a corporate entity, but the Congressman's mother, Melissa O'Rourke, acted as its authorized representative.The company pled guilty to accusations that it had restructured transactions in order to present relatively large cash payments as having been made in installments of less than $10,000. Anti-money laundering provisions of U.S. law require that a business reveal the identity of any individual who makes a cash payment above that threshold.In total, Charlotte's and its employees illegally restructured $630,000 in payments, all from one customer, in this way between May 2005 and October 2006. The identity of that customer is not known. U.S. District Court judge Kathleen Cardone gave a sentence of five years' probation and a $500,000 fine, with $250,000 of that suspended.In 2017, Melissa O'Rourke announced that she intended to close down the business but denied the decision was connected to her son's U.S. Senate campaign or the 2010 conviction.According to Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts records for 2017, Congressman O'Rourke had no formal role with Charlotte's Inc., whose directors were Melissa O'Rourke and the Congressman's sister Charlotte O'Rourke.Records for 2005 and 2006 (when the I.R.S. reporting violations took place) as well as 2010 (when the conviction happened) show that Congressman O'Rourke had no formal role with the company at those times, either.The Congressman is part owner of the property where Charlotte's was located. According to O'Rourke's 2013 congressional financial disclosure, his mother gifted him an ownership stake worth between $1 million and $5 million in Peppertree Square, a shopping center on North Mesa St. in El Paso.

FMD_train_1527

Silicon Valley Bank donated $73M to 'BLM Movement'

03/22/2023

After Silicon Valley Bank collapsed, some pundits and news organizations suggestedwithout evidencethat woke investments contributed to the collapse. Silicon Valley Bank donated $73M to BLM Movement, one March 15 Newsmaxheadlinecirculating on social media read. Fox News hosts Tucker Carlson andJesse Wattersalso made similar claims. Silicon Valley Bank brace yourself spent more than $73 million on donations to BLM and related organizations, CarlsonsaidMarch 14. The Newsmax article and similarpostswere flagged as part of Facebooks efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about ourpartnership with Meta, which owns Facebook and Instagram.) The Newsmax article pointed to adatabasefrom the Claremont Institute, a conservative think tank. The database tracks pledges and contributions to the BLM movement and related causes, according to the institute. In the databases explanatory notes, the institute said its definition of the BLM movement includes organizations such as Black Lives Matter Global Network Foundation; Movement for Black Lives; grassroots groups; independent BLM chapters; the fiscal sponsors of BLM organizations; and BLM partners such as the NAACP and the American Civil Liberties Union. The Claremont Institute defined Black Lives Matter related causes as organizations and initiatives that advance one or more aspects of BLMs agenda. However, Black Lives Matter is not one entity with a set agenda. It is a decentralized international activistmovementwith no formal hierarchy. The Claremont Institute and Silicon Valley Bank did not respond to PolitiFacts requests for comment. An institute spokespersontold MarketWatchthat most of Silicon Valley Banks roughly $70.5 million in contributions fell in the related causes category. He also said the bank donated to the NAACP and ACLU. The banks charitable contributions included in Claremonts $70 million-plus total went primarily to groups and initiatives with no clear tie to the Black Lives Matter movement: A 2021 pledge to invest more than $50 million over five years into the banksAccess to Innovation program, which works to connect people who are often underrepresented in the innovation economy including women, Blacks and Latinos with hiring, mentorship, educational and networking opportunities. A $20 million donation that the banksaidwould be used to support COVID-19 relief; a needs-based scholarship program; economic development; and diversity, equity and inclusion efforts. A 2-to-1 matchingcampaignthe bank created in 2020 for employees who donated their money or time to social justice organizations. A $250,000 allocation from the Silicon Valley Bank Foundation to support grants for social justice organizations where bank employees volunteer. A prominent Black Lives Matter organization, Black Lives Matter Global Foundation Network, told PolitiFact in a statement that the Black Lives Matter movement includes thousands of organizations, so there is no way for the group to say with certainty whether Silicon Valley Bank donated to any one of them. The group also said the banks possible contributions to Black causes are irrelevant to what caused the banks collapse. Flags fly in Black Lives Matter Plaza as President Joe Biden is sworn in during 59th Presidential Inauguration, Wednesday, Jan. 20, 2021, in Washington. (AP) A report in the newsletterPopular Informationfound an error in the databases calculations: Nearly $3 million in contributions that the database had initially counted occurred in 2019, not 2020. The Claremont Institute, which started tracking this data in 2020, updated the database to reflect that information, meaning the banks total contributions for 2020 were $70.65 million, rather than over $73 million, as the initial claims said. As of March 22, Newsmax had not corrected its headline to reflect that change. Facebook posts claimed Silicon Valley Bank donated $73M to 'BLM Movement.' The claim stemmed from a database kept by the Claremont Institute. It showed that since 2020, Silicon Valley Bank had donated or pledged to donate more than $70 million to causes related to the Black Lives Matter movement. The institute defined related causes as organizations and initiatives that advance one or more aspects of BLMs agenda. Black Lives Matter is not one entity with a set agenda; it is a decentralized international activist movement with no formal hierarchy. A close look at the Claremont list shows that Silicon Valley Banks charitable contributions went primarily to groups and initiatives with no clear association to the Black Lives Matter movement. We rate this claim False. RELATED:Was Silicon Valley Bank demise caused by Trump easing regulation, 'woke' efforts, or something else?

False

After Silicon Valley Bank collapsed, some pundits and news organizations suggestedwithout evidencethat woke investments contributed to the collapse.Silicon Valley Bank donated $73M to BLM Movement, one March 15 Newsmaxheadlinecirculating on social media read.Fox News hosts Tucker Carlson andJesse Wattersalso made similar claims.Silicon Valley Bank brace yourself spent more than $73 million on donations to BLM and related organizations, CarlsonsaidMarch 14.The Newsmax article and similarpostswere flagged as part of Facebooks efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about ourpartnership with Meta, which owns Facebook and Instagram.)The Newsmax article pointed to adatabasefrom the Claremont Institute, a conservative think tank. The database tracks pledges and contributions to the BLM movement and related causes, according to the institute.The Claremont Institute defined Black Lives Matter related causes as organizations and initiatives that advance one or more aspects of BLMs agenda. However, Black Lives Matter is not one entity with a set agenda. It is a decentralized international activistmovementwith no formal hierarchy.An institute spokespersontold MarketWatchthat most of Silicon Valley Banks roughly $70.5 million in contributions fell in the related causes category. He also said the bank donated to the NAACP and ACLU.A 2021 pledge to invest more than $50 million over five years into the banksAccess to Innovation program, which works to connect people who are often underrepresented in the innovation economy including women, Blacks and Latinos with hiring, mentorship, educational and networking opportunities.A $20 million donation that the banksaidwould be used to support COVID-19 relief; a needs-based scholarship program; economic development; and diversity, equity and inclusion efforts.A 2-to-1 matchingcampaignthe bank created in 2020 for employees who donated their money or time to social justice organizations.A report in the newsletterPopular Informationfound an error in the databases calculations: Nearly $3 million in contributions that the database had initially counted occurred in 2019, not 2020. The Claremont Institute, which started tracking this data in 2020, updated the database to reflect that information, meaning the banks total contributions for 2020 were $70.65 million, rather than over $73 million, as the initial claims said.RELATED:Was Silicon Valley Bank demise caused by Trump easing regulation, 'woke' efforts, or something else?

FMD_train_106

Toilets Boobytrapped by Zero Population Growth Terrorists?

10/05/2000

Claim: Zero Population Growth terrorists are boobytrapping men's toilers with razors. Example: [Collected via e-mail, 2000] from: [email protected]: SAIC-All Field Officessubject: Important Operational Warning Notice 29 September 2000 From: Bertrand Seiger, Special Agent in Charge Domestic Terrorism Division Headquarters Field Office Washington D.C. This message is classified at Security Level 3BFile Copy Only To Be Maintained. No Duplication Permitted Operational Immediate: Pass this information along immediately to all field agents, office staff, and support personel, special attention to notification of male staff members. It has now been verified that a new radical splinter group has broken from the main group of the Zero Population Movement. This new group, calling itself simply "No More!" has started to conduct a campaign of domestic terrorism, aimed at reducing the human population of this planet. All staff are hereby advised to use extreme caution when using any public or semi-public restroom facilities, especially male staff members. A confirmed 172 cases of maiming have occurred, with 13 resulting in the death of the victim. Many more cases are pending confirmation. The "No More" group has designed an insidious device that they have been placing in the toilets in public restrooms across the nation. 6 have been found in limited access buildings. The devices consist of a straight razor, a springload mechanism, and a pressure senser. The devices are cleverly hidden underneath the rim of the toilet bowl, and are not visible except by close inspection from inside the space of the bowl. When a subject weighing over 120 pounds sits on the toilet, the pressure senser connected to the toilet seat activates within 5 to 12 seconds, causing the springloaded razor to sweep across the forward half of the toilet. This results in extreme trauma to, or complete severing from the body of the victims testicles. In 102 cases, this has also resulted in the loss or damage of between 6 and 54% of the victims penis. 3 female victims have also suffered minor lacerations. One to the buttocks, and two to the back of the thighs. Plans are being formulated to share this information with state and local law enforcement agencies as soon as it is feasable, without chancing widespread panic amongst the civilian population. Information gathered by the Detroit Field Office also indicates that plans are in the works to install these devices in private residences. Members of "No More" plan to install the devices while in the guise of service providers, such as plumblers. There is no evidence yet to indicate that this practice has yet started. Inform all staff soonest. Staff on their days off should be contacted at home. Every effort should be made to also contact staff on vacation, medical or disability leave, or any other leave of absence. I cannot stress strongly enough the danger that this poses. message endsc/:22ab.9 Origins: This bit of silliness began making the online rounds at the end of September 2000 and is another example of hoaxsters' preying upon deep-rooted fears of castration. Once again, our toilets are supposedly turning against us: 1999's deadly lurking butt spiders have been replaced with a spring-loaded slice-o-matic with a jones for johnsons. butt spiders Despite the dire-sounding, badly-spelled e-mail quoted above, no such cases have been reported anywhere. This lack of reportage is tangentally alluded to as an effort to keep everything hush-hush so as not to cause a "widespread panic amongst the civilian population." Rest assured the media would have broken such a story if any such attacks had come to the attention of even one reporter. It's equally ludicrous to assume the families of the thirteen men who supposedly lost their lives in this fashion would stand silently by, neither raising a public outcry to warn others, nor attempting to hold anyone accountable for the loss of their loved ones. Barbara "all cisterns are go!" Mikkelson Last updated: 22 January 2015

False

Once again, our toilets are supposedly turning against us: 1999's deadly lurking butt spiders have been replaced with a spring-loaded slice-o-matic with a jones for johnsons.

FMD_train_619

In 2012, Wall Street gave Scott Brown more campaign contributions than any other candidate -- $5.3 million.

09/19/2014

As the race between Democratic Sen. Jeanne Shaheen and Republican challenger Scott Brown heats up, the attacks are growing more intense. In a recent radio ad, Shaheen accused Brown of being too friendly with Wall Street when serving as a senator from neighboring Massachusetts from 2010 to 2012. Heres the 60-second ads narration: Wonder why Scott Brown lost re-election in Massachusetts? Well, he was working for Wall Street, not the people. Scott Brown blocked a major financial reform bill until he could water it down and save Wall Street $19 billion. Scott Brown really delivered for Wall Street, said the Boston Globe. Even after the bill passed, news reports show Brown was secretly serving the interests of Wall Street, working behind the scenes to help the big banks, not consumers. Wall Street thanked Scott Brown by giving him more campaign contributions than any other candidate -- $5.3 million. Now, Scott Brown wants New Hampshire to send him to Washington. Wall Streets once again spending millions to help. Scott Brown says he really cares about New Hampshire. Come on, dont be fooled. No matter where he lives, Scott Brown will always put Wall Street first. And thats good for Scott Brown, but not New Hampshire. Thats a lot to chew on. PolitiFact New Hampshire already checked a claim by a pro-Shaheen group that Browns actions had saved big banks $19 billion in taxes, rating itMostly False. But what about the ads claim that Wall Street gave him more campaign contributions than any other candidate -- $5.3 million? We decided to take a closer look. The Shaheen campaign pointed us to calculations by the Center for Responsive Politics, whoseopensecrets.orgwebsite tracks a wide variety of campaign-finance data. Its a trusted source that weve used many times in the past. The Shaheen campaigns $5.3 million figure refers to how much Brown received in the 2012 campaign cycle -- when he lost his seat to Democrat Elizabeth Warren -- from donors categorized as being part of the finance, insurance and real estate sector. Theirdollar figure is correct-- as is Browns No. 1 ranking among all Senate candidates for donations from that sector -- but Shaheens ad stretches a bit when it calls this Wall Street. Most finance firms have a reasonable claim on being part of Wall Street, but a lot of the insurance and real-estate sectors fall outside that category. Also, not everyone working at these firms is a financial mogul, but their individual donations still count towards the total. So we decided to drill down a little deeper. We found a few sub-categories of finance/insurance/real estate that are a closer fit to Wall Street. They include: Securities and investment: Brown ranked first among Senate candidates in the 2012 campaign cycle with$2,682,872. Private equity and investment firms: Brown ranked first with$556,092in donations. Hedge funds: Brown ranked first with$306,800in donations. Venture capital: Brown ranked first with$262,081in donations. This provides support for the notion that Brown ranked No. 1 in these types of donations. But he ranked a little lower in two other categories: Finance and credit companies: Brown ranked ninth with$54,450in donations. Commercial banks: Brown ranked third with$297,539in donations. Meanwhile, Browns total haul from these six categories was about $4.2 million, or about one-fifth lower than what the ad said. This is not the first time that Shaheens campaign has used somewhat loose language in describing Browns donors. When a previous Shaheen ad claimed that Big Oil gave Scott Brown $454,260, we rated that claimHalf True, noting that only about 11.5 percent of Browns haul came from companies and individuals affiliated with the biggest multinational companies -- what most viewers would consider Big Oil. When we contacted Browns staff, spokeswoman Elizabeth Guyton said, Scott Browns fundraising is no different than Jeanne Shaheens in that they both accept contributions from the financial services industry. The only difference is that Jeanne Shaheen is hypocritically attacking him for it. However, in the 2012 election cycle -- when Brown was receiving $5.3 million from the finance/insurance/real estate sector -- Shaheen accepted just $64,139 from the same sector, ranking 65th among all Senate candidates. In the current cycle, she has accepted $565,935 from the finance/insurance/real estate sector, ranking her 21st among Senate candidates. Our ruling Shaheens ad said that in 2012, Wall Street gave Scott Brown more campaign contributions than any other candidate -- $5.3 million. If you put together six categories that might reasonably be considered Wall Street, Brown received about $4.2 million in all, and he finished first among Senate candidates in four of those six categories. However, the total amount is short of the $5.3 million claimed in the ad. The statement is generally accurate but needs clarification or additional information, so we rate it Mostly True.

True

PolitiFact New Hampshire already checked a claim by a pro-Shaheen group that Browns actions had saved big banks $19 billion in taxes, rating itMostly False.The Shaheen campaign pointed us to calculations by the Center for Responsive Politics, whoseopensecrets.orgwebsite tracks a wide variety of campaign-finance data. Its a trusted source that weve used many times in the past.Theirdollar figure is correct-- as is Browns No. 1 ranking among all Senate candidates for donations from that sector -- but Shaheens ad stretches a bit when it calls this Wall Street. Most finance firms have a reasonable claim on being part of Wall Street, but a lot of the insurance and real-estate sectors fall outside that category. Also, not everyone working at these firms is a financial mogul, but their individual donations still count towards the total.Securities and investment: Brown ranked first among Senate candidates in the 2012 campaign cycle with$2,682,872.Private equity and investment firms: Brown ranked first with$556,092in donations.Hedge funds: Brown ranked first with$306,800in donations.Venture capital: Brown ranked first with$262,081in donations.Finance and credit companies: Brown ranked ninth with$54,450in donations.Commercial banks: Brown ranked third with$297,539in donations.This is not the first time that Shaheens campaign has used somewhat loose language in describing Browns donors. When a previous Shaheen ad claimed that Big Oil gave Scott Brown $454,260, we rated that claimHalf True, noting that only about 11.5 percent of Browns haul came from companies and individuals affiliated with the biggest multinational companies -- what most viewers would consider Big Oil.

FMD_train_989

Was Donald Trump at Ground Zero Searching for Survivors Two Days After 9/11 with Workers He Paid For?

09/11/2018

On 11 September 2018, our readers asked for verification of a meme circulating on social media that reported Donald Trump had helped with search-and-rescue efforts in the rubble of the Twin Towers after the 9/11 terrorist attacks 17 years prior: "2 days after the September 11th attacks Donald Trump was at ground zero with hundreds of workers that he payed for to help find and identify victims. Share this photo to remind people exactly what kind of American our President is!" Although the image used in the meme above was taken on 18 September 2001 outside the New York Stock Exchange, the meme reflects comments Trump made two days after the attack, when he told an interviewer for a German television station about his efforts to help: taken Well I have a lot of men down here, right now. We have over 100 and we have about 125 coming. So we'll have a couple of hundred people down here. And they are very brave and what they're doing is amazing. And we'll be involved in some form in helping to reconstruct. Trump made similar remarks to an NBC News reporter: NBC News Trump: I have hundreds of men inside working right now and we're bringing down another 125 in a little while. And they've never done work like this before. And they're hard-working people but they've never seen anything like it. And they've never done work like this before, it's terrible. Reporter: Have you spoken to any of your men? Do you know how they're reacting to this, because emotionally this must be so incredibly difficult. Trump: Well there are a lot of them but they've never seen bodies like this -- bodies all over. The great thing is when they find somebody that's alive like the five firemen that they just found a little while ago. So that's the great thing, and that's what they were all striving for. But generally speaking that's not the case. So, they are working very, very hard, but it's a very depressing situation for these folks. President Trump described it a little differently during a speech at the Pentagon on Sept. 11, 2019, saying he went down to Ground Zero on the day of the attacks "with men who worked for me to try to help in any little way that we could." described it a little differently Trump's statements were vague, so they didn't provide any specifics that would help verify who the men he referenced were, what their relationship to him was, and whether he "paid for" their labor, making it difficult to tease out the accuracy of what he said. His claims about what he did and witnessed on the day terrorists flew jetliners into the World Trade Center buildings have been sources of confusion or consternation since the real estate mogul launched his bid to seek the presidency in 2015. Richard Alles, a retired deputy chief with the New York City Fire Department (FDNY), who now serves as director of 9/11 community affairs for the law firm Barasch McGarry Salzman and Penson, told us that in all the hours, days and months he spent at Ground Zero as an FDNY battalion chief starting 20 minutes after the buildings collapsed, he never witnessed a large group of workers hired by Trump at the site helping with search and rescue. "This is the first Im hearing of it," Alles told us by phone. "There would have been no need for that. Between police, fire and the construction crews, we had it all covered." Alles added that the construction crews he saw at Ground Zero who came to help rescue workers were from the trade unions and were not hired by Trump. John Feal, founder of the 9/11 first responder health advocacy non-profit the FealGood Foundation, responded to Ground Zero on 12 September 2001 as a construction demolitions expert. He also told us he didn't see evidence of hundreds of workers hired by Trump at the site, and added that by 15 September 2001 the area was on lock down. "There was no way anyone could get in and out of there without a [government-issued] badge," he told us. (Feal was forced off the site as of 17 September 2001 when he suffered a life-threatening injury caused by a 4-ton piece of steel falling on his foot, crushing it and resulting in a major infection.) non-profit forced off According to the New York Times, the entire Trump organization didn't even encompass enough people in 2001 to have assisted in the manner described: New York Times [Timothy] OBrien, the author [of TrumpNation: The Art of Being the Donald], said the size of the Trump Organization at the time was a little bit over a dozen people, which would have made it impossible to send hundreds of people to participate in the relief effort. At the time, Mr. Trump had a large number of casino workers based in Atlantic City, but there is no documented evidence of him marshaling his resources to aid in the relief effort. Hes very comfortable propagandizing that event for political purposes, Mr. OBrien said. Even in the face of tragedy, he cant help but self-promote and self-aggrandize. We reached out to the White House Press Office and the Trump Organization asking for corroborating evidence of these claims but received no response, although we don't know of anyone who raised questions about the veracity of his statements at the time they were made. But now that Trump is president, his political opponents seized on the opportunity to proclaim that he was lying about having helped in the aftermath of 9/11: Heres video of @realDonaldTrump claiming he helped look for survivors & clear rubble on 9/11. He didn't. He was lying. #NeverForget pic.twitter.com/gvc3MsbaJZ @realDonaldTrump #NeverForget pic.twitter.com/gvc3MsbaJZ Scott Dworkin (@funder) September 11, 2018 September 11, 2018 It's not the first time Trump's accounts of his experiences in New York related to the 11 September terrorist attacks have been called into question. In the lead-up to the 2016 presidential election, some critics cited a TIME magazine report that placed Trump in Chicago at the time of the attacks -- but that was due to an error in the report. For his part, Trump claimed at a campaign rally in 2015 that he watched from his apartment in Trump Tower as people jumped from the burning WTC buildings to their deaths, but multiple news organizations pointed out that would have been an impossibility because Trump Tower is four miles away from Ground Zero: some error pointed out I have a window in my apartment that specifically was aimed at the World Trade Center, because of the beauty of the whole downtown Manhattan. And I watched as people jumped, and I watched the second plane come in Trump also famously but falsely claimed repeatedly that he witnessed Muslim Americans in New Jersey celebrating as the WTC buildings came down: falsely claimed Hey, I watched when the World Trade Center came tumbling down. And I watched in Jersey City, New Jersey, where thousands and thousands of people were cheering as that building was coming down. Thousands of people were cheering. Keneally, Meghan and Liz Kreutz. "Where Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton Were on 9/11." ABC News. 9 September 2016. Waldman, Paul. "Trumps Long History of Lying About 9/11 and Exploiting It for Personal Gain." The Washington Post. 11 September 2018. Hind, John. "21 Awful Truths About 9/11." The Telegraph. 5 September 2001. Neilan, Terrence. "Hopes Are Raised, And Dashed, About Rescue of Firefighters." The New York Times. 13 September 2001. Balsalmo, Michael and Nancy Benac. "Trump's Claims About 9/11 Don't Hold Up to Scrutiny." Associated Press. 20 April 2016. Rogers, Katie. "Fact-Checking Trumps Claim He Spent a Lot of Time With 9/11 Responders." The New York Times. 29 July 2019.

NEI

Although the image used in the meme above was taken on 18 September 2001 outside the New York Stock Exchange, the meme reflects comments Trump made two days after the attack, when he told an interviewer for a German television station about his efforts to help:Trump made similar remarks to an NBC News reporter:President Trump described it a little differently during a speech at the Pentagon on Sept. 11, 2019, saying he went down to Ground Zero on the day of the attacks "with men who worked for me to try to help in any little way that we could."John Feal, founder of the 9/11 first responder health advocacy non-profit the FealGood Foundation, responded to Ground Zero on 12 September 2001 as a construction demolitions expert. He also told us he didn't see evidence of hundreds of workers hired by Trump at the site, and added that by 15 September 2001 the area was on lock down. "There was no way anyone could get in and out of there without a [government-issued] badge," he told us. (Feal was forced off the site as of 17 September 2001 when he suffered a life-threatening injury caused by a 4-ton piece of steel falling on his foot, crushing it and resulting in a major infection.)According to the New York Times, the entire Trump organization didn't even encompass enough people in 2001 to have assisted in the manner described:Heres video of @realDonaldTrump claiming he helped look for survivors & clear rubble on 9/11. He didn't. He was lying. #NeverForget pic.twitter.com/gvc3MsbaJZ Scott Dworkin (@funder) September 11, 2018In the lead-up to the 2016 presidential election, some critics cited a TIME magazine report that placed Trump in Chicago at the time of the attacks -- but that was due to an error in the report. For his part, Trump claimed at a campaign rally in 2015 that he watched from his apartment in Trump Tower as people jumped from the burning WTC buildings to their deaths, but multiple news organizations pointed out that would have been an impossibility because Trump Tower is four miles away from Ground Zero:Trump also famously but falsely claimed repeatedly that he witnessed Muslim Americans in New Jersey celebrating as the WTC buildings came down:

FMD_train_1643

Charlie Crist raised taxes in 2009 and won't rule out raising taxes again.

04/08/2014

Gov. Rick Scott signed a bill that will cut auto tag fees and pointed the finger at his predecessor for raising them in the first place. We are going to right the wrong of the 2009 tax increase that Charlie Crist enacted, Scott said as he signed the fee rollback on April 2. Scott, a Republican, is expected to face Democratic frontrunner Crist in November. The Republican Party of Florida joined the Crist-as-tax-hiker chorus onTwitter: . @charliecrist raised taxes in 2009 and won't rule out raising taxes again. Well examine what type of taxes were raised under Crist in 2009 and what he has said about raising taxes in the future. Crist signed tax and fee increases in 2009 In May 2009, then-Republican Gov. Crist signed a $66.5 billion budget that included a slew of new taxes and fees -- roughly$2 billionworth -- intended to balance the state budget during the recession. The hikes included auto tag fees, a $1-a-pack cigarette tax, as well as higher fees to visit state parks and to file civil lawsuits and foreclosure actions. There is no dispute that Crist signed those tax and fee increases into law, but the Republican Party of Florida omits that the tax and fee hikes were supported by the Republican-led Legislature at the time. That includes influential Republican legislators who now in key leadership positions: Lt. Gov. Carlos Lopez-Cantera, who was House majority whip at the time; House Speaker Will Weatherford, R-Wesley Chapel; and Senate President Don Gaetz. Recently, Crist made no apologies for supporting the auto tag increase when he spoke during an event in Tampa on the same day that Scott signed the cut into law. We had to get through a tough time, and sometimes you have to make difficult decisions, Crist said in Tampa. And we saved thousands of teachers' jobs, law enforcement officers' jobs, firefighters' jobs. What Crist has said about the potential for future tax increases As for Crists willingness to raise future taxes, the Republican Party of Florida pointed to a briefclipof MSNBCs Ed Schultz interviewing Crist on Nov. 18, 2013, a couple of weeks after Crist declared his candidacy. We went looking for thecomplete exchangeabout taxes; heres how it went: Schultz: What is your philosophy of taxation? What would you do different. We have income inequality as a huge issue in this country. The wealthy seem to get the breaks. They have under the conservative rule. What would you do differently? What would you do with Floridas finances and what would you expect? Would you expect more out of the wealthiest residents? Crist: Well, I think we all have to expect more out of each other. I dont like to raise taxes. I dont know that anybody really enjoys the idea of doing that. I did that as a governor, though. Schultz: Would you do it again? Crist: If necessary, I would. I mean, you know. Schultz: Is it necessary now? Crist: We have the highest budget weve had in the history of Florida right now at $74 billion. So, I dont know if its necessary right now. I like to live within our means if we possibly can do so, but we have to properly fund public education. We have to properly fund the needs of the most vulnerable in our society. And when Governor Scott got elected, the very first session, he whacked public education funding by $1.3 billion. Schultz: Would you restore that? Crist: Absolutely, wed restore that. Schultz: So that money would come back in under Charlie Crist. Crist: Yes sir. It would. And the $300 million, he took out of higher ed the second session. Schultz: And how would you pay for it? Crist: Pay for it by the existing revenues that we have. And if necessary, if we have to raise taxes, I would do it, but Id rather not if we dont have to. Like I said, I like to live within our means. Crists campaign website includes a mention of tax cuts for middle-class families on his policy position page about theeconomy and jobs, but its vague. It states: Today, Floridas tax policy works only if you are a special interest with a lobbyist but it fails everyday Floridians and small business owners. As Governor, Charlie will reform government to put the people first, using incentives to help homegrown Florida small businesses grow the economy from the middle class out, not simply giving handouts to political supporters. We sent the claim by the Republican Party to Crists campaign and an informal adviser to the campaign, former state Sen. Steve Geller. Geller said Crist supports giving small businesses a tax break and pointed to part of Cristsannouncement speechin November: As governor, we are going to have a tax policy that puts you the people first and when we can cut taxes and I do believe in cutting taxes it is you the people who would get the relief and when we spend money to help business, we are using it to grow the economy from the middle class out, not simply giving it away to supporters. Our ruling The Republican Party of Florida said that Crist raised taxes in 2009 and wont rule out raising taxes again. Crist -- along with the Republican-led Legislature -- did raise the cigarette tax and a slew of fees including auto tag fees in 2009 to balance the budget during a recession. When asked in November if he would raise taxes in the future, Crist said if necessary. The Republicans omitted Crists softer language in the same interview when he added, I dont know if its necessary right now. We rate this claim Mostly True.

True

The Republican Party of Florida joined the Crist-as-tax-hiker chorus onTwitter: .@charliecrist raised taxes in 2009 and won't rule out raising taxes again.In May 2009, then-Republican Gov. Crist signed a $66.5 billion budget that included a slew of new taxes and fees -- roughly$2 billionworth -- intended to balance the state budget during the recession. The hikes included auto tag fees, a $1-a-pack cigarette tax, as well as higher fees to visit state parks and to file civil lawsuits and foreclosure actions. There is no dispute that Crist signed those tax and fee increases into law, but the Republican Party of Florida omits that the tax and fee hikes were supported by the Republican-led Legislature at the time. That includes influential Republican legislators who now in key leadership positions: Lt. Gov. Carlos Lopez-Cantera, who was House majority whip at the time; House Speaker Will Weatherford, R-Wesley Chapel; and Senate President Don Gaetz.As for Crists willingness to raise future taxes, the Republican Party of Florida pointed to a briefclipof MSNBCs Ed Schultz interviewing Crist on Nov. 18, 2013, a couple of weeks after Crist declared his candidacy. We went looking for thecomplete exchangeabout taxes; heres how it went:Crists campaign website includes a mention of tax cuts for middle-class families on his policy position page about theeconomy and jobs, but its vague. It states:We sent the claim by the Republican Party to Crists campaign and an informal adviser to the campaign, former state Sen. Steve Geller. Geller said Crist supports giving small businesses a tax break and pointed to part of Cristsannouncement speechin November:

FMD_train_1721

Did Anthony Kennedy Resign from the Supreme Court to Protect His Son?

07/01/2018

Any occasion on which a member of the U.S. Supreme Court leaves the bench through retirement or death is a significant political event, providing the incumbent president with the opportunity to nominate a successor who is ideologically aligned with the party in power and, in most cases, will remain on the bench for decades to come. The requirement that a Supreme Court nominee be confirmed by a vote of the U.S. Senate often ignites bitter conflicts between the two parties in that chamber. When Justice Anthony M. Kennedy announced his imminent retirement at the end of June 2018, it set the stage for a particularly momentous shift in the makeup of the Supreme Court, as Kennedy had long been the bridge between the court's liberal and conservative sides on a number of contentious social issues. Justice Kennedy, 81, had been a critical swing vote on the sharply polarized court for nearly three decades, embracing liberal views on gay rights, abortion, and the death penalty while helping conservatives trim voting rights, block gun control measures, and unleash campaign spending by corporations. His replacement by a conservative justice, something Mr. Trump vowed to his supporters, could imperil a variety of landmark Supreme Court precedents on social issues where Justice Kennedy frequently sided with his liberal colleagues, particularly on abortion. Many critics, still smarting over the Republicans' successful and unprecedented efforts to block the approval of Merrick Garland, who had been nominated by outgoing president Barack Obama in 2016 after the death of Justice Antonin Scalia, immediately jumped on a conspiracy theory involving the timing of Kennedy's resignation and his son's employment. The details of this conspiracy theory were somewhat hazy, with most versions seemingly implying that President Trump somehow leveraged his financial connections with Kennedy's son, Justin, to convince or coerce the jurist to retire ahead of the November 2018 U.S. mid-term elections, during which Democrats might pick up enough Senate seats to block confirmation of Trump's preferred nominee. The most coherent form of the conspiracy theory posited that Kennedy's retirement was a sudden and unexpected event, a strategic move intended to allow Trump to nominate a friendly successor who would vote favorably on any issues involving Justin Kennedy that might come before the court as a result of the ongoing Mueller investigation into Russian election interference. As the New York Times noted, Donald Trump did have a business relationship with Deutsche Bank, where Justin Kennedy once worked, that went back many years to a time when many other banks were hesitant to do business with Trump. Mr. Trump was quick to note this connection in the moments after his first address to Congress in February 2017. As he made his way out of the chamber, Mr. Trump paused to chat with the justice, saying, "Say hello to your boy." Mr.

NEI

When Justice Anthony M. Kennedy announced his imminent retirement at the end of June 2018, it set the stage for a particularly momentous shift in the makeup of the Supreme Court, as Kennedy had long been the bridge between the court's liberal and conservative sides on a number of contentious social issues: Many critics still smarting over the Republicans' successful (and unprecedented) efforts at blocking approval of Merrick Garland, who had been nominated by outgoing president Barack Obama in 2016 after the death of Justice Antonin Scalia -- thus allowing incoming president Donald Trump the opportunity to fill the vacant court seat instead -- immediately jumped on a conspiracy theory involving the timing of Kennedy's resignation and his son's employment:As the New York Times noted, Donald Trump did have a business relationship with Deutsche Bank, where Justin Kennedy once worked (he left the company in 2009), that went back many years to a time when many other banks were leery of doing business with Trump:And, of course, many news outlets have reported on the potentially suspect coincidence that right about the time Trump was sworn in as U.S. president, Deutsche Bank was fined an aggregate $630 million for their involvement in a $10 billion Russian money-laundering scheme and Deutsche Bank's records were later reportedly subpoenaed by special prosecutor Robert Muellers investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 U.S. elections:Moreover, Politico reported back in April 2017 (before the Mueller investigation into Russian interference was even underway) that the Trump White House might have been utilizing connections between Trump's and Kennedy's children to ease the elder Kennedy into retirement. Notably, Politico referenced Justin Kennedy's having a connection with Donald Trump, Jr., not President Trump himself, and made no mention of Deutsche Bank:

FMD_train_244

Hispanic Leaders Speak Out!

04/24/2006

Claim: List reproduces quotes from various Hispanic leaders and newspaper articles regarding U.S. immigrants. Example: [Collected via e-mail, April 2006] "You old white people. It is your duty to die." HISPANIC LEADERS SPEAK OUT! Augustin Cebada, Brown Berets; "Go back to Boston! Go back to Plymouth Rock, Pilgrims! Get out! We are the future. You are old and tired. Go on. We have beaten you. Leave like beaten rats. You old white people. It is your duty to die ... Through love of having children, we are going to take over. Richard Alatorre, Los Angeles City Council. "They're afraid we're going to take over the governmental institutions and other institutions. They're right. We will take them over ... We are here to stay." Excelsior, the national newspaper of Mexico, "The American southwest seems to be slowly returning to the jurisdiction of Mexico without firing a single shot." Professor Jose Angel Gutierrez, University of Texas; "We have an aging white America. They are not making babies. They are dying. The explosion is in our population ... I love it. They are shitting in their pants with fear. I love it." Art Torres, Chairman of the California Democratic Party, "Remember 187 proposition to deny taxpayer funds for services to non-citizens was the last gasp of white America in California." Gloria Molina, Los Angeles County Supervisor, "We are politicizing every single one of these new citizens that are becoming citizens of this country ... I gotta tell you that a lot of people are saying, 'I'm going to go out there and vote because I want to pay them back.'" Mario Obledo, California Coalition of Hispanic Organizations and California State Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare under Governor Jerry Brown, also awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom by President Bill Clinton, "California is going to be a Hispanic state. Anyone who doesn't like it should leave." Jose Pescador Osuna, Mexican Consul General, "We are practicing 'La Reconquista' in California." Professor Fernando Guerra, Loyola Marymount University; "We need to avoid a white backlash by using codes understood by Latinos ..." Are these just the words of a few extremists? Consider that we could fill many pages with such quotes. Also, consider that these are mainstream Mexican leaders. THE U.S. VS MEXICO: On February 15, 1998, the U.S. and Mexican soccer teams met at the Los Angeles Coliseum. The crowd was overwhelmingly pro-Mexican even though most lived in this country. They booed during the National Anthem, and U.S. flags were held upside down. As the match progressed, supporters of the U.S. team were insulted, pelted with projectiles, punched, and spat upon. Beer and trash were thrown at the U.S. players before and after the match. The coach of the U.S. team, Steve Sampson, said, "This was the most painful experience I have ever had in this profession." Did you know that immigrants from Mexico and other non-European countries can come to this country and get preferences in jobs, education, and government contracts? It's called affirmative action or racial privilege. The Emperor of Japan or the President of Mexico could migrate here and immediately be eligible for special rights unavailable to Americans of European descent. Recently, a vote was taken in the U.S. Congress to end this practice. It was defeated. Every single Democratic senator except Ernest Hollings voted to maintain special privileges for Hispanic, Asian, and African immigrants. They were joined by thirteen Republicans. Bill Clinton and Al Gore have repeatedly stated that they believe that massive immigration from countries like Mexico is good. They have also backed special privileges for these immigrants. Corporate America has signed on to the idea that minorities and third-world immigrants should receive special, privileged status. Some examples are Exxon, Texaco, Merrill Lynch, Boeing, Paine Weber, Starbucks, and many more. DID YOU KNOW? Did you know that Mexico regularly intercedes on the side of the defense in criminal cases involving Mexican nationals? Did you know that Mexico has NEVER extradited a Mexican national accused of murder in the U.S. in spite of agreements to do so? According to the L.A. Times, Orange County, California is home to 275 gangs with 17,000 members; 98% of which are Mexican and Asian. How's your county doing? According to a New York Times article dated May 19, 1994, 20 years after the great influx of legal immigrants from Southeast Asia, 30% are still on welfare compared to 8% of households nationwide. A Wall Street Journal editorial dated December 5, 1994 quotes law enforcement officials as stating that Asian mobsters are the "greatest criminal challenge the country faces." Not bad for a group that is still under 5% of the population. Is education important to you? Here are the words of a teacher who spent over 20 years in the Los Angeles School system. "Imagine teachers in classes containing 30-40 students of widely varying attention spans and motivation, many of whom aren't fluent in English. Educators seek learning materials likely to reach the majority of students, and that means fewer words and math problems and more pictures and multicultural references." WHEN I WAS YOUNG: When I was young, I remember hearing about the immigrants that came through Ellis Island. They wanted to learn English. They wanted to breathe free. They wanted to become Americans. Now too many immigrants come here with demands. They demand to be taught in their own language. They demand special privileges—affirmative action. They demand ethnic studies that glorify their culture. HOW CAN YOU HELP?: Send copies of this letter to at least two other people; 100 would be even better. Help us get the word out. And did you know that at the hospital, these illegals cannot be turned down if they can't pay, and they certainly don't pay? I saw a man on TV who took his Caucasian neighbor to an emergency room. He was slowly bleeding to death, yet he had to wait for three hours for emergency treatment because the staff was busy giving prenatal treatment, cold and flu remedies, aspirin, etc., to illegals who could not speak English. They were all treated for free. When the bleeding Caucasian man's turn finally came, they would not touch him until he proved that he had insurance. Because of the overwhelming number of illegals in this country, this past year alone, 84 hospitals in the Los Angeles area went out of business. If you think there is something seriously sick going on in our country, you had better write a letter to your congressman letting him know how you feel. Soon it will be too late, so you might consider getting a head start and enrolling in a Spanish class. Origins: With immigration reform being one of the hot-button political issues in the U.S. in early 2006, the above-quoted collection of quotes from various Hispanic leaders and newspaper articles regarding U.S. immigrants started circulating widely on the Internet. Even though the issue was timely, this collection was actually compiled several years earlier and references statements made by Californians during 1990 (when immigration reform was also a hot-button political issue in California due to the controversial Proposition 187 ballot measure). Audio clips of many of the quotes reproduced above were collected on a CD offered for sale by the California Coalition for Immigration Reform (CCIR), and we include a link to the relevant clip after the discussion of each item below: immigration reform collection CCIR "Go back to Boston! Go back to Plymouth Rock, Pilgrims! Get out! We are the future. You are old and tired. Go on. We have beaten you. Leave like beaten rats. You old white people. It is your duty to die ... Through love of having children, we are going to take over." This is an excerpt from a statement by Augustin Cebada of the Brown Berets de Aztlán, a paramilitary offshoot of the Movimiento Estudiantil Chicano de Aztlán (MEChA), delivered during a Fourth of July rally held outside the Federal Building in Westwood, California, in 1996: Brown Berets We're here today to show L.A., show the minority people here, the Anglo-Saxons, that we are here, the majority, we're here to stay. We do the work in this city, we take care of the spoiled brat children, we clean their offices, we pick the food, we do the manufacturing in the factories of L.A., we are the majority here, and we are not going to be pushed around. We're here in Westwood; this is the fourth time we've been here in the last two months, to show white Anglo-Saxon Protestant L.A., the few of you who remain, that we are the majority, and we claim this land as ours, it's always been ours, and we're still here, and uh, none of this talk about deporting. If anybody's going to be deported, it's going to be you. [SHOUTING] Go back to Simi Valley, you skunks! Go back to Woodland Hills! Go back to Boston! Go back to the Plymouth Rock, Pilgrims! Get out! We are the future. You're old and tired. Go on. We have beaten you; leave like beaten rats. You old white people, it is your duty to die. Even their own ethicists say that they should die; that they have a duty to die. They're taking up too much space, too much air. We are the majority in L.A. There's over seven million Mexicans in L.A. County alone. We are the majority. And you're going to see every day more and more of it, as we ... we manifest as our young people grow up, graduate from high school, go on to college, and start taking over this society. Our people ... are ... the vast majority of our people are under the age of 15 years old. Right now we're already controlling those elections, whether it's through violence or nonviolence. Through love of having children, we are gonna take over. [Audio link] Audio link "They're afraid we're going to take over the governmental institutions and other institutions. They're right. We will take them over ... We are here to stay." This is an excerpt from a statement made by Richard Alatorre (then a member of the Los Angeles City Council) at a Latino summit conference in Los Angeles in September 1996, about the upcoming Proposition 209 ballot measure, which sought to prohibit governmental agencies in California from "discriminating against or giving preferential treatment to any individual or group in public employment ... on the basis of race, sex, color, ethnicity, or national origin" (also known as the "end of affirmative action" proposition): Proposition 209 Because our numbers are growing, they're afraid about this great mass of minorities that now live in our community. They're afraid that we're going to take over the governmental institutions and other institutions. They are right, we will take them over, and we are not going to go away—we are here to stay, and we are saying 'ya basta' (enough!) and we are going to turn ... and uh, de ... not elect or re-elect people that believe that they are going to advance their political careers on the backs of immigrants and the backs of minorities. [Audio link] Audio link (NOTES: Richard Alatorre served in the California State Assembly from 1973 to 1985 and was a member of the Los Angeles City Council from 1985 to 1999. He was twice fined for violating conflict of interest provisions while a council member, and in 2001 he agreed to plead guilty to a federal criminal charge of felony tax evasion, admitting that "he failed to report to the Internal Revenue Service nearly $42,000 in cash he received from individuals attempting to influence [him] in his official duties." Proposition 209 was passed by 54% of California voters in November 1996.) fined tax evasion "The American southwest seems to be slowly returning to the jurisdiction of Mexico without firing a single shot." We haven't been able to verify this quote (or find the context) for this statement purportedly taken from Excélsior, a Mexico City newspaper. Excélsior "We have an aging white America. They are not making babies. They are dying. The explosion is in our population ... I love it. They are shitting in their pants with fear. I love it." This is an excerpt from a statement by José Angel Gutiérrez, then an Associate Professor of Political Science at the University of Texas at Arlington (and a former leader of the La Raza Unida political party) at a Latino conference held at the University of California, Riverside on 14 January 1995, regarding the effects of California's recently-passed Proposition 187 ballot measure (which sought to bar illegal immigrants from public education and other social services provided by the state): Associate Professor of Political Science La Raza Unida Proposition 187 The border remains a military zone. We remain a hunted people. Now you think you have a destiny to fulfill in this land that historically has been ours for forty thousand years, and we're a new Mestizo nation. And they want us to discuss civil rights. Civil rights! What law made by white men to oppress all of us of color, female and male! This is our homeland. We cannot, we will not, and we must not be made illegal in our own homeland. We are not im-mi-grants that came from another country to another country; we are migrants, free to travel the length and breadth of the Americas because we belong here. We are millions. We just have to survive. We have an aging white America. They are not making babies. They are dying. It's a matter of time. [laughter] The explosion is in our population. [Audio link] Audio link (NOTE: We haven't been able to verify the last portion of Professor Gutiérrez's statement, about white America "shitting in their pants with fear," as it does not appear in the audio clip provided. The constitutionality of Proposition 187 was challenged within days of its passage, and most of its provisions were eventually voided.) "Remember 187 (proposition to deny taxpayer funds for services to non-citizens) was the last gasp of white America in California." This is a sentence taken from a statement given by Art Torres, a former California State Assembly member and State Senator, at the UC Riverside conference referenced above: Art Torres It is an honor to be with the new leadership of the Americas, here meeting at UC Riverside. So with 187 on the ballot, what is it going to take for our people to vote, to see us walking into the gas ovens? It is electoral power that is going to make the determination of where we go as a community. And power is not given to you; you have to take it. Remember: 187 is the last gasp of white America in California. Understand that. And people say to me on the Senate floor when I was in the Senate, 'Why do you fight so hard for affirmative action programs?' And I tell my white colleagues, 'because you're going to need them' [laughter]. [Audio link] Audio link (NOTE: A month after making this statement, Art Torres was appointed Chairman of the California Democratic Party, a position he held until 2009.) "We are politicizing every single one of these new citizens that are becoming citizens of this country ... I gotta tell you that a lot of people are saying, 'I'm going to go out there and vote because I want to pay them back.'" This is an excerpt from a statement made by Gloria Molina, a Los Angeles County Supervisor, at a Southwest Voter Registration Project (SVREP) rally in June 1996: Gloria Molina SVREP Tonight Latinos across this country are coming together and they are shouting one thing: we are united. And we are united because we want to demand the kind of political respect that we should have. We demand to be counted. And what we know as well is that the big giant that they keep talking about is awakening. And he's pretty angry about what's going on. Ya basta! (enough). This community is no longer going to stand for it. Because tonight we are organizing across this country in a single mission, in a plan. We are going to organize like we've never organized before. We are going to go into our neighborhoods. We are going to register voters. We are going to talk to all of those young people that need to become registered voters and go out to vote, and we are politicizing every single one of those new citizens that are becoming citizens of this country. And, what we are saying is by November we will have one million additional Latino voters in this country, and we're gonna march ... and our vote is going to be important. But I gotta tell you, there's a lot of people that are saying, 'I'm gonna go out there and vote because I want to pay them back!' And this November, we are going to remember those that stood with us and we are also going to remember those that have stood against us on the issues of immigration, on the issues of education, on the issues of health care, on the issues of the minimum wage. [Audio link] Audio link "California is going to be a Hispanic state. Anyone who doesn't like it should leave." Mario Obledo was a co-founder of the Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund (MALDEF) and the La Raza Lawyers of California bar association, and he formerly served as California's Secretary of Health and Welfare. We don't know exactly when and where he first made his controversial statement about California's becoming a "Hispanic state," but he has confirmed he said it at least twice: during an appearance on Ray Briem's talk radio show in May or June of 1998, and again on Tom Leykis' talk radio show: MALDEF La Raza Lawyers appearance again Obledo: "We're going to take over all the political institutions of California. In five years the Hispanics are going to be the majority population of this state." Caller: "You also made the statement that California is going to become a Hispanic state, and if anyone doesn't like it, they should leave. Did you say that?" Obledo: "I did. They ought to go back to Europe." "We are practicing 'La Reconquista' in California." "La Reconquista" (Spanish for "the reconquest") is a term that has historically been applied to the process whereby Christians recaptured rule over the Iberian Peninsula from Muslims between 718 and 1492. The term's appearance in the quote above reflects a modern political usage that refers to the retaking of portions of the U.S. Southwest that were once part of Mexico. The above-quoted sentence is attributed to José Pescador Osuna, the Mexican consul general in Los Angeles. We haven't been able to verify when and in what context he supposedly said it, but it is widely cited as the end portion of a statement he made in 1998: "Even though I'm saying this part serious and part joking, I believe we are practicing 'La Reconquista' in California." "We need to avoid a white backlash by using codes understood by Latinos." This sentence is attributed to Fernando J. Guerra, Ph.D., an Associate Professor in the Department of Chicano Studies and Political Science at Loyola Marymount University in Los Angeles. We haven't been able to verify when and in what context he supposedly said it, other than to note that the words are part of a longer statement also widely attributed to him: "We need to avoid a white backlash by using codes understood by Latinos ... non-Latinos aren't watching; they aren't raising questions." Fernando J. Guerra On February 15, 1998, the U.S. and Mexican soccer teams met at the Los Angeles Coliseum. The crowd was overwhelmingly pro-Mexican even though most lived in this country. They booed during the National Anthem, and U.S. flags were held upside down. As the match progressed, supporters of the U.S. team were insulted, pelted with projectiles, punched, and spat upon. Beer and trash were thrown at the U.S. players before and after the match. The coach of the U.S. team, Steve Sampson, said, "This was the most painful experience I have ever had in this profession." On February 15, 1998, Mexico's national soccer team scored a 1-0 victory over the United States team in the CONCACAF Gold Cup championship game before a crowd of 91,255 at the Los Angeles Coliseum. News accounts of the match noted that some of the large number of fans who turned out to root for the Mexican team whistled during the playing of the U.S. national anthem, booed the U.S. team, and threw debris at U.S. players: The pro-Mexican throng that filled the entire Coliseum—including areas without seats because of construction—booed the Americans and showered them with debris on several occasions. "It seemed like we were playing in Mexico City," said U.S. forward Preki, a native of Yugoslavia who gained his U.S. citizenship on October 25, 1996. "When we played down there in Mexico City, the crowd wasn't as bad as it was here. I think that was a shame. "When they were playing the United States (national) anthem, all these people were whistling (the international version of booing). I assume all these people are living in the states. I think they should respect the national anthem." Did you know that Mexico has NEVER extradited a Mexican national accused of murder in the U.S. in spite of agreements to do so? This absolute is not true. In December 2005, the Mexican government extradited Raul Gomez Garcia to the U.S. to stand trial in Colorado for the murder of Denver Police Officer Donald Young and the attempted murder of Officer John Bishop. According to a New York Times article dated May 19, 1994, 20 years after the great influx of legal immigrants from Southeast Asia, 30% are still on welfare compared to 8% of households nationwide. The original piece skips a gear here, as the preceding statement refers to immigration from Southeast Asia, not Mexico: This information was indeed taken from the beginning of a front-page May 19, 1994 New York Times article: Nearly 20 years after the end of the war in Southeast Asia brought thousands of Cambodians, Laotians, and Vietnamese refugees to this country, many still languish in poverty, giving Southeast Asians the highest rate of welfare dependency of any racial or ethnic group. More than 30 percent of all Southeast Asian households in the nation now depend on welfare for survival, according to a report on the economic diversity of Asian-Americans released Wednesday in Washington. Among some groups, like Cambodians and Laotians in California, the percentage of those on welfare reaches 77 percent. Nationwide, only 8 percent of households received public assistance in 1991. Still, Southeast Asians account for a small fraction of the welfare budget. Of the one million here, about 300,000 receive public aid, making up about 2 percent of the total welfare population. In addition to highlighting the poverty of Southeast Asians here, the report seeks to add depth to the nation's often two-dimensional picture of Asian-Americans, who are the fastest-growing segment of the population. Their numbers have risen from 1.4 million in 1960 to more than 7 million in 1990, or 3 percent of the nation's total. A Wall Street Journal editorial dated December 5, 1994 quotes law enforcement officials as stating that Asian mobsters are the "greatest criminal challenge the country faces." Not bad for a group that is still under 5% of the population. The previous statement also references Asian immigrants and appeared in a December 5, 1994 Wall Street Journal editorial about the growth of Asian criminal gangs: Triads, Asia's famous criminal gangs, may always be with us, but right now they seem to be posing special worries for the world's crime busters. With China opening up, gangs from Hong Kong and Taiwan are re-establishing themselves on the mainland. In turn, these gangs are largely responsible for directing a massive illegal emigration of Chinese citizens to every corner of the globe. Technology and the seamlessness of the global economy seem to give these crime groups a power and impunity that they never had before. The potential is alarming, as was made clear by speakers at the recent meeting of top law officers from around the world in Naples. Now even Beijing's Justice Minister Xiao Yang is decrying the triads as a threat to the mainland's "social stability." In the U.S., law enforcement officials have started calling Asian mobsters the greatest criminal challenge the country faces. Taiwanese gangs, such as United Bamboo and the Four Seas Gang, are believed to mastermind the flow of refined heroin into America and other Western countries. "Operation Dry Dock," a U.S.-mounted sting, revealed that Taiwanese crooks were also behind the worldwide, $3.5 billion-a-year business of smuggling people out of the mainland. Even Moscow now has an estimated 50,000 illegal Chinese residents. (As noted in the New York Times piece cited above, in 1990 Asian-Americans comprised about 3% of the total U.S. population.) Last updated: May 24, 2010 Ramus, Richard. "Mexico Has Road-Field Advantage." The [Riverside] Press Enterprise. February 16, 1998 (p. D1). The Wall Street Journal. "Global Gangs." December 5, 1994 (p. A14).

NEI

Origins: With immigration reform being one of the hot-button political issues in the U.S. in early 2006, the above-quoted collection of quotes from various Hispanic leaders and newspaper articles regarding U.S. immigrants started circulating widely on the Internet. Even though the issue was timely, this collection was actually compiled several years earlier and references statements made by Californians during 1990 (when immigration reform was also a hot-button political issue in California due to the controversial Proposition 187 ballot measure). Audio clips of many of the quotes reproduced above were collected on a CD offered by for sale by the California Coalition for Immigration Reform (CCIR), and we include a link to the relevant clip after the discussion of each item below:This an excerpt from a statement by Augustin Cebada of the Brown Berets de Aztln, a paramilitary offshoot of the Movimiento Estudiantil Chicano de Aztln (MEChA), delivered during a Fourth of July rally held outside the Federal Building in Westwood, California, in 1996:[Audio link]This is an excerpt from a statement made by Richard Alatorre (then a member of the Los Angeles City Council) at a Latino summit conference in Los Angeles in September 1996, about the upcoming Proposition 209 ballot measure, which sought to prohibit governmental agencies in California from "discriminating against or giving preferential treatment to any individual or group in public employment ... on the basis of race, sex, color, ethnicity, or national origin" (also known as the "end of affirmative action" proposition):[Audio link](NOTES: Richard Alatorre served in the California State Assembly from 1973 to 1985 and was a member of the Los Angeles City Council from 1985 to 1999. He was twice fined for violating conflict of interest provisions while a council member, and in 2001 he agreed to plead guilty to a federal criminal charge of felony tax evasion, admitting that "he failed to report to the Internal Revenue Service nearly $42,000 in cash he received from individuals attempting to influence [him] in his official duties." Proposition 209 was passed by 54% of California voters in November 1996.) We haven't been able to verify this quote (or find the context) for this statement purportedly taken from Exclsior, a Mexico City newspaper. This is an excerpt from a statement by Jos Angel Gutirrez, then an Associate Professor of Political Science at the University of Texas at Arlington (and a former leader of the La Raza Unida political party) at a Latino conference held at the University of California, Riverside on 14 January 1995, regarding the effects of California's recently-passed Proposition 187 ballot measure (which sought to bar illegal immigrants from public education and other social services provided by the state):[Audio link]This is a sentence taken from a statement given by Art Torres, a former California State Assembly member and State Senator, at the UC Riverside conference referenced above: [Audio link]This is an excerpt from a statement made by Gloria Molina, a Los Angeles County Supervisor, at a Southwest Voter Registration Project (SVREP) rally in June 1996:[Audio link]Mario Obledo was a co-founder of the Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund (MALDEF) and the La Raza Lawyers of California bar association, and he formerly served as California's Secretary of Health and Welfare. We don't know exactly when and where he first made his controversial statement about California's becoming a "Hispanic state," but he has confirmed he said it at least twice: during an appearance on Ray Briem's talk radio show in May or June of 1998, and again on Tom Leykis' talk radio show:This sentence is attributed to Fernando J. Guerra, Ph.D, an Associate Professor in the Department of Chicano Studies and Political Science at Loyola Marymount University in Los Angeles. We haven't been able to verify when and in what context he supposedly said it, other than to note that the words are part of a longer statement also widely attributed to him: "We need to avoid a white backlash by using codes understood by Latinos ... non-Latinos aren't watching; they aren't raising questions."This absolute is not true. In December 2005, the Mexican government extradited Raul Gomez Garca to the U.S. to stand trial in Colorado for the murder of Denver Police Officer Donald Young and the attempted murder of Officer John Bishop.

FMD_train_444

Did Donald Trump Say 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_1884

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

10/08/2013

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

True

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

FMD_train_939

Was El Paso considered one of the 'Most Dangerous Cities' in the United States prior to the construction of a border fence?

02/06/2019

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

False

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

FMD_train_1908

A Mileage Tax? No, Biden's Bill Doesn't Impose New Driving Tax

10/01/2021

A persistent rumor in the summer of 2021 was that somewhere buried in United States President Joe Biden's Build Back Better plan was a hidden tax that was about to make driving much more expensive. In September, for example, the following messages were posted on social media claiming that Biden was implementing a new mileage tax: A screenshot from a broadcast on the conservative news channel Newsmax was also circulated on social media: Biden's Build Back Better plan does not impose a new mileage tax. These rumors appear to be based on a misinterpretation of a section of the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act that is currently (as of October 1, 2021) making its way through Congress. The infrastructure bill does not impose a mileage tax. Rather, this bill proposes a "national motor vehicle per-mile user fee" pilot program to study the impacts of a mileage tax. Build Back Better plan Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act In other words, this bill will does not implement a new mileage tax. This bill provides funding to study the impact of such a tax. A mileage tax may or may not be implemented after this voluntary pilot program concludes in 2026. Andy Winkler, director of infrastructure projects at the Bipartisan Policy Center, told The Associated Press: It is not a tax, it is not on everybody and it is voluntary." The Associated Press One of the purposes of this pilot program to explore alternative revenue streams to fund surface transportation programs. At the moment, the Highway Trust Fund is largely funded by taxes on gasoline and diesel fuel purchases. With the rise of electric vehicles, cars with better miles per gallon, and decreased personal travel during the COVID-19 pandemic, revenue from the gas tax has declined. Highway Trust Fund revenue gas tax has declined One solution to this funding problem is to raise taxes on gasoline purchases. The state of Missouri, for example, just increased the state's gas tax for the first time since the 1990s. Another option would be to shift the burden of funds from the amount of gas a person uses to a person's actual mileage. Back in March 2021, Transportation secretary Pete Buttigieg said: for the first time since the 1990s Transportation secretary Pete Buttigieg said: If we believe in that user-pays principlethe idea that how we pay for roads is based on how much you drivethe gas tax used to be the obvious way to do it. Its not anymore. A so-called VMT tax or mileage tax, whatever you want to call it, could be a way to do it. While proponents of a mileage tax argue that it's a fair tax, as it will tax people based on how much they use the roads, opponents have argued that this tax could impact people in rural areas more as they typically have to drive longer distances. Others have also raised privacy concerns, questioning how a person's mileage use would be calculated. opponents have argued For the moment, the Biden administration is not implementing a new mileage tax. However, the infrastructure bill does include a pilot program to study the impacts of a mileage tax. Boesen, Ulrik. Gas Tax Revenue to Decline as Traffic Drops 38 Percent. Tax Foundation, 31 Mar. 2020, https://taxfoundation.org/gas-tax-revenue-decline-as-traffic-drops/. Fact Check: Infrastructure Bill Wouldnt Impose driving Tax of 8 Cents per Mile. Usatoday, https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2021/09/30/fact-check-no-driving-tax-8-cents-mile-infrastructure-bill/5928257001/. Accessed 1 Oct. 2021. Franck, Thomas. Vehicle Mileage Tax Could Be on the Table in Infrastructure Talks, Buttigieg Says. CNBC, 26 Mar. 2021, https://www.cnbc.com/2021/03/26/buttigieg-says-white-house-is-weighing-mileage-levy-to-fund-infrastructure.html. Friedman, Zack. Infrastructure Package Includes Vehicle Mileage Tax Program. Forbes, https://www.forbes.com/sites/zackfriedman/2021/08/11/infrastructure-package-includes-vehicle-mileage-tax-program/. Accessed 1 Oct. 2021. Its Been 28 Years Since We Last Raised the Gas Tax, and Its Purchasing Power Has Eroded. https://www.pgpf.org/blog/2021/03/its-been-28-years-since-we-last-raised-the-gas-tax-and-its-purchasing-power-has-eroded. Accessed 1 Oct. 2021. Mileage Tax Study, Not Actual Mileage Tax, Proposed in Infrastructure Bill. AP NEWS, 29 Sept. 2021, https://apnews.com/article/fact-checking-907285011746. Missouris First Gas Tax Increase since the 1990s Goes into Effect Friday. FOX 2, 30 Sept. 2021, https://fox2now.com/news/missouri/missouris-first-gas-tax-increase-since-the-1990s-goes-into-effect-friday/. Status of the Highway Trust Fund | Federal Highway Administration. https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/highwaytrustfund/. Accessed 1 Oct. 2021. The Build Back Better Agenda. The White House, https://www.whitehouse.gov/build-back-better/. Accessed 1 Oct. 2021. The Gas Tax Was Already Broken. The Pandemic Could End It. Smart Cities Dive, https://www.smartcitiesdive.com/news/the-gas-tax-was-already-broken-the-pandemic-could-end-it/587653/. Accessed 1 Oct. 2021.

False

Biden's Build Back Better plan does not impose a new mileage tax. These rumors appear to be based on a misinterpretation of a section of the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act that is currently (as of October 1, 2021) making its way through Congress. The infrastructure bill does not impose a mileage tax. Rather, this bill proposes a "national motor vehicle per-mile user fee" pilot program to study the impacts of a mileage tax. Andy Winkler, director of infrastructure projects at the Bipartisan Policy Center, told The Associated Press: It is not a tax, it is not on everybody and it is voluntary."One of the purposes of this pilot program to explore alternative revenue streams to fund surface transportation programs. At the moment, the Highway Trust Fund is largely funded by taxes on gasoline and diesel fuel purchases. With the rise of electric vehicles, cars with better miles per gallon, and decreased personal travel during the COVID-19 pandemic, revenue from the gas tax has declined. One solution to this funding problem is to raise taxes on gasoline purchases. The state of Missouri, for example, just increased the state's gas tax for the first time since the 1990s. Another option would be to shift the burden of funds from the amount of gas a person uses to a person's actual mileage. Back in March 2021, Transportation secretary Pete Buttigieg said:While proponents of a mileage tax argue that it's a fair tax, as it will tax people based on how much they use the roads, opponents have argued that this tax could impact people in rural areas more as they typically have to drive longer distances. Others have also raised privacy concerns, questioning how a person's mileage use would be calculated.

FMD_train_436

Did Biden, Ossoff, and Warnock Mislead Public With Promise of '$2000 Checks'?

02/17/2021

fighting Find out Read Submit Become a Founding Member CDC WHO In late December and early January 2021, increasing COVID-19 stimulus payments from $600 to $2,000 per person became a major issue in the Georgia Senate run-off elections. The campaign pitch, made in some form by Jon Ossoff, Raphael Warnock, and Joe Biden leading up to that Jan. 5, 2021 election, was that a blue (Democrat-controlled) U.S. Senate would ensure passage of those $2,000 checks. On Jan. 20, Biden unveiled his $1.9 trillion COVID stimulus plan. It proposed issuing $1,400 checks to each person. Some have interpreted the $1,400 as a broken promise, despite the fact that the goal, since December, had always been to achieve a total per person payment of $2,000. The $600 checks already approved by Congress began disbursement starting on Dec. 29, 2020. Here, Snopes takes a granular look at the issue. 1.9 trillion proposed On Dec. 22, 2020, President Donald Trump shocked congressional leaders on both sides of the aisle by threatening to block passage of a third COVID-19 stimulus package that had been negotiated for months and that his administration played a crucial role in shaping. The problem, Trump stated in a video Tweeted out that night, was that the $600 per person cap was not enough. "I am asking Congress to amend this bill and increase the ridiculously low $600 to $2,000 or $4,000 for a couple," he said. shocked video In a confusing moment of limited bipartisanship, Democratic members of Congress agreed with Trump and launched a last-minute campaign to amend the relief bill to include the $2,000 checks requested by Trump. Congressional Republicans, for the most part, opposed the increase. An attempt to raise the amount, pushed by Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and others, to the level Trump had requested failed on Dec. 24. Ultimately, Trump signed the originally negotiated bill which included the $600 per person cap on Dec. 27. failed signed In response, on Dec. 28, Democrats in the House passed a stand-alone bill designed to make Trump's vision of $2,000 per person a reality. The text of the bill proposed, in part, to amend the portion of the recently passed relief package "by striking '$600' each place it appears and inserting '$2,000', and by striking '$1,200' each place it appears and inserting '$4,000.' The move was described by The Associated Press at the time as "all but dar[ing] Republicans to break with Trump." text was described That "dare" came at a complicated political moment. The two run-off elections for Georgia would determine the balance of power in the Senate. Both Ossoff and Warnock capitalized on the moment, immediately pushing both their GOP rivals in Georgia to support the House bill upping the payment to $2,000. capitalized On Dec. 28, the same day that the House passed its proposed increase to COVID relief checks, Warnock tweeted that, "Georgians could have gotten $2,000 relief checks. You're only getting $600 because [opponent Kelly Loeffler] refused to fight for more." That same day, Ossoff tweeted that his opponent "David Perdue didnt even want the first round of stimulus checks." On election day, Ossoff's final pitch to voters included the statement, "We will be able to pass $2,000 stimulus checks for the people next week." tweeted tweeted https://streamable.com/tehygd President-elect Biden had made the same general point a day earlier at a rally for Ossoff and Warnock. "By electing Jon and the reverend, you can make an immediate difference in your own lives," Biden said on Jan. 4, "because their election will put an end to the block in Washington of that $2,000 stimulus check. That money that will go out the door immediately." https://streamable.com/jckvga On Jan. 20, Biden revealed his COVID relief plan in an executive order calling for additional payments of $1,400 per person. This led some to interpret Biden, Warnock, and Ossoff's pre-election discussion as a disingenuous bait-and-switch, promising a certain amount of money for votes and then refusing to deliver on that promise. "$2,000 means $2,000," Ocasio-Cortez told The Washington Post following the release of the plan, "$2,000 does not mean $1,400." Other critics accused Biden and Ossoff of "purchasing" peoples' votes and then refusing to "pay up." told Those arguing that Biden et al. broke a political promise by proposing $1,400 checks on top of the already approved $600 ones misrepresent the political debate surrounding COVID-19 relief efforts. Until the "broken promise" talking point emerged, the two political "camps" were the $600 advocates (most congressional Republicans) and the $2,000 advocates (Trump and most congressional Democrats). At no point was there ever a "$2,600 camp." Before the end of December, it appeared logistically possible to modify the amount of money mandated in the previous COVID-relief package through that House bill passed on Dec. 28. According to reporting in The New York Times, however, the Treasury Department "started making direct deposit payments" on Dec. 29, and started mailing checks the next day. reporting Ocasio-Cortez, who suggested Biden's plan did not fulfill the campaign promise of $2,000 checks, explicitly advocated the same solution on Dec. 23, proposing an amendment that would increase payments in the Trump package by $1,400 per person: same solution Looking back at the statements made by Biden and others, references to "$2,000 checks" must be to these legislative efforts including those advocated for and voted on by Ocasio-Cortez. Because the Senate cannot "block" legislation that has not yet been proposed, Biden's reference to "the block in Washington of that $2,000 stimulus check" clearly refers to the Senate's unwillingness to take up the House amendment upping the $600 checks to $2,000. reference The end result of the solution Ocasio-Cortez, Biden, Ossoff and Warnock proposed or advocated for in late December would have been a total of $2,000 per person. The end result of the Biden package, if passed, would be a total of $2,000 per person. Indeed, the claim that any politician was arguing for a total of $2,600 per person in late December is completely untenable, and belied by Ocasio-Cortez's support for the $2,000 solutions advocated for by herself and other Democrats at that time. The central issue is this: As the debate about the inadequacy of $600 checks versus $2,000 checks was raging in Congress, the $600 plan had already become law. Money was already being dispersed. To achieve the total of $2,000 advocated for by Trump and Democrats in late December, an additional payment of $1,400 passed through new legislation would be required. Biden's plan, the specifics of which are currently being worked through in the House at the time of this reporting, would achieve that same end result. currently There is a plausible argument, however, that Biden and Ossoff over-promised regarding the rapidity with which a Biden administration and a blue Senate could bring about rapid disbursement of these funds. As the House has yet to approve the legislative package proposed by Biden, the money did not "go out the door immediately," as Biden promised on Jan 4. Nor would that legislative package be passed, as Ossoff claimed it would, "the next week" after his election. The first $600 payments already approved have yet to reach many Americans. many In late December 2020, Democrats united with Trump to push Congressional Republicans to increase COVID-19 stimulus payments from $600 to $2,000 per person. The universal call by those on the Left, at the time, was for a total of $2,000 per person. Ultimately, the $600 plan passed while the viability of $2,000 payments was still gaining traction. References to "$2,000 checks" made in January by Biden and by Georgia's Democratic Senate candidates were to increase existing payments up to $2,000 not to issue a new check for $2,000 in addition to the amount already approved. Because Biden and Ossoff's statements are consistent with the package Democrats ultimately proposed, but because their timeline for getting those payments out the door was too optimistic, we rank the claim that Biden's proposed $1,400 checks are a broken promise as "false."

False

On Jan. 20, Biden unveiled his $1.9 trillion COVID stimulus plan. It proposed issuing $1,400 checks to each person. Some have interpreted the $1,400 as a broken promise, despite the fact that the goal, since December, had always been to achieve a total per person payment of $2,000. The $600 checks already approved by Congress began disbursement starting on Dec. 29, 2020. Here, Snopes takes a granular look at the issue.On Dec. 22, 2020, President Donald Trump shocked congressional leaders on both sides of the aisle by threatening to block passage of a third COVID-19 stimulus package that had been negotiated for months and that his administration played a crucial role in shaping. The problem, Trump stated in a video Tweeted out that night, was that the $600 per person cap was not enough. "I am asking Congress to amend this bill and increase the ridiculously low $600 to $2,000 or $4,000 for a couple," he said.In a confusing moment of limited bipartisanship, Democratic members of Congress agreed with Trump and launched a last-minute campaign to amend the relief bill to include the $2,000 checks requested by Trump. Congressional Republicans, for the most part, opposed the increase. An attempt to raise the amount, pushed by Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and others, to the level Trump had requested failed on Dec. 24. Ultimately, Trump signed the originally negotiated bill which included the $600 per person cap on Dec. 27. In response, on Dec. 28, Democrats in the House passed a stand-alone bill designed to make Trump's vision of $2,000 per person a reality. The text of the bill proposed, in part, to amend the portion of the recently passed relief package "by striking '$600' each place it appears and inserting '$2,000', and by striking '$1,200' each place it appears and inserting '$4,000.' The move was described by The Associated Press at the time as "all but dar[ing] Republicans to break with Trump."That "dare" came at a complicated political moment. The two run-off elections for Georgia would determine the balance of power in the Senate. Both Ossoff and Warnock capitalized on the moment, immediately pushing both their GOP rivals in Georgia to support the House bill upping the payment to $2,000.On Dec. 28, the same day that the House passed its proposed increase to COVID relief checks, Warnock tweeted that, "Georgians could have gotten $2,000 relief checks. You're only getting $600 because [opponent Kelly Loeffler] refused to fight for more." That same day, Ossoff tweeted that his opponent "David Perdue didnt even want the first round of stimulus checks." On election day, Ossoff's final pitch to voters included the statement, "We will be able to pass $2,000 stimulus checks for the people next week.""$2,000 means $2,000," Ocasio-Cortez told The Washington Post following the release of the plan, "$2,000 does not mean $1,400." Other critics accused Biden and Ossoff of "purchasing" peoples' votes and then refusing to "pay up."Before the end of December, it appeared logistically possible to modify the amount of money mandated in the previous COVID-relief package through that House bill passed on Dec. 28. According to reporting in The New York Times, however, the Treasury Department "started making direct deposit payments" on Dec. 29, and started mailing checks the next day.Ocasio-Cortez, who suggested Biden's plan did not fulfill the campaign promise of $2,000 checks, explicitly advocated the same solution on Dec. 23, proposing an amendment that would increase payments in the Trump package by $1,400 per person:Looking back at the statements made by Biden and others, references to "$2,000 checks" must be to these legislative efforts including those advocated for and voted on by Ocasio-Cortez. Because the Senate cannot "block" legislation that has not yet been proposed, Biden's reference to "the block in Washington of that $2,000 stimulus check" clearly refers to the Senate's unwillingness to take up the House amendment upping the $600 checks to $2,000.The central issue is this: As the debate about the inadequacy of $600 checks versus $2,000 checks was raging in Congress, the $600 plan had already become law. Money was already being dispersed. To achieve the total of $2,000 advocated for by Trump and Democrats in late December, an additional payment of $1,400 passed through new legislation would be required. Biden's plan, the specifics of which are currently being worked through in the House at the time of this reporting, would achieve that same end result.There is a plausible argument, however, that Biden and Ossoff over-promised regarding the rapidity with which a Biden administration and a blue Senate could bring about rapid disbursement of these funds. As the House has yet to approve the legislative package proposed by Biden, the money did not "go out the door immediately," as Biden promised on Jan 4. Nor would that legislative package be passed, as Ossoff claimed it would, "the next week" after his election. The first $600 payments already approved have yet to reach many Americans.

FMD_train_1205

Were Gun-Toting Children Photographed on the United States Border?

06/18/2018

On 18 June 2018, the front page of the Drudge Report news aggregator blog featured a link to a story accompanied by a photograph of a group of children, two of whom appeared to be holding guns, along with the headline "Border Battle: USA Taking in 250 Kids Per Day." Although the Drudge Report linked to a 2018 article from the Washington Examiner about how the Trump administration "could be holding 30,000 border kids by August," the featured photograph was neither taken in 2018 nor anywhere near Mexico or the United States, and it had nothing to do with immigration. The Drudge Report apparently chose to feature the misleading photograph (and the phrase "border battle") amidst growing outrage over a Trump administration policy to separate children from families at the Mexico-United States border, while failing to provide a description, note that the children in the image were holding toys rather than actual weapons, or credit the photographer, Christiaan Triebert, who took the picture in Azaz, Syria, in 2012. Triebert stated, "Four young Syrian boys with toy guns are posing in front of my camera during my visit to Azaz, Syria. Most people I met were giving the peace sign. This little city was taken by the Free Syrian Army in the summer of 2012 during the Battle of Azaz." The website eventually removed the image of the Syrian children and replaced it with a slightly more relevant photograph, but this second attempt was still misleading and failed to provide proper context or attribution. This photograph was not taken on the border of Mexico and the United States, nor was it taken in 2018. The image, captured by Associated Press photographer Eduardo Verdugo, was taken in 2013 in the southern Mexican city of Juchitán. It shows immigrants atop the infamous "Tren de la Muerte" ("Train of Death"), also known as La Bestia or The Beast, trying to make their way north to safety. Migrants ride on top of a northbound train toward the US-Mexico border in Juchitán, southern Mexico, on Monday, April 29, 2013. Migrants crossing Mexico to reach the U.S. have increasingly become targets of criminal gangs who kidnap them for ransom. La Bestia has that name because it is an exceptionally dangerous method of travel used only by the most desperate, and few survive the ride unscathed. The cargo trains, which run along multiple lines, carry products north for export. As there are no passenger railcars, migrants must ride atop the moving trains, facing physical dangers that range from amputation to death if they fall or are pushed. Beyond the dangers of the trains themselves, Central American migrants are subject to extortion and violence at the hands of the gangs and organized-crime groups that control the routes north.

False

On 18 June 2018, the front page of the Drudge Report news aggregator blog put up a link to a story accompanied by a photograph of a group of children, two of which appeared to be holding guns, and the headline "Border Battle: USA Taking in 250 Kids Per Day":Even though the Drudge Report linked to a 2018 article about how the Trump administration "could be holding 30,000 border kids by August" published by the Washington Examiner, the featured photograph was not taken in 2018, was not taken anywhere near either Mexico or the United States, and it has nothing at all to do with immigration.The Drudge Report apparently deliberately chose to feature the misleading photograph (and phrase "border battle") amidst increasing outrage surrounding a Trump administration policy to separate children from families at the Mexico-United States border while failing to offer a description, note that the children in the image are holding toys, not actual weapons, or even credit the photographer, Christiaan Triebert, who took the picture in Azaz, Syria in 2012:This photograph was not taken on the border of Mexico and the United States, and it was not taken in 2018. The image, which is from Associated Press photographer Eduardo Verdugo, was taken in 2013 in the southern Mexico city of Juchitn. It shows immigrants atop the infamous "Tren de la Muerte" ("Train of Death"), also known as La Bestia or The Beast, trying to make their way north to safety: La Bestia has that name because it is an exceptionally dangerous method of travel that is only used by the most desperate, and few survive the ride unscathed:

FMD_train_1276

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

06/17/2021

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

False

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

FMD_train_1427

Did President Trump Sign an Executive Order Giving Veterans Free Care at Any Hospital?

03/09/2018

In March 2018, a Facebook post deriding "Trump haters" and touting one of the president's accomplishments an executive order that grants veterans free health care at any hospital in the United States started going viral: post For all the Trump haters; today President Trump signed an executive order allowing our veterans to get 100% medical bills paid at hospitals other than a V.A. hospital. This will save the lives of many American service men and women who have been on V.A. waiting lists, some for years and many dying while waiting. Now they can go to ANY hospital they want... This is how our veterans SHOULD be treated!!! Thanks President Trump!!! There are a number of problems with this Facebook post, starting with the claim that President Donald Trump signed an executive order "today" (5 March 2018). A list of Presidential actions (including executive orders) available on the White House's web site shows that no executive order at all, whether for veteran's health care or anything else, was signed on this date. list The language in this post seems to be referring to the Veterans Choice Act, which was signed into law by President Obama in August 2014. President Trump signed a bill to extend this program a few months before it was set to expire in August 2017: Veterans Choice Act signed signed President Donald Trump extended the Veterans Choice Act on Wednesday to set the stage for a push in Congress to expand the program and allow more access to private care for veterans. Flanked by veterans at an Oval Office ceremony, the president signed the bill to extend the Choice program, which was to expire on Aug. 7, and allow the expenditure of the remaining $950 million in the program. This was not an executive order; furthermore, the Veterans Access, Choice, and Accountability Act of 2014 did not accomplish all of the things set out in this Facebook post, such as grant free health care at any hospital. Veterans Access, Choice, and Accountability Act of 2014 The Veterans Choice Program expanded the "availability of medical services for eligible Veterans with community providers," but it did not grant veterans the opportunity to receive completely free health care at any hospital of their choosing. A fact sheet provided by the Department of Veterans Affairs laid out the criteria for veterans to seek health care outside established providers: Veterans Choice Program fact sheet As directed by the Choice Act, VA will administer the Veterans Choice Fund to implement the Veterans Choice Program (the Program). The Program will operate for 3 years or until the Fund is exhausted. The Program will provide Veterans who were enrolled as of August 1, 2014 or eligible to enroll as a recently discharged combat Veteran with a Veterans Choice Card, and allow those Veterans who are unable to schedule an appointment within 30 days of their preferred date or the clinically appropriate date, or on the basis of their place of residence to elect to receive care from eligible non-VA health care entities or providers. This is separate from VAs existing program providing Veterans care outside of the VA system. Eligible non-VA entities or providers must enter into agreements with VA to furnish care, must maintain the same or similar credentials and licenses as VA providers, and must submit to VA a copy of any medical records related to care and services provided under the Program for inclusion in the Veterans VA electronic medical record. The VA elaborated on the criteria that veterans must meet in order to seek treatment at outside providers. Even then, the choice of hospitals is limited to the facilities that have agreed to participate in the program. Furthermore, this bill does not include a provision stating that it covered all of the health care provided at these facilities. Some veterans may be eligible for free health care services, but most are required to pay for a portion of their treatment: elaborated eligible While many Veterans qualify for free healthcare services based on a VA compensable service-connected condition or other special eligibilities, most Veterans are required to complete a financial assessment or means test at the time of enrollment to determine if they qualify for free health care services. Veterans whose income exceed VA income limits as well as those who choose not to complete the financial assessment at the time of enrollment, must agree to pay required copays for health care services to become eligible for VA healthcare services. The future of the program is uncertain, however. Critics of the program say that it's too expensive, and that it could eventually lead to downsizing. Critics Hicks, Josh. "A Simple Summary of the New VA Bill." The Washington Post. 29 July 2014. Jackson, David. "Obama Signs Veterans Health Care Bill." USA Today. 7 August 2014. Rein, Lisa. "Its Killing the Agency: Ugly Power Struggle Paralyzes Trumps Plan to Fix Veterans Care." The Washington Post. 9 March 2018. Sisk, Richard. "Trump Signs Bill to Extend Veterans Choice Program." Military.com. 19 April 2017.

False

In March 2018, a Facebook post deriding "Trump haters" and touting one of the president's accomplishments an executive order that grants veterans free health care at any hospital in the United States started going viral:There are a number of problems with this Facebook post, starting with the claim that President Donald Trump signed an executive order "today" (5 March 2018). A list of Presidential actions (including executive orders) available on the White House's web site shows that no executive order at all, whether for veteran's health care or anything else, was signed on this date. The language in this post seems to be referring to the Veterans Choice Act, which was signed into law by President Obama in August 2014. President Trump signed a bill to extend this program a few months before it was set to expire in August 2017:This was not an executive order; furthermore, the Veterans Access, Choice, and Accountability Act of 2014 did not accomplish all of the things set out in this Facebook post, such as grant free health care at any hospital.The Veterans Choice Program expanded the "availability of medical services for eligible Veterans with community providers," but it did not grant veterans the opportunity to receive completely free health care at any hospital of their choosing. A fact sheet provided by the Department of Veterans Affairs laid out the criteria for veterans to seek health care outside established providers:The VA elaborated on the criteria that veterans must meet in order to seek treatment at outside providers. Even then, the choice of hospitals is limited to the facilities that have agreed to participate in the program. Furthermore, this bill does not include a provision stating that it covered all of the health care provided at these facilities. Some veterans may be eligible for free health care services, but most are required to pay for a portion of their treatment:The future of the program is uncertain, however. Critics of the program say that it's too expensive, and that it could eventually lead to downsizing.

FMD_train_1518

Did Congressman Jason Lewis Call for a Dress Code for American Women?

07/30/2018

In late July 2018, Facebook users circulated a meme bearing the image of U.S. Rep. Jason Lewis (R-Minnesota) with text stating that he had "called for a dress code for American women." The meme referenced comments Lewis made in 2012, five years before he assumed office, when his primary occupation was hosting the syndicated talk radio program "The Jason Lewis Show." Those comments resurfaced on July 18, 2018, when CNN published excerpts from Lewis's former radio program (which ended in 2014) in the lead-up to his bid for reelection in the November 2018 midterms. In recordings from March 2012 released by CNN, Lewis "repeatedly expressed disbelief that people could no longer refer to women as 'sluts,'" even if those women were sexually active or dressed provocatively. He stated, "Well, the thing is, can we call anybody a slut? This is what begs the question. Take Sandra Fluke out of it, take Rush [Limbaugh] out of it for a moment ... Does a woman now have the right to behave, and I know there's a double standard between the way men chase women and running around, you know, I'm not going to get there, but you know what I'm talking about. But it used to be that women were held to a little bit of a higher standard. We required modesty from women. Now, are we beyond those days where a woman can behave as a slut, but you can't call her a slut?" He continued, "Now Limbaugh's reasoning was, look, if you're demanding that the taxpayers pay for your contraception, you must use a lot of them and therefore, ergo, you're very sexually active, and in the old days, what we used to call people who were in college or even graduate school who were sexually active, we called them sluts." He also questioned, "But have we really got to the point where you can't refer to Madonna as a slut without being sued? I mean, Madonna has had a series of lovers, as have many in Hollywood. Now in the old days, what did we call this? Madonna dresses up in these sorts of prostitute-like outfits on stage, and she goes there and she sings and she shows half of her body. What did we call those people 30 years ago? 40 years ago? 50 years ago? You can't do that today; it's too politically incorrect?" Lewis was referring to a then-current controversy over comments made by fellow conservative radio host Rush Limbaugh, who had termed Sandra Fluke, then a law student at Georgetown University, a "slut" and a "prostitute" for speaking before a House committee in support of mandatory insurance coverage for contraceptives. Although Lewis may have been, in a very broad sense, suggesting a "dress code" for women by criticizing figures such as Madonna for "running around [in] slutty outfits" and making statements such as "Only we can tell our young women, 'don't look like some slut and you won't get hit on,'" we found no instance of him advocating the imposition of a mandatory (i.e., legislatively established) mode of dress for women. We reached out to Lewis's spokespeople and received no response, but Lewis's campaign spokeswoman Becky Alery told CNN that Lewis's comments as a radio host were old news: "This has all been litigated before, and as Congressman Lewis has said time and time again, it was his job to be provocative while on the radio."

NEI

The meme referenced comments Lewis made in 2012, five years before he assumed office, when his primary occupation was hosting the syndicated talk radio program "The Jason Lewis Show." Those comments resurfaced on 18 July 2018, when CNN published excerpts from Lewis' former radio program (which ended in 2014) in the lead-up to Lewis's bid for reelection in the 2018 November midterms."Well, the thing is, can we call anybody a slut? This is what begs the question. Take "Sandra Fluke out of it, take Rush [Limbaugh] out of it for a moment ... Does a woman now have the right to behave and I know there's a double standard between the way men chase women and running and running around you know, I'm not going to get there, but you know what I'm talking about. But it used to be that women were held to a little bit of a higher standard. We required modesty from women. Now, are we beyond those days where a woman can behave as a slut, but you can't call her a slut?"Lewis was referring to a then-current controversy over comments made by fellow conservative radio host Rush Limbaugh, who had termed Sandra Fluke, then a law student at Georgetown University, a "slut" and a "prostitute" for speaking before a House committee in support of mandatory insurance coverage for contraceptives.

FMD_train_632

Says the main Central Texas food bank is delivering 50 percent more food to the poor than three years ago.

11/01/2011

In a September 2011 floorspeech, Democratic U.S. Rep. Lloyd Doggett of Austin spoke of two concerns he said are growing in the Lone Star State: poverty and hunger.Doggett said that in tough times, more families are turning to food banks, creating immense demand. Among his examples: The Austin-basedCapital Area Food Bank of Texasthis year is delivering 50 percent more food to poor people than it did three years ago.In his speech, Doggett attributed that figure to John Turner, a food bank official. We wondered if the proclaimed increase was correct, and if so, whether that accurately reflected a surge in hunger in our area.The food bank, founded in 1981, takes in donations of food and money from the government, the food industry and the public, then distributes food to Central Texas residents directly and through more than 350 agencies in its 21-county service area roughly centered on Travis and Williamson counties. (Click to view a map. )The regions north edge runs from Mills County in the west to Freestone County in the east; its south edge runs from Gillespie and Blanco counties in the west to Fayette County on the east.Doggett spokeswoman Sarah Dohl told us by email that Doggett drew his 50 percent figure from aSept. 4, 2011, news story in theGuardian, a British newspaper, which quotes Turner saying the food bank was delivering 50 percent more food to the poor than it had done three years ago.In an interview, Turner, the food banks senior director for marketing and branding, recently told us hed given theGuardiana conservative estimate: The pounds of food distributed by the bank had actually increased 64 percent, going from 15.4 million pounds in 2007 to 25.3 million pounds in 2010. Turner noted, too, that the 2010 poundage was inflated by one-time federal stimulus aid enabling the bank to buy an additional 2.3 million pounds for the Summer Food Nutrition Program. Subtract that, and the 2010 figure becomes 23 million pounds -- up 49 percent from what the bank gave out in 2007.So, do the poundage figures mean hunger in the area shot up 49 percent or more over the past few years?J.C. Dwyer of the Texas Food Bank Network, the state association of food banks, told us pounds of food distributed generally isn't the best measure of need in a food bank's region: Its more of a metric for how were dealing with the needs, Dwyer said. A better way of gauging needs, he said, is to track the number of residents requesting food assistance.That is, the amount of food distributed doesn't necessarily reflect ups and downs in need. In the holiday season, donations and distributions surge, for instance, but that doesnt necessarily mean surges in need.Dwyer and Turner each suggested we check on changes in food demands through Hunger in America, a report commissioned every four years by Feeding America, a national charity that acts as a clearinghouse connecting food supplies to 200 food banks, including the one in Austin.There was no Hunger in America report for 2007, the first year in Doggetts statement, but thereports based on surveys in 2005 and 2009were broken down into smaller reports covering the Austin banks 21-county region: In 2005, the Capital Area bank fed an estimated 174,900 people. In 2009, the estimated number of people served was284,900 for the year, up 63 percent from those who were served in 2005. That change outstripped population growth, according toU.S. census estimates. In 2005, the 21 counties had 2,265,981 residents. By 2009, the regions population was 2,547,559 -- up 12.4 percent. Put another way, the food bank provided sustenance to nearly 8 percent of the regions residents in 2005 while about 11 percent of a greater total of residents got food in 2009.Finally, we wondered if Doggett was correct in saying the food aid went to the poor alone.Turner told us the bank does not question people who come seeking food as to their income -- if you show up, you are fed, he said, though depending on the lines that form, it could take an hour or two. However, the Hunger in America report using 2009 data states that 73 percent of the Capital Area food banks clients had incomes below the federal poverty level.Census figures for 2010, drawing on 2009 data, show that poverty in the 21-county region matched the percentage for Texas overall: Seventeen percent of residents had income below the federal poverty level.According to the United States Department of Agriculture,Dwyer told us, food insecurity across Texas -- the percentage of households at risk of missing meals because of financial pressure -- rose from 14.8 percent in the three-year period 2005-07 to 18.8 percent in 2008-10.Our conclusion: Changes in the amount of food distributed over several years, which Doggett cited, might not be the best way to gauge changes in residents needs. That said, the number of Central Texas requestors for food aid over those years outpaced regional population growth. The 63 percent increase in requestors also exceeded the 50-percent increase in food distributed that he stressed, though, contrary to his statement, not all those pounds of food went to the poor.We rate the claim Mostly True.

True

In a September 2011 floorspeech, Democratic U.S. Rep. Lloyd Doggett of Austin spoke of two concerns he said are growing in the Lone Star State: poverty and hunger.Doggett said that in tough times, more families are turning to food banks, creating immense demand. Among his examples: The Austin-basedCapital Area Food Bank of Texasthis year is delivering 50 percent more food to poor people than it did three years ago.In his speech, Doggett attributed that figure to John Turner, a food bank official. We wondered if the proclaimed increase was correct, and if so, whether that accurately reflected a surge in hunger in our area.The food bank, founded in 1981, takes in donations of food and money from the government, the food industry and the public, then distributes food to Central Texas residents directly and through more than 350 agencies in its 21-county service area roughly centered on Travis and Williamson counties.(Click to view a map.)The regions north edge runs from Mills County in the west to Freestone County in the east; its south edge runs from Gillespie and Blanco counties in the west to Fayette County on the east.Doggett spokeswoman Sarah Dohl told us by email that Doggett drew his 50 percent figure from aSept. 4, 2011, news story in theGuardian, a British newspaper, which quotes Turner saying the food bank was delivering 50 percent more food to the poor than it had done three years ago.In an interview, Turner, the food banks senior director for marketing and branding, recently told us hed given theGuardiana conservative estimate: The pounds of food distributed by the bank had actually increased 64 percent, going from 15.4 million pounds in 2007 to 25.3 million pounds in 2010. Turner noted, too, that the 2010 poundage was inflated by one-time federal stimulus aid enabling the bank to buy an additional 2.3 million pounds for the Summer Food Nutrition Program. Subtract that, and the 2010 figure becomes 23 million pounds -- up 49 percent from what the bank gave out in 2007.So, do the poundage figures mean hunger in the area shot up 49 percent or more over the past few years?J.C. Dwyer of the Texas Food Bank Network, the state association of food banks, told us pounds of food distributed generally isn't the best measure of need in a food bank's region: Its more of a metric for how were dealing with the needs, Dwyer said. A better way of gauging needs, he said, is to track the number of residents requesting food assistance.That is, the amount of food distributed doesn't necessarily reflect ups and downs in need. In the holiday season, donations and distributions surge, for instance, but that doesnt necessarily mean surges in need.Dwyer and Turner each suggested we check on changes in food demands through Hunger in America, a report commissioned every four years by Feeding America, a national charity that acts as a clearinghouse connecting food supplies to 200 food banks, including the one in Austin.There was no Hunger in America report for 2007, the first year in Doggetts statement, but thereports based on surveys in 2005 and 2009were broken down into smaller reports covering the Austin banks 21-county region: In 2005, the Capital Area bank fed an estimated 174,900 people. In 2009, the estimated number of people served was284,900 for the year, up 63 percent from those who were served in 2005.That change outstripped population growth, according toU.S. census estimates. In 2005, the 21 counties had 2,265,981 residents. By 2009, the regions population was 2,547,559 -- up 12.4 percent. Put another way, the food bank provided sustenance to nearly 8 percent of the regions residents in 2005 while about 11 percent of a greater total of residents got food in 2009.Finally, we wondered if Doggett was correct in saying the food aid went to the poor alone.Turner told us the bank does not question people who come seeking food as to their income -- if you show up, you are fed, he said, though depending on the lines that form, it could take an hour or two. However, the Hunger in America report using 2009 data states that 73 percent of the Capital Area food banks clients had incomes below the federal poverty level.Census figures for 2010, drawing on 2009 data, show that poverty in the 21-county region matched the percentage for Texas overall: Seventeen percent of residents had income below the federal poverty level.According to the United States Department of Agriculture,Dwyer told us, food insecurity across Texas -- the percentage of households at risk of missing meals because of financial pressure -- rose from 14.8 percent in the three-year period 2005-07 to 18.8 percent in 2008-10.Our conclusion: Changes in the amount of food distributed over several years, which Doggett cited, might not be the best way to gauge changes in residents needs. That said, the number of Central Texas requestors for food aid over those years outpaced regional population growth. The 63 percent increase in requestors also exceeded the 50-percent increase in food distributed that he stressed, though, contrary to his statement, not all those pounds of food went to the poor.We rate the claim Mostly True.

FMD_train_163

Says that unlike Texas, Missouri has a perfect AAA credit rating.

08/30/2013

Responding to an ad blitz in which Texas Gov. Rick Perry urged Missouri businesses to move to the booming Lone Star State, Missouri Gov. Jay Nixon suggested that taxes are lower in his state and that students fare better. Nixon, a Democrat, also singled out credit worthiness in the radio spotwe noticed onlineAug. 27, 2013. Unlike Texas, Nixon said, Missouri has a perfect AAA credit rating. Three days earlier, heposted a similar claimon a Twitter list of ways he ranks the Show-Me State as #betterthantx. His credit claim snagged our attention. Achart posted onlineby the California state treasurer lists state general-obligation bond ratings by three rating agencies. We noticed that Missouri and Texas both earned the highest, AAA rating from both Fitch Ratings and Moodys Investors Service. But Standard & Poors gave Missouri a AAA rating and Texas a rating of AA+, which is its rating immediately below AAA. Via emails from spokespersons for each of those rating services, we confirmed those ratings for both states--and we inquired into the differences. By phone, New York-based Moodys spokesman David Jacobson told us that both states have long been stable borrowers, though Missouri has had its Moodys AAA rating longer--since at least 1972, Jacobson said. In contrast, he said, Moodys lowered its rating for Texas general obligation debt from AAA to AA in 1987. That year, Texas faced a recession that drove down state revenues. In 2010, Jacobson said, Moodys recalibrated its methodology for rating state debt; Texas regained a AAA rating. A Standard & Poors spokesman, Olayinka Fadahunsi, emailed us a Nov. 20, 2012, report by the firm stating it had assigned its AA+ rating to general-obligation bonds issued by the Texas Transportation Commission. The report credited the Texas economy with being diverse and strong and likely to continue to generate additional jobs. Also, it said, state government had strong cash-management practices and low overall debt and retirement liabilities. On the other hand, it expressed concern at the states budgetary pressures, which are primarily related to the growing proportion of school revenues Texas is required to fund, as well as insufficient new sources of recurring dedicated tax revenues to support the increased funding. The report also cited increasing spending pressure from public assistance payments, including Medicaid, plus uncertainty about how the Obamacare law might affect the states health-care expenditures. Based on the analytic factors we evaluate for states, on a four-point scale in which '1' is the strongest, we have assigned Texas an overall score of '1.8, the report said. We asked Fadahunsi to discuss the distinction between the firms AA+ and AAA ratings. By email, he said that there is no one precise financial distinction. The firms general debt ratings methodology, as published Jan. 3, 2011, states that it develops a states credit rating by judging conditions across factors including the governments framework; financial management; economy; budgetary performance; and debt/liability profile. We assess each of these factors utilizing various metrics that we score on a scale from 1 (strongest) to 4 (weakest), the methodology states. For each metric there may be several indicators we evaluate to develop the metric score. We score each indicator individually on the same scale and average the indicators' scores to develop the overall score for the metric. We average the metrics for each factor to develop a composite score for each. The scores for the five factors are combined and averaged with equal weighting to arrive at an overall score which is then translated to an indicative credit level. The report says an overall score of 1 to 1.5 is needed to draw the AAA rating. Separately, R.J. DeSilva, spokesman for the Texas state comptrollers office, pointed us to a December 2012,reportby the Texas Bond Review Board which includes a chart indicating that as of August 2012, Missouri was among seven states with AAA GO debt ratings from the three major rating services. The other perfects were: Delaware, Georgia, Maryland, North Carolina, Utah and Virginia. Finally we asked Robert Coalter, executive director of theTexas Public Finance Authority, which issues bonds for the acquisition or construction of state buildings, to speak to any financial costs to Texas from not having Missouris three AAA ratings. Coalter said by phone that the effect is minimal, adding that any entity that issues bonds--including state agencies--sometimes obtain ratings from only one or two of the rating services. Also, he said, investment firms conduct their own research before committing to bonds. Coalter said the ratings of Texas debt are outstanding. Our debt is considered to be top quality. Put another way, might the Missouri governors statement be real-world meaningless? I do not believe its significant, Coalter replied. He said the claim sounded like comparing one student scoring 100 on a test with another scoring 99. Our ruling Nixon said that unlike Texas, Missouri has a perfect AAA credit rating. Thats correct, though Texas is close; two major services rate the bigger states GO debt AAA, one rates it AA+, which is its next-highest rating. We rate this claim as True. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- TRUE The statement is accurate and theres nothing significant missing. Click here formoreon the six PolitiFact ratings and how we select facts to check.

True

Nixon, a Democrat, also singled out credit worthiness in the radio spotwe noticed onlineAug. 27, 2013.Unlike Texas, Nixon said, Missouri has a perfect AAA credit rating. Three days earlier, heposted a similar claimon a Twitter list of ways he ranks the Show-Me State as #betterthantx.Achart posted onlineby the California state treasurer lists state general-obligation bond ratings by three rating agencies. We noticed that Missouri and Texas both earned the highest, AAA rating from both Fitch Ratings and Moodys Investors Service. But Standard & Poors gave Missouri a AAA rating and Texas a rating of AA+, which is its rating immediately below AAA.Separately, R.J. DeSilva, spokesman for the Texas state comptrollers office, pointed us to a December 2012,reportby the Texas Bond Review Board which includes a chart indicating that as of August 2012, Missouri was among seven states with AAA GO debt ratings from the three major rating services. The other perfects were: Delaware, Georgia, Maryland, North Carolina, Utah and Virginia.Finally we asked Robert Coalter, executive director of theTexas Public Finance Authority, which issues bonds for the acquisition or construction of state buildings, to speak to any financial costs to Texas from not having Missouris three AAA ratings. Coalter said by phone that the effect is minimal, adding that any entity that issues bonds--including state agencies--sometimes obtain ratings from only one or two of the rating services. Also, he said, investment firms conduct their own research before committing to bonds.Click here formoreon the six PolitiFact ratings and how we select facts to check.

FMD_train_1207

Did Debby Ryan Have a Heart Attack?

07/08/2019

On July 6, 2019, fans of actor Cameron Boyce were shocked and saddened to learn that the 20-year-old Disney star had passed away after experiencing a seizure. As celebrities and fans mourned Boyce's loss on social media, a rumor began to circulate that actress Debby Ryan had suffered a heart attack after hearing the news about her former co-star's death. There was no truth to this unfounded rumor, which was widely disseminated by a viral video posted to YouTube by @Dancetayley and titled "Debby Ryan Rushed to Hospital After Finding Out About Cameron Boyce." The video, which racked up nearly 2 million views within a day of its initial posting, included a number of screenshots of tweets from random people who claimed that Ryan had suffered a heart attack. None of those tweets originated from verified sources, and no credible news outlets reported that Ryan experienced a heart attack. This rumor likely stemmed from the fact that Ryan's voice was absent from the conversation immediately following Boyce's death. While many other co-stars and celebrity friends posted messages on social media mourning Boyce's loss after the news broke, Ryan's social media accounts were largely silent. Fans began to wonder why she hadn't commented yet, and some started to claim without evidence that she had suffered a heart attack. There were, of course, innumerable potential reasons why Ryan didn't immediately post on social media that did not involve a heart attack. For example, she might simply have taken some time to process the news of her co-star's passing. While Ryan didn't immediately post on social media, she did like a tweet posted by actor Charles Esten, who co-starred with Ryan and Boyce on the show Jessie. Ryan, who turned off her Instagram comments following Boyce's death—likely because a large number of fans were continuously reminding her that her friend had just died—also posted a video to her Instagram story of Boyce's acceptance speech for the Pioneering Spirit Award at the 2018 Thirst Gala. Here's the full video of Boyce's acceptance speech. The portion of his speech included in Ryan's post is transcribed below: "It's crazy, we can tweet whenever we want and we can use social media and Instagram and make the world a better place, instead of a worse one, which so many people use it for... We need to use what we have and make the world a better place for other people, people who need us."

False

On July 6, 2019, fans of actor Cameron Boyce were shocked and saddened to learn that the 20-year-old Disney star had passed away after experiencing a seizure. As celebrities and fans mourned the loss of Boyce on social media, a rumor began to circulate that actress Debby Ryan had suffered a heart attack after hearing the news about her former co-star's death:There was no truth to this unfounded rumor, which was widely disseminated by a viral video posted to YouTube by @Dancetayley and titled "Debby Ryan Rushed to Hospital After Finding Out About Cameron Boyce." The video, which racked up nearly 2 million views within a day of its initial posting, included a number of screenshots of tweets from random people who claimed that Ryan had suffered a heart attack:This rumor likely stemmed from the fact that Ryan's voice was absent from the conversation immediately following Boyce's death. While many other co-stars and celebrity friends posted messages to social media mourning the loss of Boyce after the news of his death broke, Ryan's social media accounts were largely silent. Fans began to wonder why she hadn't commented yet, and some of them started to claim without evidence that she had suffered a heart attack.While Ryan didn't immediately post to social media, she did like a tweet posted by actor Charles Esten, who co-starred with Ryan and Boyce on the show Jessie:Ryan, who turned off her Instagram comments following Boyce's death (likely because a large number of fans were continuously reminding her that her friend had just died), also posted a video to her Instagram story of Boyces acceptance speech for the Pioneering Spirit award at the 2018 Thirst Gala.

FMD_train_1832

Facebook Scammers Seize On Gas Monkey Garage Giveaway

05/24/2022

On May 24, 2022, Facebook scammers seized on a real giveaway from Richard Rawlings' Gas Monkey Garage, which was once affiliated with the "Fast N' Loud" reality television series. The show aired its final episodes in 2020. Facebook Richard Rawlings Gas Monkey Garage Fast N' Loud It's true that the official and verified Facebook page for Rawlings' Gas Monkey Garage was promoting a giveaway for $200,000. In order to enter, users simply needed to purchase products on the company's website. page However, scammers reposted videos about the giveaway from the official Facebook page to their own accounts. The scammers' posts instructed potential victims to visit a potentially malicious website that asked them to send money through the Stash finance app in order to claim a supposed prize. One of the scammers' posts showed a video of Rawlings talking about the real Gas Monkey Garage giveaway. That video was downloaded and reposted by a scammer's account named Nyong Desi (facebook.com/uygdvuidfhvyfdgviushv): It read as follows and included three steps, which we've seen in many scams before: Nyong Desi ????????????? ???????-??????? 2022 CONGRATULATIONS for those of you who have received comments from me have been selected as winners???Step 1 = Like and ShareStep 2 = Coments "Done"Step 3 = Register here? (link removed) ? to receive my prize. And the Gift will be sent after you successfully register (this is authentic and official) God bless you Good Luck The edit history for the post above showed that it was originally created on Jan. 30, 2022 as a giveaway scam involving PlayStation 5 game consoles and $10,000. It was edited on the morning of May 24 in order to change it to the Gas Monkey Garage giveaway scam. PlayStation 5 We visited the website that was displayed in the scammers' posts. In addition to asking users to send the scammers money through the Stash finance app, it also claimed that they had already won $10,000. Of course, this was all misleading. asking Our best tip to avoid these kinds of scams is to always look for the verified badge next to Facebook page names. If it's a big brand name and there's no verified badge, it might be a scam. scams verified badge In sum, the official Gas Monkey Garage Facebook page truly was holding a real giveaway. However, scammers sought to capitalize on the giveaway by downloading and then reposting several videos that showed Rawlings talking in order to trick potential victims into losing money. For further reading, this story might remind some readers of a similar Facebook scam we reported on in the past for the "Diesel Brothers" reality television series. reported on

False

On May 24, 2022, Facebook scammers seized on a real giveaway from Richard Rawlings' Gas Monkey Garage, which was once affiliated with the "Fast N' Loud" reality television series. The show aired its final episodes in 2020.It's true that the official and verified Facebook page for Rawlings' Gas Monkey Garage was promoting a giveaway for $200,000. In order to enter, users simply needed to purchase products on the company's website.The edit history for the post above showed that it was originally created on Jan. 30, 2022 as a giveaway scam involving PlayStation 5 game consoles and $10,000. It was edited on the morning of May 24 in order to change it to the Gas Monkey Garage giveaway scam.We visited the website that was displayed in the scammers' posts. In addition to asking users to send the scammers money through the Stash finance app, it also claimed that they had already won $10,000. Of course, this was all misleading.Our best tip to avoid these kinds of scams is to always look for the verified badge next to Facebook page names. If it's a big brand name and there's no verified badge, it might be a scam.For further reading, this story might remind some readers of a similar Facebook scam we reported on in the past for the "Diesel Brothers" reality television series.

FMD_train_465

Bernie Sanders: A Loser's Life?

02/04/2016

In February 2016, a meme about the lack of business acumen and experience exhibited by Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders, a Democratic presidential candidate, began circulating online. The criticisms offered in the meme were a mixture of true, false, irrelevant, and misleading statements. To wit: Never owned a business. Right off, this meme begins with a rather nebulous criticism. Although having owned a business is an experience many voters would like to see on the résumé of a potential chief executive, a literal application of that term isn't of much relevance. Technically, a person who once operated a roadside lemonade stand has "owned a business," while a person who has spent his career serving as the CEO of a public multinational, multibillion-dollar corporation has not—even though everyone would agree the latter has vastly more business experience than the former. Certainly, a number of highly regarded U.S. presidents in the modern era (e.g., Franklin Roosevelt, Dwight Eisenhower, John Kennedy, Ronald Reagan) never owned their own businesses. Moreover, one might validly say that Sanders started and operated his own business (whether he "owned" it is somewhat arguable, as it was a non-profit), the American People's Historical Society, which was created in 1978 to produce educational film strips about the history of Vermont. The University of Vermont has archived several of the brochures produced by the American People's Historical Society, one of which includes a statement from Sanders outlining the purpose of his film strips. Director Bernard Sanders explained, "It is our belief that state and regional history has too long been neglected by the audio-visual industry, and we are happy to begin the process of rectifying that situation. We believe that students have the right to learn about the state and region in which they are living." While the financials of the American People's Historical Society are not available, Sanders wrote in his memoir, Outsider in the House, that the business was reasonably successful and "a lot of fun." A friend of Sanders told Politico that the film strip business "wasn't just a way to make money ... He made film strips about people he admired and believed in. He just thought kids should know the truth of how things really were." Never invented anything. Once again, this is a rather nebulous criticism. The concept of "inventing" something could range from simply thinking up a novel idea (but doing nothing more about it) to creating and building a device for personal use (but not marketing it) to actually obtaining a patent for a new product. Bernie Sanders is certainly no inventor and holds no patents, but it's hard to see how that fact is of any relevance, as the same is true of nearly every U.S. president. Thomas Jefferson might legitimately be considered an inventor for having conceptualized various devices (including a macaroni machine, a swivel chair, a spherical sundial, a moldboard plow, and a cipher wheel), although he held no patents because he believed them to be a form of monopoly. Abraham Lincoln was the only U.S. president who ever held a patent, having been issued Patent #6,469 for "A Device for Buoying Vessels Over Shoals" on May 22, 1849. Beyond that, "inventing" has historically had nothing to do with the qualifications or success of candidates for the White House. Never had a 9 to 5 job. This criticism is too vaguely worded to allow for much cogent analysis. What does holding a "9 to 5 job" mean? That one literally works from 9 AM to 5 PM (and not some other period of the day)? That one holds full-time employment? That one is paid on an hourly basis? That one toils at what is commonly referred to as a "blue-collar" job? That one works for someone else rather than being self-employed? If we assume the most seemingly relevant application of the term—that it refers to holding steady, full-time employment—then one might fairly say it applies to Bernie Sanders. After receiving a Bachelor of Arts degree in political science from the University of Chicago in 1964, Sanders primarily worked a series of odd jobs while attempting to get his political career off the ground, and a Politico article observed that he "didn't collect his first steady paycheck until he was an elected official pushing 40 years old." However, that same article did list a variety of jobs Sanders held (even if they weren't steady or didn't provide a livable wage) before he finally reached public office upon being elected mayor of Burlington, Vermont, at age 39—working as an aide at a psychiatric hospital, as a Head Start preschool teacher, as a carpenter, and as a freelance writer for local publications. Sanders rented a small brick duplex at 295 1/2 Maple Street that was filled with not much furniture and not much food in the fridge but stacks of checked-out library books and scribbled-on legal pads. "Pretty sparse," Gene Bergman, an old friend, said about the apartment. "Stark and dark," said Darcy Troville, a fellow Liberty Unionite who lived around the corner and shared with Sanders homemade jellies and jams. "The electricity was turned off a lot," Barnett said. "I remember him running an extension cord down to the basement. He couldn't pay his bills." He worked some as a carpenter, although "he was a shitty carpenter," [Liberty Union party member John] Bloch told me. "His carpentry," [Liberty Union member Danny] Morrisseau said, "was not going to support him, and didn't." He worked as a freelance writer, putting intermittent pieces in the low-budget Vermont Freeman, a Burlington alternative weekly called the Vanguard Press, and a glossy, state-supported magazine called Vermont Life. His writing wasn't a living. The Vanguard paid as little as the rest. "It would've been not more than 50 bucks," said Greg Guma, a former editor. Vermont Life? "Our rate was 10 cents a word," said Brian Vachon, a former editor. "He was always poor," Sandy Baird, another old friend, told me in Burlington. "Virtually unemployed," said Nelson, the political science professor at the University of Vermont. "Just one step above hand to mouth," said Terry Bouricius, who was involved with Liberty Union, served at times as a de facto campaign manager for Sanders, and at one point crashed for a couple of months on his couch. Liberty Union "people found it difficult to support themselves while engaging in full-time political work," Michael Parenti, one of those people, wrote in the Massachusetts Review in the summer of 1975. "Some held jobs that allowed free time for campaign activities, while others lived off unemployment insurance." "His work was to be a politician," Guma said. "He put everything into what he was doing." We would also note that by the standard used here, holding elective office (as Sanders has done for most of the last 35 years as a mayor, a U.S. representative, and a U.S. senator) is as much a "9 to 5" job as any other. Never proposed a bill that has passed. This statement is not literally true, as during his tenure in Congress, Sanders has sponsored three bills that were enacted, two of which were rather slight matters involving the naming of USPS facilities, and one of which was the Veterans' Compensation Cost-of-Living Adjustment Act of 2013 (which provided "for an increase in the rates of compensation for veterans with service-connected disabilities and the rates of dependency and indemnity compensation for the survivors of certain disabled veterans"). Although that might seem like a slight achievement for someone who has spent 25 years as both a U.S. representative and a U.S. senator, we would note that only a scant handful of bills submitted in Congress (about 4 to 6 percent) are ever brought to a vote, and even fewer (about 2 to 4 percent) end up being enacted. We would also note that sponsoring original legislation is but one small part of Congress members' duties: they also co-sponsor legislation submitted by colleagues (which Sanders has done for more than 200 successful bills), muster support (or opposition) among colleagues and the public for proposed legislation, review and vote on proposed bills, serve on various committees (Sanders holds six Senate committee appointments), meet with constituents, and participate in oversight and investigation of governmental affairs. First and foremost, the Member is a decision-maker. Members are faced with hundreds of decisions in both recorded and unrecorded votes on matters major and minor. Many decisions must be made quickly. Each decision, whether spontaneous or studied, balances the conflicting perspectives received from private citizens, public officials, and party leaders. Decisions are often second-guessed by constituents, campaign opponents, colleagues, lobbyists, and media critics. Meetings are continual, in committee rooms, in private offices, in corridors, and in gatherings on the floor. Daily, sacks of mail are delivered. Faxes flow in a steady stream. Electronic mail jams congressional computers. Correspondence must be written and press releases issued. Highly visible issues are debated on the House or Senate floor, fully televised, and the absence or presence of a Member is duly noted. Scandals require investigation. Programs require oversight. Requests for information, both basic and complex, are received daily. Journalists seek comment. Constituents seek assistance obtaining federal grants, government jobs, and help in overcoming bureaucratic obstacles. Over time, these daily tasks and the always-changing expectations of the electorate have come together to establish a multi-faceted job. Lived off welfare before elected to public office. As noted above, various acquaintances who knew Sanders in the years before he achieved public office have reported that he was "always poor," and he likely received public assistance at some point during that time, although what form of (and how much) assistance he received is difficult to determine at this remove. A contemporaneous newspaper account from the Bennington Banner reported that in 1974, when Sanders ran for the U.S. Senate on the Liberty Union Party ticket, he was collecting unemployment benefits: Sanders, 32, cares little what 'image' he conveys—and that's part of his image of being a bit rumpled and unshorn. He's on unemployment compensation right now, having worked for the Bread & Law Task Force, as a freelance writer, and as a carpenter in the Burlington area. But the thing he likes best, and excels at, is 'talking the issues,' and he doesn't mind repeating himself sometimes." 74-year-old personal net worth of $300,000. As 247 Wall St. reported, determining the precise net worth of candidates is difficult for a number of reasons: net worth reporting exact values is not required. Instead, candidates may disclose their assets and income in a range. Further, candidates do not necessarily report all their assets. For instance, candidates do not need to disclose their personal real estate and property values. Jeb Bush opted to omit assets generated by several holding companies, for example. In addition, while some candidates choose to include their spouses in their disclosures, some do not. Carly Fiorina's net worth of $59 million, for example, includes that of her husband, Frank. Hillary Clinton's reported net worth, on the other hand, does not include assets jointly owned by her and former President Bill Clinton, who is worth by some estimates more than $50 million. 247 Wall St. attempted to determine each presidential candidate's net worth in an article published on August 24, 2015. They estimated that Sanders was one of the "poorest presidential candidates" running for office in 2016, with a likely net worth somewhere around $330,000: estimated Bernie Sanders' net worth: $194,026-$741,030. In 2013, Bernie Sanders had an average estimated net worth of $330,507, well below other prospective presidential nominees and among the lowest compared with other members of Congress. As of late 2019, Open Secrets, the website of the Center for Responsive Politics, estimated Sanders' net worth at between $729,000 and $1.8 million, making him neither the richest nor the poorest presidential hopeful in the 2020 field. In any case, the meme's characterization of Sanders as a "loser" based on his net worth evinces a rather skewed perspective. Although many people view financial rewards as a tangible measure of one's success, it is far from the only factor by which accomplishment can be measured. (In fact, highly regarded President Harry S. Truman had virtually no net worth even after leaving the White House in 1953 and afterwards was largely dependent upon Congress finally establishing a pension for former presidents.) Bernie Sanders might equally be considered a "winner" for persevering at his goal of achieving a political career long after others might have given up, and for succeeding at that effort despite prolonged financial hardship. Unlike many others, Sanders might also be lauded for maintaining a rather plain life and not having enriched himself in public service (especially since candidates at the other end of the financial spectrum are frequently criticized for being "out of touch with the common man"). As 247 Wall St. wrote of Sanders: The Vermont senator, who is the longest-serving independent in U.S. history, is a self-identified socialist. He is seeking the Democratic nomination and is the most popular Democratic candidate after Hillary Clinton. In keeping with Sanders' stated intention of starting a grassroots movement, more than 90% of his campaign contributions have come from individual donors. Sanders' campaign speeches have drawn record numbers of attendees. Most recently, 19,000 people watched Sanders speak at an NBA arena in Portland, Oregon, the largest political event compared with all other candidates so far this election season. All in all, that sounds like quite an impressive career achievement for anyone—regardless of net worth.

NEI

Moreover, one might validly say that Sanders started and operated his own business (whether he "owned" it is somewhat arguable, as it was a non-profit), the American People's Historical Society, which was created in 1978 to produce educational film strips about the history of Vermont. The University of Vermont has archived several of the brochures produced by the American People's Historical Society, one of which includes a statement from Sanders outlining the purpose of his film strips:If we assume the most seemingly relevant application of the term that it refers to holding steady, full-time employment then one might fairly say it applies to Bernie Sanders. After receiving a Bachelor of Arts degree in political science from the University of Chicago in 1964, Sanders primarily worked a series of odd jobs while attempting to get his political career off the ground, and a Politico article observed that he "didn't collect his first steady paycheck until he was an elected official pushing 40 years old." However, that same article did list a variety of jobs Sanders held (even if they weren't steady or didn't provide a livable wage) before he finally reached public office upon being elected mayor of Burlington, Vermont, at age 39 working as an aide at a psychiatric hospital, as a Head Start preschool teacher, as a carpenter, and as a freelance writer for local publications:Although that might seem like slight achievement for someone who has spent 25 years as both a U.S. representative and a U.S. senator, we would note that only a scant handful of bills submitted in Congress (about 4 to 6 percent) are ever brought to a vote, and even fewer (about 2 to 4 percent) end up being enacted. We would also note that sponsoring original legislation is but one small part of Congress members' duties: they also co-sponsor legislation submitted by colleagues (which Sanders has done for more than 200 successful bills), muster support (or opposition) among colleagues and the public for proposed legislation, review and vote on proposed bills, serve on various committees (Sanders holds six Senate committee appointments), meet with constituents, participate in oversight and investigation of governmental affairs, etc., as detailed in "The Many Roles of a Member of Congress":As 247 Wall St. reported, determining the precise net worth of candidates is difficult for a number of reasons:247 Wall St. attempted to determine each presidential candidate's net worth in an article published on 24 August 2015. They estimated that Sanders was one of the "poorest presidential candidates" running for office in 2016, with a likely net worth somewhere around $330,000:As of late 2019, Open Secrets, the website of the Center for Responsive Politics, estimated Sanders' net worth at between $729,000 and $1.8 million, making him neither the richest nor the poorest presidential hopeful in the 2020 field.In any case, the meme's characterization of Sanders as a "loser" based on his net worth evinces a rather skewed perspective. Although many people view financial rewards as a tangible measure of one's success, it is far from the only factor by which accomplishment can be measured. (In fact, highly-regarded President Harry S. Truman had virtually no net worth even after leaving the White House in 1953 and afterwards was largely dependent upon Congress' finally establishing a pension for former presidents.)

FMD_train_813

The Armani jacket owned by Hillary Clinton that cost $12,000.

06/08/2016

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

NEI

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

FMD_train_1310

Has the Legal Drinking Age Been Raised to 23?

12/09/2015

On 9 December 2015, a message claiming that the legal drinking age would be raised to 23 in February 2016 started circulating on Facebook: While the above-displayed Facebook message may appear atfirst glance as if it came from the news network CNN, that is not the case. This Facebook message was created by a prank website that creates links which resemble real news stories. However, when a user clicks on the link they are redirected to apage that informs them that the story was fake: Users are then prompted to share the joke with their friendson Facebook. Similar pranks have previously circulated on the internet, briefly convincing Facebook users that Taco Bell was closingandthat PepsiCo was discontinuing Mountain Dew. closing discontinuing [article-meta]

False

Similar pranks have previously circulated on the internet, briefly convincing Facebook users that Taco Bell was closingandthat PepsiCo was discontinuing Mountain Dew.

FMD_train_88

Were 10,000 Camels Scheduled to Be Killed in Australia Amid Water Shortages?

01/08/2020

In January 2020, readers asked us about the accuracy of reports that authorities in Australia had announced their intention to cull (kill) around 10,000 camels due to the pressure the animals were placing on drinking water supplies. For example, on Jan. 7, the Weird World Facebook page posted a widely shared meme that contained the following text: meme "More than 10,000 camels to be killed because they drink too much water. Feral camels in South Australia are set to be killed in a bid to stop them drinking too much water as droughts and fires ravage the country. More than 10,000 camels will be shot by professional shooters in helicopters starting Wednesday." Also on Jan. 7, the London Evening Standard published a story with a headline similar to that contained in the meme: "Over 10,000 Australian Camels to Be Shot Because They Drink Too Much Water." The article reported that: story "Over 10,000 camels will be shot from helicopters to stop them drinking water in drought ravaged South Australia. Professional shooters will move in on Wednesday, after orders from Aboriginal leaders in the Anangu Pitjantjatjara Yankunytjatjara lands (AYP). The culling, expected to take about five days, follows complaints from locals about animals looking for any available water source, including tanks and taps in properties." Similar stories, with similar headlines, were published by the Independent, the Daily Mail, and IndiaTimes.com. Those reports, and the Weird World meme, were broadly accurate, though the specific claim that "more than" 10,000 camels would be culled as part of the plan appears to have been contradicted by a local official who said the number would be between 5,000 and 10,000. They also failed to mention that a small number of wild horses would be targeted in the kill, as well. Independent Daily Mail IndiaTimes.com The APY local government authority, in the state of South Australia, announced the cull in a Jan. 6 news release that read, in part "There will be a feral animal kill across the APY lands. Feral animals, but specifically camels, are the primary target ... The cull (kill) will occur the week of 8th January, 2020, when the aerial operations will commence (expected to go over five days)." news release In a supplementary news release published the following day, APY officials explained the reasoning behind the cull: news release The region's first major cull of feral animals is in urgent response to threats posed to communities by an increase in the number of feral camels, and some feral horses, due to drought and extreme heat. Thousands of feral camels are emerging from an arid landscape and moving into communities looking for water, while doing significant damage to infrastructure and housing, and creating serious safety hazards. Traditional owners, who have been widely consulted about the cull, have reported extremely large groups of camels and other feral animals in and around communities and in specific hot spots across the APY Lands. The APY Executive Board of Management held an urgent meeting on December 11 about the impact of feral animals on communities and pastoral operations, and approved a resolution for an aerial cull of camels and other feral animals across the APY Lands. ... Richard King, APY's general manager, said traditional owners recognized the need to manage feral owners, despite a camel cull presenting a spiritual conflict for some indigenous groups, because of serious risks to community safety and damage to important economic, natural and cultural assets. "There is extreme pressure on remote Aboriginal communities in the APY Lands and their pastoral operations as the camels search for water," Mr. King said. "The dire situation is compounded by dry conditions, animal welfare issues, threats to communities, scarce water supplies, health and environmental impacts, the destruction of country, loss of food supplies and endangerment of travellers on the Stuart Highway and across the APY Lands. Given ongoing dry conditions and the large camel congregations threatening all of the main APY communities and infrastructure, immediate camel control is needed." Separately, APY's General Manager Richard King told CBS News that the number of camels being targeted in the cull was between 5,000 and 10,000 a range that somewhat contradicts the claim, repeated in several news articles, that "more than" or "over" 10,000 camels were to be killed. If the number ends up being 10,000, those reports will transpire to be rather accurate. However, according to King, the number could be as low as half of that figure, a detail noted by none of the articles or the meme mentioned above. CBS News Hennessey, Ted. "Over 10,000 Australian Camels to Be Shot From Helicopters Because They Drink Too Much Water." The Evening Standard. 7 January 2020. Osborne, Samuel. "Australia: More Than 10,000 Camels to Be Shot Because They Drink Too Much Water." The Independent. 7 January 2020. Wilkie, Kelsey. "Shooters Will Cull More Than 10,000 Australian Camels From the Air Tomorrow..." The Daily Mail. 6 January 2020. Chauhan, Shreya. "Solution to Bushfires? Australia to Kill 10,000 Camels Because 'They Drink Too Much Water.'" IndiaTimes.com. 7 January 2020. Anangu Pitjantjatjara Yankunytjatjara Local Authority. "Media Statement -- There Will Be a Feral Animal Kill Across the APY Lands." 6 January 2020. Anangu Pitjantjatjara Yankunytjatjara Local Authority. "Media Statement -- Feral Camel Control Operation Launches on APY Lands." 7 January 2020. Lewis, Sophie. "Up to 10,000 Thirsty Camels Will Be Shot and Killed During Major Australian Drought." CBS News. 7 January 2020.

True

For example, on Jan. 7, the Weird World Facebook page posted a widely shared meme that contained the following text:Also on Jan. 7, the London Evening Standard published a story with a headline similar to that contained in the meme: "Over 10,000 Australian Camels to Be Shot Because They Drink Too Much Water." The article reported that:Similar stories, with similar headlines, were published by the Independent, the Daily Mail, and IndiaTimes.com. Those reports, and the Weird World meme, were broadly accurate, though the specific claim that "more than" 10,000 camels would be culled as part of the plan appears to have been contradicted by a local official who said the number would be between 5,000 and 10,000. They also failed to mention that a small number of wild horses would be targeted in the kill, as well.The APY local government authority, in the state of South Australia, announced the cull in a Jan. 6 news release that read, in part "There will be a feral animal kill across the APY lands. Feral animals, but specifically camels, are the primary target ... The cull (kill) will occur the week of 8th January, 2020, when the aerial operations will commence (expected to go over five days)."In a supplementary news release published the following day, APY officials explained the reasoning behind the cull:Separately, APY's General Manager Richard King told CBS News that the number of camels being targeted in the cull was between 5,000 and 10,000 a range that somewhat contradicts the claim, repeated in several news articles, that "more than" or "over" 10,000 camels were to be killed. If the number ends up being 10,000, those reports will transpire to be rather accurate. However, according to King, the number could be as low as half of that figure, a detail noted by none of the articles or the meme mentioned above.

FMD_train_229

When colleges and universities are added, education spending is the biggest item in the state budget about 52 percent of all state dollars.

06/23/2017

After Dan Patrick popped a statistic to back his contention that Texas state government spends plenty on education, a reader asked us to check the Republican lieutenant governors accuracy. Patrick, in a June 2017commentary, extolled the state budget then about to besigned into law by Gov. Greg Abbott, specifying: Texas spends $60 billion on schools in our two-year budget, including both federal and state funds. Of that, $41 billion is state funding. That is on top of the estimated $28 billion to $30 billion annually paid by local property taxpayers. When colleges and universities are added, Patrick said, education spending is the biggest item in the state budget about 52 percent of all state dollars. Health care is second, accounting for most of the remaining dollars. It is disingenuous to suggest that we are, somehow, holding back funding that we could spend on schools. Our review of budget documents posted by the Legislative Budget Board led us to find Patricks figure solid though the percentage also proved historic in a low-end way not stated by Patrick. Patrick cites state budget summary Up front, Patrick spokesman Alejandro Garcia responded by email to our inquiry about the basis of Patricks 52 percent by pointing out a chart in the2018-19 state budget, which takes effect Sept. 1, 2017. The chart shows that the budget puts $55.9 billion in general revenue toward public and higher education out of $106.7 billion in all such revenue which breaks out to 52.4 percent of such spending. Next highest: Nearly $34 billion budgeted for health and human services accounts for 31 percent of state spending in the budget. SOURCE: Document,Summary of Conference Committee Report for Senate Bill 1, Appropriations for the 2018-19 Biennium,Legislative Budget Board, May 2017 (accessed June 14, 2017) Some context: The chart shows that the nearly $41 billion in public school aid appropriated by the 2017 Legislature trailed $635.6 million, or 1.5 percent, behind what lawmakers budgeted for public schools the previous two years. On the other hand, the new budget increases state spending on higher education by $195.2 million, 1.1 percent, from the 2016-17 budget, according to the chart. We asked the Legislative Budget Board about Patricks percentage. By email, staff spokesman R.J. DeSilva responded by pointing out the same chart offered by Patrick. Separately to our emailed inquiries, Austin school-finance expert Joe Wisnoski, who works for a firm that represents school districts, and Tom Canby of the Texas Association of School Business Officials didnt quibble with Patricks calculation. Wisnoski added, though, that the 52 percent conclusion may not be the whole story. He alsopointed outthat from all funding sources--including federal aid--lawmakers devoted $80 billion to education, which represented 37 percent of the full $217 billion state budget. Alternate calculation For our part, we noticed one other way of gauging the share of state revenue budgeted for education. Another chart in the budget shows that lawmakers budgeted nearly $58.8 billion for public schools and higher education in state general revenue plus the smaller pot of money consisting of state revenue dedicated to particular expenditures. The combined amount, we found, also breaks out to 52 percent of the full budgets $113.1 billion in state revenue and dedicated state revenue: SOURCE: Document,Summary of Conference Committee Report for Senate Bill 1, Appropriations for the 2018-19 Biennium,Legislative Budget Board, May 2017 (accessed June 14, 2017) Other state funds? When we asked about Patrick's claim, Dominic Giarratani of the Texas Association of School Boards agreed its fair to focus on state general revenue to evaluate budgeted spending on education. By email, though, he also provided a calculation suggesting that public plus higher education accounts for 48 percent of non-federal spending in the budget. Thats correct, it looked to us, though its worth noting the additional spending captured by this alternate analysis folds in chunks of money not easily controlled by lawmakers--including $1.8 billion of earnings on the endowment that benefits institutions in the University of Texas and Texas A&M University systems; nearly $4.6 billion in local tax revenue projected to be provided by property-rich school districts, including the Austin district, to support the states school finance system; and nearly $3.6 billion in payments driven by a 2006 state-mandated reduction in school property taxes. Historic low? Next, we wondered how the 52 percent cited by Patrick for 2018-19 compares to the share of state GR devoted to education in previous budgets. To get a fix on that, we checked spending on education from non-dedicated GR in the previous 10 budgets. Such funds comprise the bulk of each budget and are most directly controlled by legislative decisions. Our finding: In the budgets, which encompass 20 years, no Legislature devoted less than 53 percent of general revenue to education. On average, educations share of state spending through the budgets was 58 percent. State Revenue Budgeted for Education, Texas, 1998-99 through 2018-19 (By Percentage) BUDGET YEARS SHARE OF REVENUE* BUDGETED FOR PUBLIC AND HIGHER EDUCATION 1998-99 61 % 2000-01 63 2002-03 59 2004-05 59 2006-07 56 2008-09 59 2010-11 61 2012-13 57 2014-15 53 2016-17 53 2018-19 52 *State general revenue, excluding revenue constitutionally dedicated to particular purposes. SOURCE: PolitiFact Texas calculations drawing on state budgets adopted by Texas Legislature, 1997-2017as posted bythe Legislative Budget Board (accessed June 14-15, 2017) Our ruling Patrick, saying its disingenuous to suggest lawmakers held back on education aid, said 52 percent of state spending in the 2018-19 state budget was appropriated to public plus higher education. Thats an accurate percentage. Unclarified: Education also accounts for the smallest share of budgeted state spending in at least 20 years, which is as far back as we checked. We rate the statement Mostly True. MOSTLY TRUE The statement is accurate but needs clarification or additional information. Click here formoreon the six PolitiFact ratings and how we select facts to check.

True

Patrick, in a June 2017commentary, extolled the state budget then about to besigned into law by Gov. Greg Abbott, specifying: Texas spends $60 billion on schools in our two-year budget, including both federal and state funds. Of that, $41 billion is state funding. That is on top of the estimated $28 billion to $30 billion annually paid by local property taxpayers.Up front, Patrick spokesman Alejandro Garcia responded by email to our inquiry about the basis of Patricks 52 percent by pointing out a chart in the2018-19 state budget, which takes effect Sept. 1, 2017. The chart shows that the budget puts $55.9 billion in general revenue toward public and higher education out of $106.7 billion in all such revenue which breaks out to 52.4 percent of such spending. Next highest: Nearly $34 billion budgeted for health and human services accounts for 31 percent of state spending in the budget.SOURCE: Document,Summary of Conference Committee Report for Senate Bill 1, Appropriations for the 2018-19 Biennium,Legislative Budget Board, May 2017 (accessed June 14, 2017)Wisnoski added, though, that the 52 percent conclusion may not be the whole story. He alsopointed outthat from all funding sources--including federal aid--lawmakers devoted $80 billion to education, which represented 37 percent of the full $217 billion state budget.SOURCE: Document,Summary of Conference Committee Report for Senate Bill 1, Appropriations for the 2018-19 Biennium,Legislative Budget Board, May 2017 (accessed June 14, 2017)SOURCE: PolitiFact Texas calculations drawing on state budgets adopted by Texas Legislature, 1997-2017as posted bythe Legislative Budget Board (accessed June 14-15, 2017)MOSTLY TRUE The statement is accurate but needs clarification or additional information. Click here formoreon the six PolitiFact ratings and how we select facts to check.

FMD_train_498

Certainly, the IRS requested that taxpayers report stolen goods and illicit earnings.

12/30/2021

Criminals, beware. Just because you got away with an illegal activity doesn't mean the IRS isn't going to come after your earnings. Just ahead of the 2021 tax season, the IRS released guidelines requiring taxpayers to claim items they have stolen, as well as earnings from illegal activities. The claim made headlines in publications that joked potential criminals were running out of time to return stolen goods to avoid paying taxes on them. It went viral when the financial Twitter account @litquidity took to social media to remind taxpayers that tax season is around the corner. And it's true. Publication 17, which contains the IRS's general rules for filing federal income tax returns, lists illegal activities under "other income," categorized as self-employment activity, which must be reported to the federal tax agency. "Income from illegal activities, such as money from dealing illegal drugs, must be included in your income on Schedule 1 (Form 1040), line 8z, or on Schedule C (Form 1040) if from your self-employment activity," read the 2021 IRS guidelines. The guidelines also require that those who steal property must report the fair market value as income in the year that the item was stolen. Of course, one can avoid paying taxes on such items as long as the person returns them to the individual they were stolen from in the first place. The handy regulations also list how to report embezzled funds, note that bribes are considered nondeductible expenses, and state that kickbacks, side commissions, and push money must also be included in Schedule 1 (Form 1040), line 8z, or on Schedule C (Form 1040) if from self-employment activity. It's not just items or earnings obtained through illegal activities. That watch you found in the gym locker room? Yep, it's taxable. If you find and keep property that doesn't belong to you and has been lost or abandoned (treasure trove), it's taxable to you at its fair market value in the first year of your undisputed possession, noted the IRS. Snopes spoke with an accountant who said that while the reporting requirements themselves aren't new, there was previously a separate form specifically for reporting illegal activity income. It's unclear to what extent people actually used the form in the past. It's not exactly clear whether law enforcement will be given information about individuals who report income from illegal activities. What is clear is that anyone under the age of 65 who made more than $12,550 in 2021 is required to file by April 18, 2022. Sources: Dolan, Debra. "Time Is Running Out to Return Stolen Goods to Avoid Paying Taxes on Them." https://www.wdbj7.com, https://www.wdbj7.com/2021/12/29/time-is-running-out-return-stolen-goods-avoid-paying-taxes-them/. Accessed 30 Dec. 2021. "IRS Asks That Criminals Provide Its Cut of Stolen Property, Illegal Income." KXXV, 29 Dec. 2021, https://www.kxxv.com/news/local-news/irs-asks-that-criminals-provide-its-cut-of-stolen-property-illegal-income. "Publication 17 (2021), Your Federal Income Tax | Internal Revenue Service." https://www.irs.gov/publications/p17. Accessed 30 Dec. 2021. "Stole Something? IRS Says Stolen Property and Bribes Must Be Reported as Income." USA Today, https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/2021/12/28/irs-says-stolen-property-must-reported-and-twitter-goes-wild/9035694002/. Accessed 30 Dec. 2021.

True

The claim made headlines in publications that joked potential criminals were running out of time to return stolen goods to avoid paying taxes on them. And went viral when the financial Twitter account @litquidity took to social media to remind taxpayers that tax szn is around the corner. And its true. Publication 17, which contains the IRS general rules for filing federal income tax returns, lists illegal activities under other income categorized as self-employment activity required to be reported to the federal tax agency. Screengrab/IRS Publication 17 Screengrab/IRS Publication 17

FMD_train_1337

Did the Taliban Endorse Trump While Scientific Community Endorsed Biden?

10/14/2020

Voting in the 2020 U.S. Election may be over, but misinformation continues to spread. Never stop fact-checking. Follow our post-election coverage here. As the 2020 U.S. presidential election inched closer, the internet was flooded with misleading memes about both candidates, including the allegation that extremist organizations like the Taliban and Ku Klux Klan supported U.S. President Donald Trump, while the New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM) and other bipartisan groups openly endorsed Democratic candidate Joe Biden. The claims were first put forth by screenwriter and author Bess Kalb, whose work has been featured on "Jimmy Kimmel Live!" and in The New Yorker. In a Twitter post shared on Oct. 11, she suggested that extremist groups supported Trump while implying that more even-keeled organizations backed Biden. At the time of publication, the tweet had received more than 370,000 likes. Although Kalb didn't specify in the tweet which candidate received endorsements from whom, it was perfectly clear to anyone following news about the presidential campaigns at the time which was which: Biden's endorsers included the magazine Scientific American, and the Trump campaign had publicly rejected an alleged endorsement from the Taliban. To verify Kalb's claim, we broke it down into four sections to address each of her assertions. Like much viral content, her statement contained kernels of truth that had been taken out of context or were inaccurately represented. In October 2020, CBS News claimed to have spoken with Zubihullah Mujahid, a spokesperson for the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan, or Taliban, who allegedly told the publication that the extremist group believed Trump would win the November 2020 election. In an exclusive telephone interview, Mujahid reportedly said that Trump had "proved himself a politician who accomplished all the major promises he had made to the American people." Another senior Taliban leader said that the organization hoped Trump would win the election and end U.S. military presence in Afghanistan. CBS News added that the Taliban's enthusiasm for Trump is grounded in the shared goal of getting U.S. troops out of Afghanistan after 19 years of war—a longtime promise of the president. However, Mujahid denied the claims made by CBS News and wrote in an Oct. 10 tweet that the publication had misinterpreted his remarks. A subsequently translated tweet shared as a comment added that nothing like what they published had happened. Tim Murtaugh, a spokesperson for the Trump campaign, told Axios in an emailed statement, "We reject their support, and the Taliban should know that the President will always protect American interests by any means necessary, unlike Joe Biden, who opposed taking out Osama bin Laden and Qasem Soleimani." In an Oct. 10 tweet, Murtaugh added that he had told CBS News that the Trump campaign rejected the endorsement. Snopes attempted to contact Murtaugh on Twitter but did not receive a response in time for publication. Our message to the Trump campaign also went unanswered. At the announcement of Trump's 2016 bid, the KKK published a full-page spread supporting Trump in its official quarterly newspaper, The Crusader. In an interview with MSNBC, Trump stated that he disavowed former KKK leader David Duke and that his campaign rejected the endorsement, issuing the following statement to news outlets in 2016: "Mr. Trump and the campaign denounce hate in any form. This publication is repulsive, and their views do not represent the tens of millions of Americans who are uniting behind our campaign." The KKK endorsement followed the Trump presidency for years. It resurfaced again in January 2020 when a manipulated photo claimed to show a group of KKK members marching behind a campaign sign for Trump and Vice President Mike Pence. A message accompanying the meme at the time claimed, "This is all you need to know about why you should vote Blue in 2020." As our previous fact check concluded, the photograph in question was not genuine—it was taken during a march in Pulaski, Tennessee, in July 2009. The banner actually read, "Fraternal White Knights of the Ku Klux Klan." White supremacist and former Grand Wizard David Duke, whose Twitter account was suspended in October 2020, has expressed support for Trump on more than one occasion. In a video shared to Twitter by verified photojournalist Mykal McEldowney of the Indy Star (which has been archived here) from the Aug. 12, 2017, Unite the Right rally in Charlottesville, Virginia, the former KKK leader offered support to the president. "We're going to fulfill the promises of Donald Trump. That's what we believed in. That's why we voted for Donald Trump—because he said he's going to take our country back. And that's what we had to do." Trump expressed disapproval of Duke and disavowed white supremacy on "Good Morning America" in 2016. During a televised debate on Sept. 29, 2020, the president was asked to clearly and explicitly condemn white supremacy, which he failed to do on that occasion, though he did condemn "all white supremacists," mentioning the KKK specifically, during a Fox News interview two days later. NEJM, an esteemed medical journal that publishes research and review articles, took an unprecedented step when it published an Oct. 8 editorial urging voters to render judgment on the current political leaders, adding that they were dangerously incompetent in their handling of the pandemic. The column, titled "Dying in a Leadership Vacuum," did not explicitly name Trump, nor did it acknowledge Biden. Rather, it laid blame on a failing leadership and administration that inadequately responded to the COVID-19 pandemic, further polarizing and politicizing Americans while disenfranchising vulnerable communities and leaving behind healthcare professionals who have put their lives on the line. By making masks political tools rather than effective infection control measures, continuing to push inaccurate guidelines, and deferring to pandemic responses at the state level—many of which did not have adequate resources to fight such a public health crisis without the support of the federal government—the publication argued that U.S. leaders ignored and even denigrated experts, furthering that the COVID-19 response was a failure that had taken a crisis and turned it into a tragedy. The editorial went on to say the following: "The response of our nation's leaders has been consistently inadequate. The federal government has largely abandoned disease control to the states. Governors have varied in their responses, not so much by party as by competence. But whatever their competence, governors do not have the tools that Washington controls. Instead of using those tools, the federal government has undermined them. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, which was the world's leading disease response organization, has been eviscerated and has suffered dramatic testing and policy failures. The National Institutes of Health have played a key role in vaccine development but have been excluded from much crucial government decision-making. And the Food and Drug Administration has been shamefully politicized, appearing to respond to pressure from the administration rather than scientific evidence. Our current leaders have undercut trust in science and in government, causing damage that will certainly outlast them. Instead of relying on expertise, the administration has turned to uninformed opinion leaders and charlatans who obscure the truth and facilitate the promulgation of outright lies. Anyone else who recklessly squandered lives and money in this way would be suffering legal consequences. Our leaders have largely claimed immunity for their actions. But this election gives us the power to render judgment. Reasonable people will certainly disagree about the many political positions taken by candidates. But truth is neither liberal nor conservative. When it comes to the response to the largest public health crisis of our time, our current political leaders have demonstrated that they are dangerously incompetent. We should not abet them and enable the deaths of thousands more Americans by allowing them to keep their jobs." It is unclear what broad bipartisan coalition Kalb refers to in her tweet; however, both candidates indeed have a long list of endorsements from both sides of the political aisle. Most notably, in mid-September, Scientific American backed Biden, marking it the second publication to break stride in endorsing a presidential candidate for the first time in its history. Again, the editorial board cited Trump's rejection of science and pandemic response as a catalyst. "The evidence and the science show that Donald Trump has badly damaged the U.S. and its people—because he rejects evidence and science. The most devastating example is his dishonest and inept response to the COVID-19 pandemic, which cost more than 190,000 Americans their lives by the middle of September," wrote the publication. "He has also attacked environmental protections, medical care, and the researchers and public science agencies that help this country prepare for its greatest challenges. That is why we urge you to vote for Joe Biden, who is offering fact-based plans to protect our health, our economy, and the environment. These and other proposals he has put forth can set the country back on course for a safer, more prosperous, and more equitable future." A list of endorsements from political leaders and labor unions can be found on Biden's official campaign website, but as with most political candidates, the majority of his endorsers are partisan. Those include activist groups built around the platforms of LGBTQ rights, environmental issues, animal rights, women's reproductive rights, and labor unions representing dozens of industries from across the nation. That being said, a number of established newspapers have also endorsed the former vice president, including The Washington Post, The New York Times, and The Boston Globe. By comparison, Trump is backed by activist groups that include religious organizations, law enforcement, and pro-life organizations. Trump has been endorsed by a handful of publications, including The Boston Herald and The Tulsa Beacon. In the weeks leading up to the general election in 2020, discord and contention dominated U.S. political discourse. As with many viral and political posts, memes, videos, or content, elements of truth are not fully represented in a short character count. Generally speaking, this claim was based in truth but lacked the context needed to accurately characterize both the Trump and Biden campaigns.

NEI

Voting in the 2020 U.S. Election may be over, but the misinformation keeps on ticking. Never stop fact-checking. Follow our post-election coverage here.The claims were first put forth by screenwriter and author Bess Kalb, whose work has been featured on "Jimmy Kimmel Live!" and The New Yorker. In a Twitter post shared on Oct. 11, she suggested that extremist groups supported Trump while implying that more even-keeled organizations backed Biden. At the time of publication, the tweet had received more than 370,000 likes. In October 2020, CBS News claimed to have spoken with Zubihullah Mujahid, a spokesperson of the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan, or Taliban, who allegedly told the publication that the extremist group believed that Trump would win the November 2020 election. In an exclusive telephone interview, Mujahid reportedly said that Trump had "proved himself a politician who accomplished all the major promises he had made to American people." However, Mujahid denied the claims made by CBS News and wrote in an Oct. 10 tweet that the publication had misinterpreted his remarks. A subsequently translated tweet shared as a comment added that nothing like what they published has happened.Tim Murtaugh, a spokesperson for the Trump campaign, told Axios in an emailed statement, We reject their support and the Taliban should know that the President will always protect American interests by any means necessary, unlike Joe Biden who opposed taking out Osama bin Laden and Qasem Soleimani." In an Oct. 10 tweet, Murtaugh added that he had told CBS News that the Trump campaign rejected the endorsement.At the announcement of Trumps 2016 bid, the KKK published a full-page spread supporting Trump in its official quarterly newspaper, The Crusader. In an interview with MSNBC, Trump said that that he disavowed former KKK leader David Duke and that his campaign rejected the endorsement, issuing the following statement to news outlets in 2016:The KKK endorsement followed the Trump presidency for years. It resurfaced again in January 2020 when a manipulated photo claimed to show a group of KKK members marching behind a campaign sign for Trump and Vice President Mike Pence. A message accompanying the meme at the time claimed, This is all you need to know about why you should vote Blue in 2020. As our previous fact check concluded, the photograph in question was not genuine it was taken during a march in Pulaski, Tennessee, in July 2009. The banner actually read, Fraternal White Knights of the Ku Klux Klan. Spencer Platt / StaffWhite supremacist and former Grand Wizard David Duke, whose Twitter account was suspended in October 2020, has expressed support for Trump on more than one occasion. In a video shared to Twitter by verified photojournalist Mykal McEldowney of the Indy Star (which has been archived here) from the Aug. 12, 2017, Unite the Right rally in Charlottesville, Virginia, the former KKK leader offered support to the president. Trump expressed disapproval of Duke and disavowed white supremacy on "Good Morning America" in 2016. During a televised debate on Sept. 29, 2020, the president was asked to clearly and explicitly condemn white supremacy, which he failed to do on that occasion, though he did condemn "all white supremacists," mentioning the KKK specifically, during a Fox News interview two days later.NEJM, an esteemed medical journal that publishes research and reviews articles, took an unprecedented step when it published an Oct. 8 editorial urging voters to render judgment on the current political leaders, adding that they were dangerously incompetent in their ignorance and handling of the pandemic.It is unclear what broad bipartisan coalition Kalb refers to in her tweet; however, both candidates indeed have a long list of endorsements from both sides of the political aisle. Most notably, in mid-September Scientific American backed Biden, marking it the second publication to break stride in endorsing a presidential candidate for the first time in its history. Again, the editorial board cited Trumps rejection of science and pandemic response as a catalyst."The evidence and the science show that Donald Trump has badly damaged the U.S. and its people because he rejects evidence and science. The most devastating example is his dishonest and inept response to the COVID-19 pandemic, which cost more than 190,000 Americans their lives by the middle of September," wrote the publication.A list of endorsements from political leaders and labor unions can be found on Bidens official campaign website, but as with most political candidates, the majority of his endorsers are partisan. Those include activist groups built around the platforms of LGBTQ, environmental, animal, womens reproductive rights, and labor unions representing dozens of industries from across the nation. That being said, a number of established newspapers have also endorsed the former vice president, including The Washington Post, The New York Times, and The Boston Globe. By comparison, Trump is backed by activist groups that include religious organizations, law enforcement, and pro-life organizations. Trump has been endorsed by a handful of publications, including The Boston Herald and The Tulsa Beacon. (You can view a full list of Trump endorsements here.)

FMD_train_8

Did William Phelps Eno, the 'Father of Traffic Safety,' Never Learn to Drive?

10/02/2002

We stop for red lights and go on green lights almost by instinct, so deeply steeped into us are our traffic rules. Just as we rarely give thought to the possibility of meeting a car traveling the wrong way on a one-way street, so too do we rarely pause to wonder where our traffic laws came from or who invented the crosswalk. Meet William Phelps Eno (1858-1945), an innovator who long ago earned the sobriquet "the Father of Traffic Safety." William Phelps Eno Born in New York City, this forward-thinking man observed the massive traffic jams of his era and from those observations formulated solutions that carried over from the days of horses and carriages into the automotive age. In 1900 he penned the treatise "Reform in Our Street Traffic Urgently Needed," which immediately established him as a traffic safety expert, a mantle he was to wholeheartedly embrace. In 1903 he developed the world's first city traffic code (for New York City) and the first traffic plans for New York City, London, and Paris. It was William Phelps Eno who invented stop signs and who envisioned one-way streets, taxi stands, traffic circles, and pedestrian safety islands. He wrote the first manual of police traffic regulations, and it was he who designed the circular traffic pattern that courses around the Arc de Triomphe in Paris. stop signs In 1921 he established the Eno Transportation Foundation, a non-profit study center located in Washington, D.C. The Foundation is dedicated to improving all modes of transportation ground, air, and water. Eno was always a great fan of horseback riding but did not place all that much faith in the automobile, thinking it but a fad. He never learned to drive, and when events in his life necessitated car travel, he relied on a chauffeur. William Phelps Eno's penchant for peculiarity outlived him. In 1996 his old home in Westport, Connecticut, came under the steady assault of determined bargain hunters who misunderstood the "bargain" they so intently pursued. Eno's 32-room mansion and the land it stood on had been sold for $1.5 million, but the buyer wanted the choice waterfront land for the purpose of subdividing it, not for the 119-year-old building that stood upon it. The old manse was to be razed to make way for new housing. Rather than see old building torn down, the Connecticut Trust for Historic Preservation stepped in and offered it for $1 to anyone who would cart William Phelps Eno's home away and give it a good home elsewhere. The costs of barging the mansion to a new site and restoring it were estimated at $500,000 and $1.7 million, respectively. The Today Show helped publicize the scheme, but unfortunately people heard only what they wanted to hear: that they could have a mansion for $1. Everything about the land not coming with it and the building having to be carted away and set up elsewhere went in one ear and out the other. The property was overrun by folks determined to look it over, and they showed up at all hours of day and night, often necessitating calls to the police to have them removed. The previous owner (who was living in its carriage house) was driven to distraction by the never-ending stream of phone calls and letters pleading for the house. "Keep Out" signs had to be posted, and the road leading to the mansion had to be chained off to keep dollar-waving people out. Meanwhile, the Trust's office was also fielding hundreds of calls and letters, some coming from those who thought this was a lottery, and one from a gal who thought the mansion was a prize offered for an essay-writing contest. Even utter chaos eventually dies down. Hundreds upon hundreds of inquiries later, no one really wanted the house. It was ultimately demolished in July 1997. Meyers, Kendra. Will a Mansion Find a Home Before All the Doorknobs Are Gone? The New York Times. 4 February 1996 (13CN; p. 2). Wallace, Irving. Significa. New York: E.P. Dutton, Inc., 1983 (pp. 22-23).

True

We stop for red lights and go on green lights almost by instinct, so deeply steeped into us are our traffic rules. Just as we rarely give thought to the possibility of meeting a car traveling the wrong way on a one-way street, so too do we rarely pause to wonder where our traffic laws came from or who invented the crosswalk. Meet William Phelps Eno (1858-1945), an innovator who long ago earned the sobriquet "the Father of Traffic Safety." It was William Phelps Eno who invented stop signs and who envisioned one-way streets, taxi stands, traffic circles, and pedestrian safety islands. He wrote the first manual of police traffic regulations, and it was he who designed the circular traffic pattern that courses around the Arc de Triomphe in Paris.

FMD_train_1361

'Sam's Club Shopper Survey' Email Scam Promises Gift Card or 'Reward'

05/25/2023

In May 2023, we reviewed a "Sam's Club Shopper Survey" email scam that promised a gift card or "promo reward" worth either $50 or $90, all for taking a short survey. This was not a legitimate giveaway or promotion from Sam's Club. Any online users who followed the link in the email eventually found that it had little to do with Sam's Club and a lot to do with scammers misleadingly roping people into being charged monthly fees for strange subscriptions. The scam started with the email about Sam's Club. Its subject line read, "Confirmation Needed." The message claimed that a "Sam's Club Shopper Survey" would provide a $50 gift card simply for taking a "30-second questionnaire." The message came from an email address that ended in @sendinblue.com and was routed through sightbanner.com. A real message from Sam's Club would come from an email address ending in @samsclub.com. The link in the email led through several redirects and ended on herbonlinereward.com. After a short survey, the website presented several options to purchase various products for "free," purportedly with only shipping and handling needed to be paid. None of these items had anything to do with Sam's Club. The "free" products included a RoboKleen Vacuum, iPad Pro, Everclean Portable Vacuum, Hi-Tech Wireless Ear Pods, 5.3K60 Sports Action Cam, Hair Halo Sonic Blow Dryer, Ring Video Doorbell, and a Ninja NeverDull Knife Set. However, just about all of these offers were part of hidden subscription scams, the kind of scam where monthly subscription fees only appear on separate pages within the terms and conditions. Such scams often make no mention of these fees on the checkout page, even in the grand total. Many of them also don't include a box for customers to check off that would indicate they agree to abide by the terms. In this case, the websites that hosted the hidden subscription scams included getqualitysavings.com, getqualityoffers.com, pixelmaxpro.com, peakproductzone.com, qualityexpressshop.com, premiumgadgetbargains.com, and specialtechdeals.com. The website that hosted the page for the iPad Pro, premiumonlineshopper.com, did not mention subscription fees in its terms. However, the top of the page stated in big letters that anyone looking at the page was a "winner." At the same time, the very bottom of the page said in very small letters that the user was simply the "winner" of a single entry into a sweepstakes that had not yet ended. If any readers believe that they've been scammed by a hidden subscription scam, we recommend calling your credit card company (or whatever financial institution you paid with) immediately to let them know. A new card number may be needed to ensure no more unauthorized charges are placed on the compromised card. Generally, if any readers believe they have been the victim of fraud, we recommend filing a report with the FTC. Always remember with online scams that if it seems too good to be true, it probably is.

False

In this case, the websites that hosted the hidden subscription scams included getqualitysavings.com, getqualityoffers.com, pixelmaxpro.com, peakproductzone.com, qualityexpressshop.com, premiumgadgetbargains.com, and specialtechdeals.com.The website that hosted the page for the iPad Pro,premiumonlineshopper.com, did not mention subscription fees in its terms. However, the top of the page said in big letters that anyone looking at the page was a "winner." However, at the same time, the very bottom of the page said in very small letters that the user was simply the "winner" of a single entry into a sweepstakes that had not yet ended.Generally, if any readers believe they have been the victim of fraud, we recommendfiling a report with the FTC.

FMD_train_628

Says food stamp growth, while high, lagged the rise in unemployment.

12/06/2012

Mention food stamps in a mixed political crowd and youll get a full buffet of opinions -- starchy, sugary, wilted and done to a turn -- about the people who use them.Exhibit A is the array of reader comments on Cleveland.com aftera story there, and in The Plain Dealer on Dec. 3, described efforts in Congress to cut the federal food safety net.Sorry, but youll get no dish here about the habits or consumption patterns of Americans using the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP (now delivered in the form of an electronic card rather than with stamps or coupons). Instead, PolitiFact Ohio is using this as an opportunity to revisit a claim from the food stamp story, made by Anne Goodman, president and CEO of the Cleveland Foodbank. The food bank provides food for 450 meal sites, shelters and pantries, whose clients include Ohioans on SNAP whose food budgets run out before the end of each month.Goodman said that while national SNAP enrollment grew by 70 percent between 2007 and 2011, unemployment jumped by a much higher rate, 94 percent. That shows, she said, that SNAP is working as it was intended. It was designed to ensure that families have food when they need a helping hand.PolitiFact Ohio was curious about those figures. Did food stamp growth really lag unemployment as the economy turned sour.A cursory look at labor statistics showed she was in the ballpark. But the data, and thus the rhetoric, can change depending on the months reported or even the dates when the data is released, so we asked for more.Goodman provided three sources of information.The first was the latestSNAP Annual Summaryfrom the U.S. Department of Agriculture, which runs SNAP. The summary provided data from 2007 to 2011, a five year window that includes pre-recession data for a baseline and carries into recovery. 2011 also is the most current year for which statistics are available.The summary shows annual participation, measured in fiscal years. In 2007, there were 26.316 million individual SNAP recipients. In 2011, there were 44.709 million.That comes to a growth rate of 69.89 percent. With almost no rounding, thats the same as 70 percent. So Goodman was accurate on that figure.We should note that these are annual averages. As the article in The Plain Dealer on food stamps said Dec. 3, participation was as high as 47.1 million at one point, in August, 2011. That figure came from another Agriculture Department set of data, tracking SNAP participationby the month.The second source that Goodman sent us was a set ofU.S. Census Bureau dataon economic characteristics of Americans. This was from the bureaus American Community Survey, and it estimated the percentage of individuals on food stamps was 7.7 percent in 2007, and 13 percent in 2011.Thats a 68.8 percent growth rate, or 1 percent lower than the figure from the Agriculture Department. The difference is likely due to a difference in methodology: The census asks questions of households, and the Agriculture Department has actual figures from the food stamp program, since it runs it. With the numbers so close, it makes little difference here.So Goodmans numbers were good on food stamp growth. But what about unemployment growth?That leads to the third set of data she cited, this from theU.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. The bureau, a division of the Labor Department, tracks the number and percentage of people in the workforce who are unemployed.In 2007, the unemployment rate was 4.6 percent.In 2011, it was 8.9 percent.Thats a 93.48 percent rise. Goodman put it at 94 percent -- within a percentage point of the actual figure. We checked BLS data using adifferent table-- the government agency allows you to use its information in different formats -- and got the same result as Goodman.These, too, were annual averages, and some months were higher, some lower. If you were to pick certain months in those years to find high and low points, you could show an even bigger leap in unemployment -- as high as the 105 percent rise between May 2007 and May 2011. But by using the more conservative annual average, it becomes clear that Goodman did not cherry pick the data to show extremes.Her comments to The Plain Dealer, and anop-ed columnon food aid that she wrote for the newspaper on Dec. 2, were not the first time these numbers have been cited. Goodman mentioned them when sheappeared before the U.S. Senate Agriculture Committeeon March 7 to discuss the need for food assistance.And Feeding America, a national charity,has cited them in its materials.Goodmans figures check out entirely.On the Truth-O-Meter, her claim rates True.

True

Mention food stamps in a mixed political crowd and youll get a full buffet of opinions -- starchy, sugary, wilted and done to a turn -- about the people who use them.Exhibit A is the array of reader comments on Cleveland.com aftera story there, and in The Plain Dealer on Dec. 3, described efforts in Congress to cut the federal food safety net.Sorry, but youll get no dish here about the habits or consumption patterns of Americans using the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP (now delivered in the form of an electronic card rather than with stamps or coupons). Instead, PolitiFact Ohio is using this as an opportunity to revisit a claim from the food stamp story, made by Anne Goodman, president and CEO of the Cleveland Foodbank. The food bank provides food for 450 meal sites, shelters and pantries, whose clients include Ohioans on SNAP whose food budgets run out before the end of each month.Goodman said that while national SNAP enrollment grew by 70 percent between 2007 and 2011, unemployment jumped by a much higher rate, 94 percent. That shows, she said, that SNAP is working as it was intended. It was designed to ensure that families have food when they need a helping hand.PolitiFact Ohio was curious about those figures. Did food stamp growth really lag unemployment as the economy turned sour.A cursory look at labor statistics showed she was in the ballpark. But the data, and thus the rhetoric, can change depending on the months reported or even the dates when the data is released, so we asked for more.Goodman provided three sources of information.The first was the latestSNAP Annual Summaryfrom the U.S. Department of Agriculture, which runs SNAP. The summary provided data from 2007 to 2011, a five year window that includes pre-recession data for a baseline and carries into recovery. 2011 also is the most current year for which statistics are available.The summary shows annual participation, measured in fiscal years. In 2007, there were 26.316 million individual SNAP recipients. In 2011, there were 44.709 million.That comes to a growth rate of 69.89 percent. With almost no rounding, thats the same as 70 percent. So Goodman was accurate on that figure.We should note that these are annual averages. As the article in The Plain Dealer on food stamps said Dec. 3, participation was as high as 47.1 million at one point, in August, 2011. That figure came from another Agriculture Department set of data, tracking SNAP participationby the month.The second source that Goodman sent us was a set ofU.S. Census Bureau dataon economic characteristics of Americans. This was from the bureaus American Community Survey, and it estimated the percentage of individuals on food stamps was 7.7 percent in 2007, and 13 percent in 2011.Thats a 68.8 percent growth rate, or 1 percent lower than the figure from the Agriculture Department. The difference is likely due to a difference in methodology: The census asks questions of households, and the Agriculture Department has actual figures from the food stamp program, since it runs it. With the numbers so close, it makes little difference here.So Goodmans numbers were good on food stamp growth. But what about unemployment growth?That leads to the third set of data she cited, this from theU.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. The bureau, a division of the Labor Department, tracks the number and percentage of people in the workforce who are unemployed.In 2007, the unemployment rate was 4.6 percent.In 2011, it was 8.9 percent.Thats a 93.48 percent rise. Goodman put it at 94 percent -- within a percentage point of the actual figure. We checked BLS data using adifferent table-- the government agency allows you to use its information in different formats -- and got the same result as Goodman.These, too, were annual averages, and some months were higher, some lower. If you were to pick certain months in those years to find high and low points, you could show an even bigger leap in unemployment -- as high as the 105 percent rise between May 2007 and May 2011. But by using the more conservative annual average, it becomes clear that Goodman did not cherry pick the data to show extremes.Her comments to The Plain Dealer, and anop-ed columnon food aid that she wrote for the newspaper on Dec. 2, were not the first time these numbers have been cited. Goodman mentioned them when sheappeared before the U.S. Senate Agriculture Committeeon March 7 to discuss the need for food assistance.And Feeding America, a national charity,has cited them in its materials.Goodmans figures check out entirely.On the Truth-O-Meter, her claim rates True.

FMD_train_514

Blunder Pressure

08/28/2015

FACT CHECK: Does a photograph depict a pressure canner accident? Claim: A photograph depicts a pressure canner accident. PROBABLY Example: [Collected via Reddit, August 2015] Why I'm not allowed to cook dinner anymore Origins: On 24 August 2015, a user (who has since deleted the post from their history) published a thread titled "Why I'm not allowed to cook dinner anymore" with the photograph shown above to Reddit's r/funny subreddit. The image garnered thousands of comments and "upvotes" for the submitter, but that user was very likely not the source of the image. One day earlier, Imgur user NineteenSeventyFour had published the same image in a separate post on that site with the title "Whoopsie." In both cases, no backstory for what was depicted in the photograph was provided. As is not uncommon for popular image posts of this sort, the photograph filtered over to Facebook. The account UNILAD published the same picture to their timeline (crediting the Reddit user who posted it as the source), and the Adinas Acres page also posted it along with the following text: UNILAD posted, "Canning season is upon us. If you use a pressure canner, be sure the weights/release is working correctly." Despite clear interest in the events of the photograph (and multiple reposts of the picture), the actual scenario depicted by the photograph remains unknown. We were unable to find any online versions of it before it was shared to Imgur in August 2015 with no description, and the user who posted it there has a site tagline that reads, "It's not a Repost, it's Nostalgia!", suggesting that they curate and share interesting images not personally taken by them. While it's possible the photograph indeed depicts a pressure canning or cooking scenario gone awry, no actual information was ever included alongside its iterations to definitively describe the image. We don't know when the photo was taken, by whom, or even in which country the purported kitchen catastrophe occurred. Moreover, canning enthusiasts commenting on the image noted that while debris from equipment was scattered throughout the scene in the photograph, the splattered food one would expect to see if a pressure cooker malfunctioned was curiously absent. It's unlikely that either the person who originally posted the photograph on Imgur or the Reddit reposter snapped the picture themselves. As such, any information gleaned from such online postings is speculative, and the humorous one-line descriptions that have accompanied it were likely invented to encourage sharing of an amusing picture. Last updated: 28 August 2015 Originally published: 28 August 2015

False

Origins: On 24 August 2015, a user (who has since deleted the post from their history) published a thread titled "Why I'm not allowed to cook dinner anymore" with the photograph shown above to Reddit's r/funny subreddit.The image garnered thousands of comments and "upvotes" for the submitter, but that user was very likely not the source of the image. One day earlier, Imgur user NineteenSeventyFour had published the same image in a separate post on that site with the title "Whoopsie." In both cases no backstory for what was depicted in the photograph was provided.As is not uncommon for popular image posts of this sort, the photograph filtered over to Facebook. The account UNILAD published the same picture to their timeline (crediting the Reddit user who posted it as the source), and the the page Adinas Acres page also posted it along with the following text:Despite clear interest in the events of the photograph (and multiple reposts of the picture), the actual scenario depicted by the photograph remains unknown. We were unable to find any online versions of it before it was shared to Imgur in August 2015 with no description, and the user who posed it there has a site tagline that reads "It's not a Repost, it's Nostalgia!", suggesting that they curate and share interesting images not personally taken by them.

FMD_train_1393

Freezing of military wages

11/22/2010

Claim: President Obama plans to implement a pay freeze for active duty military personnel in 2011. Example: [Collected via e-mail, November 2010] On Facebook, there is the following message "reposted" by a friend, and who knows how far it has circulated: "Dear Mr. President, I hear you would like to freeze pay rates for active duty starting next year. Would you also consider cutting your own pay to save more money for our country? While you're at it, let's cut congressmen's pay too. If the people who risk their lives don't get an increase in pay, why would we continue raising pay for those who take no risks and reap the benefits? Repost if you agree!" Origins: At the time this item was circulating via Facebook postings in November 2010, it was not true that President Obama had announced an intention to freeze the pay of active duty military personnel starting in 2011. (In fact, President Obama's fiscal 2011 budget proposal, submitted in February 2010, called for a 1.4% military pay increase for the following year.) The November 2010 circulation of this item was prompted by a draft report prepared by the National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform (NCFRR), a bipartisan body created by President Obama "to address our nation's fiscal challenges." Among the 58 recommendations included in that draft report, released in November 2010, was a recommendation for a three-year freeze on basic non-combat military pay and allowances. Regular Military Compensation (excluding combat pay) for military personnel, which includes basic pay, basic allowances for housing and subsistence, and federal income tax advantages that accompany the allowances, is expected to grow by $9.2 billion from 2011 to 2015. A three-year freeze at 2011 levels for these compensation categories would save the federal government $7.6 billion in compensation and tax expenditures, as well as another $1.6 billion in reduced retirement accrual, totaling $9.2 billion in discretionary savings by 2015. However, as noted above, the NCFRR's report was merely a draft, and a military pay freeze was just one of several dozen potential items offered to achieve the goal of saving $200 billion in federal expenditures through 2015. Any such proposal, even if considered, would still have to overcome several hurdles before being enacted, including approval by 14 of the 18 commissioners who comprise the NCFRR and subsequent approval by both the Senate and the House of Representatives. In December 2010, Congress approved President Obama's recommended 1.4% pay increase for military personnel, while President Obama announced that he would freeze for two years the salaries of all other federal government workers. As for presidential compensation (which is currently set at $400,000 per year, with a $50,000 expense allowance), the salary of the President of the United States is established by Congress, so a president cannot technically "cut his own pay" (although he might opt to decline some or all of his salary or donate it to charity). Members of Congress could vote to decrease their salaries (which are currently set at $174,000 per year), although they have already voted to decline their cost-of-living pay increases in 2009 and again in 2010. Last updated: 13 January 2011 Pincus, Walter. "House Approves Defense Bill with Lower Pay Raise for Military." The Washington Post. 18 December 2010. Vinch, Chuck. "Panel Calls for 3-Year Freeze on Military Pay." Army Times. 11 November 2010.

NEI

Origins: As of the time this item was circulating via Facebook postings in November 2010, it was not true that President Obama had announced an intention to freeze the pay of active duty military personnel starting in 2011. (In fact, President Obama's fiscal 2011 budget proposal, submitted in February 2010, called for a 1.4% military pay bump for the following year.)The November 2010 circulation of this item was prompted by a draft report prepared by the National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform (NCFRR), a bipartisan body created by President Obama "to address our nation's fiscal challenges." Among the 58 recommendations included in that draft report, released in November 2010, was a recommendation for a three-year freeze on basic non-combat military pay and allowances:As for presidential compensation (which is currently set at $400,000 per year, with a $50,000 expense allowance), the salary of the President of the United States is established by Congress, so a president cannot technically "cut his own pay" (although he might opt to decline some or all of his salary, or donate it to charity). Members of Congress could vote to decrease their salaries (which are currently set at $174,000 per year), although they have already voted to decline their cost-of-living pay increases in 2009 and again in 2010.

FMD_train_293

Did Ex-Judge Roy Moore Write Anti-Abortion Poem 'America the Beautiful'?

08/02/2021

In the summer of 2021, an old poem, touching on several conservative talking points including abortion, re-emerged on social media. The poem, entitled "America the Beautiful," was widely attributed to controversial former Alabama Supreme Court Chief Justice Roy Moore. He lost a U.S. Senate election to Democrat Doug Jones in 2017, after several women accused him of sexual impropriety decades ago, when they were in their teens and Moore was in his 30s. The former judge has denied the allegations. controversial Roy Moore denied Many Facebook posts in July and August 2021 began with the following introduction: Some of you may be wondering what Alabama Judge Roy Moore has been doing since he was removed from the bench for refusing to remove the Ten Commandments from his courtroom wall. The following is a poem written by Judge Moore... The poem was also widely shared in 2020, especially after it was posted to Facebook by Sharon Baptist Church in Iron Station, North Carolina. Most of the Facebook posts in 2020 and 2021 included a photograph of a bearded and bespectacled man (shown above) who is, definitively, not Moore. It's not clear who the man is, or why his picture was almost universally associated with the poem in Facebook posts. posted to Facebook Snopes readers have inquired about "America the Beautiful" for at least a decade, and the poem has been attributed to Moore as far back as 1999. On the website of the Foundation for Moral Law, a non-profit organization started by Moore but now headed by his wife, Kayla, the poem is published along with following assertion: " Copyright 2007 Roy S. Moore": 1999 published America the Beautiful, or so you used to be,Land of the Pilgrims pride, Im glad theyre not here to see,Babies piled in dumpsters, abortion on demand,Oh, sweet land of liberty, your house is on the sand. Your children wander aimlessly poisoned by cocaine,Choosing to indulge their lusts, when God has said abstain.From sea to shining sea this Nation has turned away,From the teaching of Gods Law, and a need to always pray. So many worldly pastors telling lies about our Rock,Saying God is going broke so they can fleece the flock.Weve kept God in our temples, how foolish we have grown,When all the earth is but His footstool, and Heaven is His throne. Weve voted in governments that are rotting to the core,Appointing Godless judges who throw reason out the door.Too soft to put a killer in a well deserved tomb,But brave enough to kill that child before he leaves the womb. You think that Gods not angry, that our lands a moral slum?How much longer will it be before His judgment comes?And how can we face our God, from Whom we cannot hide?What is left for us to do, but stem this evil tide! For if we who are His children, will humbly turn and pray,If we seek His holy face, and mend our evil way,Then God will hear from Heaven and forgive us of our sins.Hell heal our sickly land and those who live within. But, America the beautiful, if you dont then you will see,A sad but Holy God withdraw His hand from Thee. Moore also recited "America the Beautiful" during his speech at the October 2017 Values Voter Summit, which can be watched here (beginning around 3:00:00). 3:00:00 The assertion of Moore's copyright, and the consistent attribution of the poem to him in various forums over the past two decades, all point towards his authorship. However, the earliest publication of the poem that we could find was dated 1992 and attributed to someone else entirely. On Oct. 28, 1992, the Victoria Advocate newspaper in Victoria, Texas, published a letter to the editor written by a Richard A. Barsness, in support of anti-abortion politicians. The letter incorporated a nearly identical poem to the one later claimed by Moore, but attributed it to a David Hungerford, as shown below: published Snopes contacted individuals who might be able to shed further light on Barsness' letter, and the possible involvement of a David Hungerford in the writing of the poem, but we did not receive responses in time for publication. Speaking on behalf of Moore, a staff member at the Foundation for Moral Law told Snopes, "Judge Moore has been writing poetry since the early 1980s and cannot say when this was written." When we pressed the spokesperson on whether that statement meant Moore was continuing to assert that he wrote "America the Beautiful," the spokesperson did not elaborate. We found only one other attribution of the poem to a David Hungerford, in an undated document hosted on the website of the Calvary Chapel in Eagle, Idaho. By contrast, Moore has been cited as its author on dozens of occasions over the past two decades. undated document However, because the earliest publication of the poem that we could find so far (in 1992) was attributed to David Hungerford, and Moore did not provide evidence that he wrote the poem before then, we cannot rule out the possibility that someone by the name of Hungerford, or even someone else entirely, was the original writer of the poem later claimed by Moore. As such, we are issuing a rating of "Unproven," for now. If definitive evidence becomes available, we will update this fact check accordingly.

NEI

In the summer of 2021, an old poem, touching on several conservative talking points including abortion, re-emerged on social media. The poem, entitled "America the Beautiful," was widely attributed to controversial former Alabama Supreme Court Chief Justice Roy Moore. He lost a U.S. Senate election to Democrat Doug Jones in 2017, after several women accused him of sexual impropriety decades ago, when they were in their teens and Moore was in his 30s. The former judge has denied the allegations. The poem was also widely shared in 2020, especially after it was posted to Facebook by Sharon Baptist Church in Iron Station, North Carolina. Most of the Facebook posts in 2020 and 2021 included a photograph of a bearded and bespectacled man (shown above) who is, definitively, not Moore. It's not clear who the man is, or why his picture was almost universally associated with the poem in Facebook posts. Snopes readers have inquired about "America the Beautiful" for at least a decade, and the poem has been attributed to Moore as far back as 1999. On the website of the Foundation for Moral Law, a non-profit organization started by Moore but now headed by his wife, Kayla, the poem is published along with following assertion: " Copyright 2007 Roy S. Moore":Moore also recited "America the Beautiful" during his speech at the October 2017 Values Voter Summit, which can be watched here (beginning around 3:00:00). On Oct. 28, 1992, the Victoria Advocate newspaper in Victoria, Texas, published a letter to the editor written by a Richard A. Barsness, in support of anti-abortion politicians. The letter incorporated a nearly identical poem to the one later claimed by Moore, but attributed it to a David Hungerford, as shown below:We found only one other attribution of the poem to a David Hungerford, in an undated document hosted on the website of the Calvary Chapel in Eagle, Idaho. By contrast, Moore has been cited as its author on dozens of occasions over the past two decades.

FMD_train_1802

Complex Social Housing Initiative

07/28/2011

Claim: Video clip shows a Tacoma housing development "built for illegal immigrants" who are receiving "refugee pay." Example: [Collected via e-mail, July 2011] I want to move to Tacoma... to the good life! Here is a development in Tacoma, WA (Salishan) that was built for illegal immigrants! 1,325 homes created! Refugee pay offers them $2,642 per month in SSI benefits, plus food stamps, plus Section 8 housing. You will see new expensive cars in this video. Wouldn't you like to get a free ride like the illegals? Origins: As noted by Kathleen Merryman of the Tacoma News Tribune, the video clip linked above about the Salishan housing development on Tacoma's East Side has garnered a good deal of attention for that community: William B. Mount is going viral on Salishan. The Tacoman once used public access television to air his worldview and now posts videos on YouTube. About five months ago, he and a woman named Jane drove through Salishan on Tacoma's East Side with a video camera and a big box of misinformation. They delivered a 10-minute commentary on the mixed-use and mixed-income redevelopment of the worn-out public housing site and posted it on the video-sharing site. The stew of untruths simmered there. It's at a boil now. Tacoma Housing Authority (THA) and Tacoma City Council members are receiving e-mails from people upset over what he calls the misuse of Social Security funds. As Ms. Merryman described in considerable detail in an excellent analysis of the video, virtually all of the claims made within it regarding Social Security, foreigners, and illegal immigrants are false: analysis Claim: "What you are looking at is a $225 million complex, $225 million complex, of housing out of the Social Security budget for 1,300 units." False: No Social Security funds were used to redevelop Salishan. Claim: "All welfare housing. All Social Security housing for foreigners will get $2,642 a month. All of that comes out of the Social Security budget." False: Of Salishan's renters, 97 percent are citizens of the United States, according to THA Executive Director Michael Mirra. "We know of no government program that pays $2,642 per month to foreigners," Mirra said. Claim: "The average income in here is about $13,000 per year, not including welfare, not including Social Security refugee pay, not including Women, Infants, and Children." False: The $13,000 figure is based on out-of-date 2000 Census data. As for the other sources, Mirra said: "We do not know of anyone who gets something called 'Social Security refugee pay.'" Claim: "This school was built by Tacoma specifically to house foreigners and welfare recipients." False. Lister Elementary School does not "house" any foreigners or welfare recipients. Claim: "They mollycoddle these foreigners who come across the border illegally." False. THA does not rent to people who are in this country illegally, and 97 percent of Salishan residents are U.S. citizens. Claim: "And they don't pay taxes. This housing is free if you are on Social Security refugee pay." False. Anyone who buys non-food goods and services in Washington State pays sales tax, and every Salishan household with earned income is subject to federal income taxes. Every Salishan rental household with an income pays rent. For complete information, we recommend reading the News Tribune's thorough debunking of the video. Last updated: 28 July 2011

False

As Ms. Merryman described in considerable detail in an excellent analysis of the video, virtually all of the claims made within it regarding Social Security, foreigners, and illegal immigrants are false:For complete information, we recommend reading the News Tribune's thorough debunking of the video.

FMD_train_1413

A Canadian's View of U.S. Elections

01/14/2008

Claim: E-mail reproduces an editorial from a Canadian newspaper about U.S. presidential candidates. Example: [Caldwell, December 2007] I received this as an email. Is this real? A Canadian's view of US Elections Theo Caldwell, National Post (Canada) Wednesday, December 26, 2007 An obvious choice can be unnerving. When the apparent perfection of one option or the unspeakable awfulness of another makes a decision seem too easy, it is human nature to become suspicious. This instinct intensifies as the stakes of the given choice are raised. American voters know no greater responsibility to their country and to the world than to select their president wisely. While we do not yet know who the Democratic and Republican nominees will be, any combination of the leading candidates from either party will present the most obvious choice put to American voters in a generation. To wit, none of the Democrats has any business being president. This pronouncement has less to do with any apparent perfection among the Republican candidates than with the intellectual and experiential paucity evinced by the Democratic field. "Not ready for prime time," goes the vernacular, but this does not suffice to describe how bad things are. Alongside Hillary Clinton, add Barack Obama's kindergarten essays to an already confused conversation about Dennis Kucinich's UFO sightings, dueling celebrity endorsements, and who can be quickest to retreat from America's global conflict and raise taxes on the American people, and it becomes clear that these are profoundly unserious individuals. [Rest of article here.] Origins: We've received many forwarded copies of the above-linked article, accompanied by inquiries from readers wanting to know whether it's "real" or "true." The article is "real" in the sense that it is indeed an editorial by Theo Caldwell, which was published in the December 26, 2007 edition of Canada's National Post newspaper (and reproduced in that publication's online version), offering the writer's assessment of the candidates vying for the nominations of the two major parties in the upcoming U.S. presidential election. Theo Caldwell online Aside from the issue of its origins, the article is not classifiable as "true" nor "false"—it is an editorial that reflects its author's opinions. Last updated: January 14, 2008 Sources: Caldwell, Theo. "Democrat or Republican? The Question Is Shockingly Easy." National Post. December 26, 2007 (p. A27).

True

[Rest of article here.]The article is "real" in the sense that it is indeed an editorial by Theo Caldwell which was published in the 26 December 2007 edition of Canada's National Post newspaper (and reproduced in that publication's online version), offering the writer's assessment of the candidates vying for the nominations of the two major parties in the upcoming U.S. presidential election.

FMD_train_815

Redrawn Map of the United States

09/30/2013

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

False

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

FMD_train_1321

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

03/11/2012

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

True

To comment on this ruling, go toNJ.com.

FMD_train_456

In 2009, the Small Business & Entrepreneurship Council ranked Ohio 11th in the nation and 1st in the Midwest for overall business climate.

08/04/2010

In the race for governor, the story of the states attractiveness to business is a tale of two Ohios. In Democratic Gov. Ted Stricklands version, the states tax laws, location and workforce make it appealing, especially to small businesses. In Kasichs narrative, Ohios tax system and regulations are driving away all businesses.Each cites different studies to help make his case. In 2009, the Small Business & Entrepreneurship Council ranked Ohio 11th in the nation and 1st in the Midwest for overall business climate, the governor said in a July 17 news release. We decided to take a closer look. Strickland, who made the statement in response to a Kasich ad that blamed the governor for Ohios jobs losses, was referring to a December 2009 study entitled Small Business Survival Index 2009: Ranking the Policy Environment for Entrepreneurship Across the Nation. The study was produced by the Small Business and Entrepreneurship Council, or SBE, a trade group that represents small businesses and advocates for less government regulation.The 2009 study -- the SBEs 14th survival index -- is a more objective look than say, surveys of CEOs or other business professionals, which do not rely on hard numbers. The SBE rankings evaluate states in 36 categories, including corporate and income taxes, gas and diesel taxes, government spending, health care and energy costs, inheritance taxes, and workers compensation costs. Business and tax experts agree that these are among key factors business owners and entrepreneurs examine when considering where to locate.Ohio does rank 11th overall in the 2009 SBE index. But whether Ohio is No. 1 in the Midwest depends on how you define the Midwest.Strickland relies on the Ohio Business Development Coalition, which supports the states economic development efforts. In a news release, it defines the Midwest as Ohio, Indiana, Kentucky, Michigan, Illinois, Wisconsin and Minnesota.The U.S. Census Bureau defines the Midwest differently. It doesnt include Kentucky, which lands in the South, but it adds Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, and South Dakota.Ohio still beats them all -- except South Dakota. While Ohio is more likely to compete with nearby states, the Mount Rushmore States ranking tops SBEs entire survey. One reason: South Dakota is among a handful of states without a personal income tax. Small business operators find that attractive because, as the SBE and other groups often point out, about 90 percent of them file taxes as individuals -- sole proprietorships, partnerships and S-Corps -- and dont pay corporate income taxes.Stricklands critics like to cite the personal income tax rate, which is high compared to about half of the other states. The conservative Tax Foundation, which Kasich frequently points to, and others say Ohios personal income tax, coupled with local taxes, makes the overall tax burden unattractive to business. The Federation of Tax Administratorstallyof total state and local tax burden ranks 29 states better than Ohio.But the Federation of Tax Administrators warns that state and local tax burden calculations dont tell the whole story of any business climate. In Ohio, for example, tax reforms begun in 2005 replaced the corporate franchise tax with an activity tax, a move that has made Ohio more attractive to businesses.What would make that a bad tax would be an increase in its rate, says Thomas Zaino, a tax attorney and Gov. Bob Tafts state tax commissioner who helped lead the tax reform. Where Ohios tax system is out of kilter with other states is with personal income tax, which includes both state and local and school income tax. We are way out of line.This brings us back the 2009 SBE survey.It looked at Ohios top personal income tax rate at the time of 5.925 percent. And it considers both personal and corporate taxes and other categories that reflect the states larger narrative about business climate. So while Strickland may overstate Ohios Midwest ranking, his claim about the SBEs rankings is on point and the SBEs methodology reflects the larger context of the tax debate.We rate Stricklands claim Mostly True. Comment on this item.

True

Strickland, who made the statement in response to a Kasich ad that blamed the governor for Ohios jobs losses, was referring to a December 2009 study entitled Small Business Survival Index 2009: Ranking the Policy Environment for Entrepreneurship Across the Nation. The study was produced by the Small Business and Entrepreneurship Council, or SBE, a trade group that represents small businesses and advocates for less government regulation.The 2009 study -- the SBEs 14th survival index -- is a more objective look than say, surveys of CEOs or other business professionals, which do not rely on hard numbers. The SBE rankings evaluate states in 36 categories, including corporate and income taxes, gas and diesel taxes, government spending, health care and energy costs, inheritance taxes, and workers compensation costs. Business and tax experts agree that these are among key factors business owners and entrepreneurs examine when considering where to locate.Ohio does rank 11th overall in the 2009 SBE index. But whether Ohio is No. 1 in the Midwest depends on how you define the Midwest.Strickland relies on the Ohio Business Development Coalition, which supports the states economic development efforts. In a news release, it defines the Midwest as Ohio, Indiana, Kentucky, Michigan, Illinois, Wisconsin and Minnesota.The U.S. Census Bureau defines the Midwest differently. It doesnt include Kentucky, which lands in the South, but it adds Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, and South Dakota.Ohio still beats them all -- except South Dakota. While Ohio is more likely to compete with nearby states, the Mount Rushmore States ranking tops SBEs entire survey. One reason: South Dakota is among a handful of states without a personal income tax. Small business operators find that attractive because, as the SBE and other groups often point out, about 90 percent of them file taxes as individuals -- sole proprietorships, partnerships and S-Corps -- and dont pay corporate income taxes.Stricklands critics like to cite the personal income tax rate, which is high compared to about half of the other states. The conservative Tax Foundation, which Kasich frequently points to, and others say Ohios personal income tax, coupled with local taxes, makes the overall tax burden unattractive to business. The Federation of Tax Administratorstallyof total state and local tax burden ranks 29 states better than Ohio.But the Federation of Tax Administrators warns that state and local tax burden calculations dont tell the whole story of any business climate. In Ohio, for example, tax reforms begun in 2005 replaced the corporate franchise tax with an activity tax, a move that has made Ohio more attractive to businesses.What would make that a bad tax would be an increase in its rate, says Thomas Zaino, a tax attorney and Gov. Bob Tafts state tax commissioner who helped lead the tax reform. Where Ohios tax system is out of kilter with other states is with personal income tax, which includes both state and local and school income tax. We are way out of line.This brings us back the 2009 SBE survey.It looked at Ohios top personal income tax rate at the time of 5.925 percent. And it considers both personal and corporate taxes and other categories that reflect the states larger narrative about business climate. So while Strickland may overstate Ohios Midwest ranking, his claim about the SBEs rankings is on point and the SBEs methodology reflects the larger context of the tax debate.We rate Stricklands claim Mostly True.Comment on this item.

FMD_train_464

Does Dashcam Video Show a Handcuffed Man Saving Choking Police Officer?

02/16/2021

In February 2021, a video went viral on TikTok that supposedly showed a handcuffed man saving a choking police officer's life. The video, which supposedly came from the cop car's dashcam, racked up more than 26 million views within a few days of its initial posting by @kd_k97: There are strong reasons to doubt this is a genuine video of a handcuffed man saving a choking police officer's life. More likely, it's a staged video that was created as a sort of "morality play" asking the viewer to ponder what they would do in this situation. While there are no explicit disclaimers labeling this footage as a scripted moment as opposed to a genuine incident captured on a police car's dashcam, there are a number of indications that this video could be more accurately captioned as the former. For one, this "dashcam" video did not originate with a police department, a news article, or any other official source. Rather, this video first went viral on TikTok. This is also just one part of a three-part video series. Part one showed the initial confrontation, involving a Black man being stopped and handcuffed after reports of "suspicious activity." Part two shows the handcuffed man saving the cop's life after he starts to choke. Part three shows the Black man retrieving the cuffs after saving the cop's life, giving them back to the police officer and preparing to be arrested again, before the cop decides to reward his good deed and let him go. Part one showed Part two shows Part three shows While this may be an effective way to break down and share a scripted performance, this would be an odd way to release a genuine police dashcam video. We have not seen any news reports about this alleged incident, nor have we found any "official" versions of this video from a police department. On social media, users also noted that the officer's "costume" didn't seem authentic. For instance, he doesn't appear to be wearing a weapon and the "bullet proof vest" appears a bit flimsy. TikTok user kd_k97 has not commented on the authenticity of the video. However, they did respond to a comment that highlighted the intended message of the video: We reached out to KD97 for more information, and will update this article accordingly.

NEI

This is also just one part of a three-part video series. Part one showed the initial confrontation, involving a Black man being stopped and handcuffed after reports of "suspicious activity." Part two shows the handcuffed man saving the cop's life after he starts to choke. Part three shows the Black man retrieving the cuffs after saving the cop's life, giving them back to the police officer and preparing to be arrested again, before the cop decides to reward his good deed and let him go.

FMD_train_1634

The state's transportation department is already burdened with a significant amount of debt, and it has made over $700 million in debt payments within the past two years.

05/08/2019

Infrastructure is one of Gov. Mike Parsons top priorities in the 100th legislative session, and some representatives have followed suit. House Budget Chairman Rep. Cody Smith, R-Carthage, presented a budget plan to fund road and bridge improvements throughout the state. Smith said his plan would fund the infrastructure improvements without raising taxes or accruing new debt. Smith wanted to do this by appropriating funds from general revenue to state infrastructure instead of taking out more bonds. Our state transportation department already has a heavy debt load and has paid more than $700 million in debt payments in just the last two years, Smith wrote in a Capitol report sent by his office. Has the Missouri Department of Transportation really paid more than $700 million in debt payments in the last two years? Lets take a look at the numbers Documents from MoDOTshow that his numbers are on point. MoDOTs 2018 Financial Snapshot shows the department paid a little more than that, totaling $702 million in 2017 and 2018. My preference is to avoid debt when possible, Smith said. But, the debt paid doesnt tell the whole story. The department paid $412 million in debt in 2017. The departments average payment since 2004 is about $242 million a year. The number was higher in 2017 than past years because the agency paid off some of its debt early. In 2017, $117.8 million of bonds were paid off early, saving future interest costs of $29.4 million, said Sally Oxenhandler, MoDOT interim spokeswoman. This helped inflate Smiths point when he said MoDOTs debt reached more than $700 million in just two years. This graph of MoDOTs borrowed funds and annual payments helps visualize the amount of debt MoDOT paid in 2017, compared to debt payments in the past. (Look for the mountain peak.) Graph courtesy of MoDOTs Financial Snapshot, November 2018 Compared to other state transportation departments, Missouri does not have a lot of debt, said Todd Grosvener, MoDOT assistant financial services director. Still, Smith wants to limit the state department accruing any more debt. Keeping our road funds stable over the coming years is of the utmost importance, Smith said. When MoDOT takes on more debt, it has fewer dollars to improve our roads and bridges. What is the borrowed money used for? The borrowed funds were and are still being used for hundreds of road and bridge projects throughout Missouri, the agency said. The department borrowed the most money in 2010 when it took on an additional $100 million to replace the Mississippi River Bridge in St. Louis. In 2010, the department also borrowed $685 million for theSafe and Sound Bridge Improvement Program. This three-and-a-half-year project replaced or rehabilitated more than 800 bridges across the state. On behalf of the House of Representatives, Ill be keeping a close eye on the amount of debt the state takes on to improve and maintain our transportation infrastructure, Smith said. Smith said, Our state transportation department already has a heavy debt load and has paid more than $700 million in debt payments in just the last two years. His numbers match MoDOTs records. They need clarification, however, because MoDOT paid off a big chunk of debt early, in order to avoid more interest accumulation. Because the statement is accurate and needs clarification, we rate the statement Mostly True.

True

Documents from MoDOTshow that his numbers are on point.In 2010, the department also borrowed $685 million for theSafe and Sound Bridge Improvement Program. This three-and-a-half-year project replaced or rehabilitated more than 800 bridges across the state.

FMD_train_907

Says Trump administration is raiding moneyfrom military service member pensions to pay for the border wall.

03/28/2019

California Senator and Democratic presidential candidate Kamala Harris has sharply criticized President Trump for his plans to divert military funds to pay for a wall along the U.S.-Mexico border. In February, Trump declared a national emergency on the border to access billions of dollars that Congress refused to allocate for the wall. One of Harris's recent attacks caught our attention: she claimed the Trump administration was raiding money from the military pensions of service members to pay for the barrier. "Members of our military have already given so much. Raiding money from their pensions to fund the President's wasteful vanity project is outrageous. Our servicemembers deserve better," Harris said on March 8 on Twitter and Facebook. Is the Trump administration really planning to raid military pensions? FactCheck.org, along with some social media users who commented on Harris's posts, described her claim as misleading or wrong. We decided to fact-check her provocative statement ourselves. Democratic leaders have called Trump's emergency declaration a power grab, and some Republicans have also said it sets a dangerous precedent. The move allows the president to transfer $3.6 billion from military construction projects to the wall, according to the White House. It also gives him the ability to tap $2.5 billion from drug interdiction programs and $600 million from a Treasury Department asset forfeiture fund. Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., said in a joint statement in February: "The Congress will defend our constitutional authorities in the Congress, in the Courts, and in the public, using every remedy available." The House and Senate voted this month to block the declaration. Trump vetoed the joint resolution shortly after. A bid to override the veto failed this week in the House. Sixteen states, including California, have filed a federal lawsuit challenging Trump's authority to divert funds for the border wall. To support her statement, Harris linked in her social media posts to a March 7 Associated Press article. Reading just the headline—"Pentagon may tap military pay, pensions for border wall"—Harris's claim seems mostly accurate. However, the first paragraph describes the money as leftover funds, casting a different light. "The Pentagon is planning to tap $1 billion in leftover funds from military pay and pension accounts to help President Donald Trump pay for his long-sought border wall," a top Senate Democrat said Thursday. The money is available because the Army missed a recruitment goal by 6,500 enlistees. Additionally, fewer soldiers opted to take financial incentives for voluntary early retirement, according to the article. The Pentagon plans to move the extra money to its drug interdiction account, freeing it up to spend on border barriers, the AP reported. To further assess Harris's claim of raiding pensions, we spoke with three experts on federal defense budgets. Each said the senator's statement was inaccurate. "It's off-base," said Todd Harrison, senior fellow at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, a bipartisan, nonprofit policy research organization. He explained that the money is leftover in certain Army personnel accounts. "It's a separate issue worth debating whether that money should be used for the border wall or for other purposes within the military. But the fact that they're moving money out of these accounts is not an indication that anyone is cutting military pay or cutting benefits or pension payments. That's not the case. No military service member's pension would be reduced," he said. Mark Cancian, who worked for the White House Office of Management and Budget on defense budget strategy during the Obama administration, agreed that Harris's statement is wrong. "The answer is, No. They are not raiding military pensions," Cancian said. "I'm sure the Army had some places they would have preferred to send that money. But they are not taking any money from pensions." Cancian is now a senior advisor with the Center for Strategic and International Studies. Travis Sharp directs the budget program at the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments, which provides independent defense budget analysis. He also said Harris's statement is flawed. "This is another example of there being a lot of confusion about what it means to cut something in the budget," Sharp said. "Transferring money after an agency overestimated how much something would cost is not the same as a cut," he explained. "The Department of Defense has to budget in advance for things that are unpredictable. The money that's leftover is what the Trump administration is trying to reallocate. Does that constitute a cut? In my opinion, no. That's not a cut." When the Pentagon has funds remaining in one account, it can reprogram the money to others, such as health care or fuel accounts that have a budget shortfall, Cancian said. If that doesn't happen, Congress will rescind that money and use it for other purposes, Harrison said. The Department of Defense did not respond to a request for comment. A spokesperson for the Harris campaign provided a written statement: "The AP reported that money is being transferred from a fund dedicated to pensions of armed service members. The President is trying to circumvent Congress, which refused to give him funding for this wall, by diverting resources from other military funds." The spokesperson would not say whether the senator stood by the original claim. Our rating: Sen. Kamala Harris claimed the Trump administration was raiding money from the military pensions of service members to pay for the wall. In reality, the Pentagon plans to move leftover pay and retirement funds that are available because fewer soldiers opted for an early retirement program and because the Army missed a recruitment goal by 6,500 enlistees. No service members would lose pay or retirement benefits as a result of the move, according to experts on federal defense budgets. The headline in the article Harris relied on did not make this clear. But it's important for anyone, especially a public official, to read beyond a headline before making such a claim. The debate over whether the Trump administration should tap this money is a separate issue. Harris's claim was off the mark. We rate it False.

False

Members of our military have already given so much. Raiding money from their pensions to fund the Presidents wasteful vanity project is outrageous. Our servicemembers deserve better, Harris said on March 8 onTwitterandFacebook.FactCheck.org, along with some social media users who commented on Harris posts, described her claim as misleading or wrong. We decided to fact-check her provocative statement ourselves.Sixteen states, including California, have filed a federal lawsuit challenging Trumps authority to divert funds for the border wall.To support her statement, Harris linked in her social media posts to a March 7 Associated Pressarticle. Reading just the headline -- Pentagon may tap military pay, pensions for border wall -- Harris claim seems mostly accurate.Its off-base, said Todd Harrison, senior fellow at theCenter for Strategic and International Studies, a bipartisan, nonprofit policy research organization.Click here formoreon the six PolitiFact ratings and how we select facts to check.

FMD_train_1591

Vanishing dependents

03/29/2006

Several million fewer dependents were claimed on federal income tax returns the year the IRS started requiring taxpayers to list the Social Security numbers of their children. I had read at some point that millions of dependents dropped off the 1040 forms the year that the IRS required Social Security numbers. This seems incredibly high, but I know that it was a fact that many divorced parents were both claiming the same children as dependents, and some people were even claiming their pets. The U.S. federal income tax code requires residents to be responsible for their own taxes; that is, it's up to each taxpayer to calculate their income, determine their allowable deductions, and file a tax return with the Internal Revenue Service (or hire someone to do it for them). Such a system allows (some say it even encourages) taxpayers to cheat, engaging in everything from blurring the line between business and personal expenses to hiding large amounts of unreported income. Although tax fraud may never be completely eliminated, the increasing use of automated record-keeping and tracking technology has made many of the more common cheating schemes quite difficult, if not impossible, to execute successfully these days. Given how often we're asked to provide our Social Security numbers (they seem to be used for just about everything these days), those of us who began paying federal income tax only in the last twenty years might be surprised to discover that not until 1987 did the IRS begin requiring taxpayers to include the Social Security numbers of all dependent children claimed on their returns. After all, listing phony dependents in order to claim illegitimate extra deductions has historically been one of the more common forms of tax fraud, so it makes sense that the IRS would always have wanted to track such information as closely as possible. This is the notion behind the legend made familiar to many readers by the 2005 best-seller Freakonomics that the year the IRS began asking taxpayers to provide Social Security numbers for all dependent children, the number of claimed dependents suddenly dropped significantly: some cheating leaves barely a shadow of evidence. In other cases, the evidence is massive. Consider what happened one spring evening at midnight in 1987: seven million American children suddenly disappeared. The worst kidnapping wave in history? Hardly. It was the night of April 15, and the Internal Revenue Service had just changed a rule. Instead of merely listing each dependent child, tax filers were now required to provide a Social Security number for each child. Suddenly, seven million children—children who had existed only as phantom exemptions on the previous year's 1040 forms—vanished, representing about one in ten of all dependent children in the United States. The "seven million" figure appears to be accurate, as noted in a December 2000 National Tax Journal article by Jeffrey B. Liebman that drew its data from a 1990 Internal Revenue Service conference report. Another way in which taxpayers without children might claim a dependent child is to invent a fictional one. The strongest evidence for this possibility is that in 1987, the first year in which taxpayers were required to list Social Security numbers of dependents on their tax returns, seven million fewer dependent children were claimed than in the previous year. The suggestion by the Freakonomics authors that most or all of that drop in the number of dependents claimed in 1987 was directly attributable to fraud was an obvious one but not necessarily the only one, as alternative explanations could have accounted for a substantial portion of the reduction in the number of claimed dependents. For example, it was not until 1987 that the IRS first demonstrated a program to allow parents to automatically obtain Social Security numbers for their newborn children when those births were registered, and the program did not become nationwide until 1989. Since the average citizen doesn't generally keep abreast of all the changes made to the tax code from year to year until they directly affect them, perhaps many taxpayers sat down to fill out their returns in 1987 and didn't realize until it was too late that they had never applied for Social Security numbers for their children. However, the assumption that many taxpayers had previously claimed non-existent children until the newly implemented Social Security number requirement made it much more difficult for them to safely do so is certainly an obvious one, and seems to be supported by additional information provided by Liebman. Further evidence that nonexistent children may have been claimed comes from the 1988 TCMP [Taxpayer Compliance Measurement Program]. In 1988, taxpayers were required to list on their tax returns the Social Security numbers of all dependents who were at least five years old. On tax returns where the TCMP auditor disallowed an EITC [Earned Income Tax Credit] claim, 39 percent of the disallowed dependent child claims were dependents for whom the taxpayer checked the box stating the child was under five and did not provide a Social Security number—possibly because the children did not exist. Likewise, although follow-up reports in subsequent years noted that some portion of the previously claimed dependents who went "missing" in the 1987 tax year were indeed real people who were not claimed as dependents in 1987 for reasons other than their being fictitious (e.g., they were children who had in earlier years been unlawfully claimed as dependents by each of two divorced parents), the pattern of disappearing dependents in 1987 was indicative of widespread fraud. Starting in 1987, the IRS required that taxpayers report the Social Security number of all dependents over the age of five. That year, seven million American children disappeared from the nation's tax returns, representing a 9 percent drop in the 77 million dependents claimed the previous year and $2.9 billion more in yearly tax revenue. The tax agency said about 20 percent of the vanished dependents were children who had been claimed as dependents by both parents after a divorce. Under the law, only one parent may claim the child as a deduction. Most of the others probably never existed, John Szilagyi, an IRS researcher, said. Some families apparently became quite greedy in creating dependents, each worth a $1,080 deduction in 1986 and $1,900 in 1987. About 66,000 taxpayers who claimed four or more dependents in 1986 claimed none in 1987, after the Social Security identification rule went into effect. More than 11,000 families claimed seven or more dependents in 1986 but none in 1987. Those returns are now under investigation, with more than 1,000 audits in which the 1986 dependents were disallowed, and back taxes and fines collected. Mr. Szilagyi said some cases of apparent fraud have also been referred to the authorities for criminal investigation. "In any individual family, you can imagine that one or two children might legitimately have stopped being dependents in 1987, but it's hard to imagine a legitimate situation in which a taxpayer had seven dependents one year and none the next," said Mr. Szilagyi, who drafted the proposal to require Social Security numbers from dependents and babysitters. Mr. Szilagyi said his research indicates that there are probably four million to five million more dependents being claimed illegally, either because they are fictitious or do not legally qualify as dependents.

True

The "seven million" figure appears to be accurate, as noted in a December 2000 National Tax Journal article by Jeffrey B. Liebman that drew its data from a 1990 Internal Revenue Service conference report:The suggestion by the Freakonomics authors that most or all of that drop in the number of dependents claimed in 1987 was directly attributable to fraud was an obvious one but not necessarily the only one, as alternative explanations could have accounted for a substantial portion of the reduction in number of claimed dependents. For example, it was not until 1987 that the IRS first demonstrated a program to allow parents to automatically obtain Social Security numbers for their newborn children when those births were registered, and the program did not become nationwide until 1989. Since the average citizen doesn't generally keep abreast of all the changes made to the tax code from year to year until they directly affect him, perhaps many taxpayers sat down to fill out their returns in 1987 and didn't realize until it was too late that they had never applied for Social Security numbers for their children.

FMD_train_523

Did Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez 'Chase' Amazon Out of Her NYC District?

02/20/2019

In mid-February 2019, social media users shared a meme containing a fabricated quote seemingly attributed to newly elected U.S. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York: We found no record U.S. Rep. Ocasio-Cortez made that remark or said anything that could reasonably be paraphrased as such. The faux quote also encapsulated the mistaken belief that the Democrat representing New York's 14th Congressional District was solely responsible for "chasing" Amazon out and driving them to cancel their plans to establish a second headquarters in that area. In late 2018, reports emerged that New York state and city officials, including Gov. Andrew Cuomo and Mayor Bill de Blasio, were aggressively lobbying the Seattle-based, retail-and-delivery giant to open a second headquarters ("HQ2") in New York. But that news also spurred public backlash over New York's proposal to offer $3 billion in publicly funded incentives and subsidies to Amazon. reports $3 billion Although Ocasio-Cortez was a vocal opponent of the HQ2 project, many other local and state legislators and residents were also opposed to the plan. For example, speaking to the crowd at a 14 November 2018 protest, New York City Councilman Jimmy van Bramer criticized the proposal, saying: "When Jeff Bezos needed $3 billion, the governor and the mayor found it sure damn quick. The governor and the mayor conspired secretly to cut a deal with Jeff Bezos to the exclusion of everyone else." criticized Furthermore Long Island City falls into the 12th Congressional district and is represented by Rep. Carolyn Maloney, not Ocasio-Cortez. Criticism of the Amazon deal continued to grow in New York, and after a 30 January 2019 City Council meeting, Curbed New York reported the proverbial welcome mat was gone: "Council members blasted the officials with a laundry list of concerns including Amazons union opposition, its investment in the city, and accusations that city and state officials failed to accurately calculate the costs of bringing the conglomerate to Long Island City." Residents and activists began sharing critical social media posts using the hashtag #noAmazonNYC: Dozens of people here in Queensbridge Houses this morning. People are joining a canvassing blitz against Amazon all across Queens from Flushing to LIC. Our neighbors are here to let Amazon, our city + state governments know that, QUEENS IS NOT FOR SALE! #noAmazonNYC pic.twitter.com/EPMd6toZeW #noAmazonNYC pic.twitter.com/EPMd6toZeW PrimedOut NYC (@PrimedOutNYC) February 9, 2019 February 9, 2019 On 14 February 2019, Amazon announced they were no longer planning to build HQ2 in Queens, blaming the decision on "a number of state and local politicians [who] have made it clear that they oppose our presence and will not work with us to build the type of relationships that are required to go forward with the project we and many others envisioned in Long Island City." announced In an op-ed column published a few days later, de Blasio reversed his previous support for the retail giant, slamming their decision to suddenly back out of New York: op-ed column There was a clear path forward. Put simply: If you dont like a small but vocal group of New Yorkers questioning your companys intentions or integrity, prove them wrong. Instead, Amazon proved them right. Just two hours after a meeting with residents and community leaders to move the project forward, the company abruptly canceled it all. Although Ocasio-Cortez made no secret of her opposition to Amazon's opening a location in her district, she was not the only such critic, and it is difficult to imagine such a complex deal would have been scrapped solely because of her opinion. Ultimately, it was a groundswell of opposition from residents and other legislators that "chased" Amazon out of New York. Hess, Abigail. "Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez: Amazon Abandoning Its Plans for a New York Headquarters Proves 'Anything Is Possible.'" CNBC. 14 February 2019. Giridharadas, Anand. "The New York Hustle of Amazons Second Headquarters." The New Yorker. 17 November 2018. Amazon. "Update on Plans for New York City Headquarters." 14 February 2019. Plitt, Amy. "Amazon HQ2 and NYC: A Timeline of the Botched Deal." Curbed New York. 18 February 2019. De Blasio, Bill. "The Path Amazon Rejected." The New York Times. 16 February 2019. Soper, Spencer. "Amazon Scraps Plan to Build a Headquarters in New York City." Bloomberg. 14 February 2019. Updated to note that Long Island City is in the 12th congressional district, which Ocasio-Cortez does not represent.

NEI

In late 2018, reports emerged that New York state and city officials, including Gov. Andrew Cuomo and Mayor Bill de Blasio, were aggressively lobbying the Seattle-based, retail-and-delivery giant to open a second headquarters ("HQ2") in New York. But that news also spurred public backlash over New York's proposal to offer $3 billion in publicly funded incentives and subsidies to Amazon.Although Ocasio-Cortez was a vocal opponent of the HQ2 project, many other local and state legislators and residents were also opposed to the plan. For example, speaking to the crowd at a 14 November 2018 protest, New York City Councilman Jimmy van Bramer criticized the proposal, saying: "When Jeff Bezos needed $3 billion, the governor and the mayor found it sure damn quick. The governor and the mayor conspired secretly to cut a deal with Jeff Bezos to the exclusion of everyone else."Dozens of people here in Queensbridge Houses this morning. People are joining a canvassing blitz against Amazon all across Queens from Flushing to LIC. Our neighbors are here to let Amazon, our city + state governments know that, QUEENS IS NOT FOR SALE! #noAmazonNYC pic.twitter.com/EPMd6toZeW PrimedOut NYC (@PrimedOutNYC) February 9, 2019On 14 February 2019, Amazon announced they were no longer planning to build HQ2 in Queens, blaming the decision on "a number of state and local politicians [who] have made it clear that they oppose our presence and will not work with us to build the type of relationships that are required to go forward with the project we and many others envisioned in Long Island City."In an op-ed column published a few days later, de Blasio reversed his previous support for the retail giant, slamming their decision to suddenly back out of New York:

FMD_train_1367

Did Biden promise to get rid of the 'Stepped-Up' Basis for Capital Gains Tax?

02/03/2021

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

True

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

FMD_train_1694

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

10/21/2022

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

False

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

FMD_train_860

Did George Washington Want Citizens Armed Against the Government?

01/07/2016

In January 2016, a quote attributed to first U.S. president George Washington, about the importance of an armed citizenry, started recirculating on the internet: This statement had been making the online rounds for several years, but it regained popularity in January 2016 after President Obama announced new measures on gun control. announced George Washington never uttered the phrase in question. The first ten words ("a free people ought not only be armed and disciplined") are taken from the former president's annual address to theSenate and House of Representatives on 8 January 1790, in which he argued in favor of an armed citizenry and self-sufficiency in production military supplies as a deterrent to war: annual address Among the many interesting objects which will engage your attention that of providing for the common defense will merit particular regard. To be prepared for war is one of the most effectual means of preserving peace. A free people ought not only to be armed, but disciplined; to which end a uniform and well-digested plan is requisite; and their safety and interest require that they should promote such manufactories as tend to render them independent of others for essential, particularly military, supplies. The proper establishment of the troops which may be deemed indispensable will be entitled to mature consideration. In the arrangements which may be made respecting it it will be of importance to conciliate the comfortable support of the officers and soldiers with a due regard to economy. A page dedicated to fake quotes attributed to George Washington on theMount Vernon web site addressed this passage as follows: addressed This quote is partially accurate as the beginning section is taken from Washington's First Annual Message to Congress on the State of the Union. However, the quote is then manipulated into a differing context and the remaining text is inaccurate. Although this meme does include a portion of Washington's first annual addressto members of theSenate and House of Representatives in1790, the majority of the quotewas never utteredby the Founding Father, and does not accurately represent his views on gun control. Nonetheless, its apocryphal nature doesn't hinder its continued reproduction as a genuine expression from George Washington:

False

This statement had been making the online rounds for several years, but it regained popularity in January 2016 after President Obama announced new measures on gun control.George Washington never uttered the phrase in question. The first ten words ("a free people ought not only be armed and disciplined") are taken from the former president's annual address to theSenate and House of Representatives on 8 January 1790, in which he argued in favor of an armed citizenry and self-sufficiency in production military supplies as a deterrent to war:A page dedicated to fake quotes attributed to George Washington on theMount Vernon web site addressed this passage as follows:

FMD_train_1695

The Debt Free America Act, also known as H.R. 4646, aims to eliminate national debt.

07/27/2010

Claim: The Obama administration is proposing a 1% tax on debit card usage and/or banking transactions. Examples: [Collected via e-mail, July 2010] The Transaction Tax! WHAT THE HELL IS THIS??President Obama's finance team and Nancy Pelosi are recommending a 1% transaction tax on all financial transactions.The bill is HR-4646 introduced by US Rep Peter deFazio D-Oregon and US Senator Tom Harkin D-Iowa.Their plan is to sneak it in after the November election to keep it under the radar.See what Nancy has to say about this wonderful idea!https://tinyurl.com/24dn5udIt's only 1%! This is a 1% tax on all transactions to or from any financial institution i.e. Banks, Credit Unions, Mutual funds, Brokers, etc.Any deposit you make will have a 1% tax charged.Any withdrawal you make, 1% tax.Any transfer within your account, a transfer to or from savings and checking, will have a 1% tax charged.Any ATM transaction, withdrawal or deposit, 1% tax.If your pay check or your Social Security is direct deposited, 1% tax.If you carry a check to your bank to deposit, 1% tax.If you take cash in to deposit, 1% tax.If you receive any income from a bond or a dividend from stock, 1% tax.Any Real Estate Transaction, 1% tax.This is from the man who promised that if you make under $250,000 per year, you will not see one penny of new tax! Remember, he is completely honest and trustworthy.Keep your eyes and ears open. https://tinyurl.com/24dn5ud Folks, Nancy says this would be a minimal tax on the people, but 1 percent every time you pay a bill or make a deposit is not minimal. This would no doubt tax investment transactions as well as bank account transactions.This woman is nuts!!!If you know someone in California get this to them! While at the checkout of Wal-mart in Greeneville, TN I heard that in the future the government may be planning to place a 1% tax on people using debit cards at the check out. I have heard discussion and seen on emails the fear that the Obama administration is going to pass a 'banking tax' that will take 1% of each deposit and 1% of every transaction out of a bank account. Summary: The Obama administration has not proposed or recommended placing a 1% tax on all financial transactions. The idea of the 1% transaction tax stemmed from a bill repeatedly introduced by a single congressman which had no support from any other member of Congress and no chance of passing. Origins: Some members of Congress have what might be termed "hobby horse" issues: concepts about which they introduce legislation in Congress after Congress although their bills not only never come close to passing, but never even clear committee to be put to votes in the first place. The hobby horse of Representative Chaka Fattah of Pennsylvania is the notion of eliminating all federal taxes on individuals and corporations and replacing them with a revenue-generating system based on transaction fees (a concept he originally called the "Transform America Transaction Fee" and later referred to as the "Debt Free America Act"). Chaka Fattah Transform America Transaction Fee In 2004 Rep. Fattah presented a bill calling on Congress to fund a study regarding the replacement of the federal tax code with a transaction fee-basedsystem (H.R. 3759), he introduced a similar bill in 2005 (H.R. 1601), again in 2007 (H.R. 2130), and again in 2009 (H.R. 1703). None of these bills was ever put to a vote, and only one of them had so much as a single co-sponsor. H.R. 3759 H.R. 1601 (H.R. 2130), (H.R. 1703) In 2010, Rep. Fattah moved beyond proposing studies and submitted the Debt Free America Act (H.R. 4646), a bill calling for the implementation of a scheme to pay down the national debt and eliminate federal income tax on individuals by imposing a 1% fee on specified financial transactions: H.R. 4646 pay down One idea for raising taxes to pay down the debt is the bill introduced this February [2010] by Rep. Chaka Fattah (D-Pa.). His "Debt Free America Act" (H.R. 4646) would impose a 1 percent "transaction tax" on every financial transaction whether paid by cash, credit card or any form of financial transfer, the only exception being transactions involving the purchase or sale of stock. Theoretically, everyone would pay one cent on the dollar for every such transaction in America every day whether $3 million on a $300 million business acquisition, $300 on the purchase of a $30,000 car, or $5 on a $500 ATM withdrawal. Specifically, the text of the bill stated that: The purpose of [the transaction fee] is to establish a fee on most transactions. Such [a] fee: is different than a sales tax in that a sales tax is charged only on sales to the final consumer, [while] the transaction fee would apply to intermediate users as well as end users is different than a value added tax (VAT), commonly used in European and other countries, in that a VAT is imposed only on a portion of a transaction's value (roughly the difference between an item's selling price and its cost), [while] the transaction fee would apply to the entire amount of the transaction is intended to raise sufficient revenue to eliminate the national debt, which was $10.6 trillion in January 2009, during a period of 7 years, and to phase out the income tax on individuals. [This bill would] impose on every specified transaction a fee in an amount equal to 1 percent of the amount of such transaction. The term 'specified transaction' means any transaction that uses a payment instrument, including any check, cash, credit card, transfer of stock, bonds, or other financial instrument. The term 'transaction' includes retail and wholesale sales, purchases of intermediate goods, and financial and intangible transactions. Persons become liable for the fee at the moment the person exercises control over a piece of property or service, regardless of the payment method. (The bill provided for individuals earning $125,000 or less to receive a credit equal to 1% of their income against the tax, and it gave the Treasury Department discretion to exempt certain transactions on which lower-income people disproportionately relied.) Like Rep. Fattah's other Congressional efforts along these lines, his Debt Free America Act had no sponsors other than himself, languished in committee after being introduced, had no realistic chance of being passed. Thus, although e-mailed warnings about a "1% transaction tax" do reference a once-real piece of proposed legislation, the amount of attention those warnings garnered vastly, vastly outstripped any real possibility that such legislation would actually be enacted. Moreover, some of the additional details contained with such e-mailed warnings were erroneous: Neither "President Obama's finance team" nor Nancy Pelosi is "recommending a 1% transaction tax." The proposal for the Debt Free America Act was purely the effort of a single congressman, with no outside support. Neither Representative Peter DeFazio of Oregon nor Senator Tom Harkin of Iowa introduced the Debt Free America Act, co-sponsored it, or publicly supported it. The included link that supposedly showed Nancy Pelosi endorsing the Debt Free America Act antedated the introduction of that bill to Congress; her comments actually referred to a different, earlier transaction tax proposed in December 2009 by Rep. Peter DeFazio. That bill, known as the "Let Wall Street Pay for the Restoration of Main Street Act" (H.R. 4191), called for the funding of investment in middle class jobs by levying small percentage value taxes on the buying and selling of stocks, futures, swaps, options and other securities. (Although Rep. DeFazio's bill had 31 co-sponsors, it too languished in committee without being brought to a vote.) proposed H.R. 4191 Later versions of this item opened with the statement that "ON JANUARY 1ST 2012, THE GOVERNMENT IS REQUIRING EVERYONE TO HAVE DIRECT DEPOSIT FOR SS CHECKS. WONDER WHY?" The Social Security program did switch over to an electronic payments system as of 1 March 2013 that provided recipients with the options of receiving their benefits payments either through direct deposit to a bank account or via the reloading of a debit card, but that change had nothing to do with the Congressional bill discussed above. Rep. Fattah reintroduced his Debt Free America Act (as H.R. 1125) to the 112th Congress on 16 March 2011. Like Rep. Fattah's previous efforts along these lines, Govtrack.us tagged it with the prognosis "This bill has a 0% chance of being enacted." H.R. 1125 Govtrack.us Last updated: 22 October 2013

True

The Transaction Tax! WHAT THE HELL IS THIS??President Obama's finance team and Nancy Pelosi are recommending a 1% transaction tax on all financial transactions.The bill is HR-4646 introduced by US Rep Peter deFazio D-Oregon and US Senator Tom Harkin D-Iowa.Their plan is to sneak it in after the November election to keep it under the radar.See what Nancy has to say about this wonderful idea!https://tinyurl.com/24dn5udIt's only 1%! This is a 1% tax on all transactions to or from any financial institution i.e. Banks, Credit Unions, Mutual funds, Brokers, etc.Any deposit you make will have a 1% tax charged.Any withdrawal you make, 1% tax.Any transfer within your account, a transfer to or from savings and checking, will have a 1% tax charged.Any ATM transaction, withdrawal or deposit, 1% tax.If your pay check or your Social Security is direct deposited, 1% tax.If you carry a check to your bank to deposit, 1% tax.If you take cash in to deposit, 1% tax.If you receive any income from a bond or a dividend from stock, 1% tax.Any Real Estate Transaction, 1% tax.This is from the man who promised that if you make under $250,000 per year, you will not see one penny of new tax! Remember, he is completely honest and trustworthy.Keep your eyes and ears open. votes in the first place. The hobby horse of Representative Chaka Fattah of Pennsylvania is the notion of eliminating all federal taxes on individuals and corporations and replacing them with a revenue-generating system based on transaction fees (a concept he originally called the "Transform America Transaction Fee" and later referred to as the "Debt Free America Act").In 2004 Rep. Fattah presented a bill calling on Congress to fund a study regarding the replacement of the federal tax code with a transaction fee-basedsystem (H.R. 3759), he introduced a similar bill in 2005 (H.R. 1601), again in 2007 (H.R. 2130), and again in 2009 (H.R. 1703). None of these bills was ever put to a vote, and only one of them had so much as a single co-sponsor.In 2010, Rep. Fattah moved beyond proposing studies and submitted the Debt Free America Act (H.R. 4646), a bill calling for the implementation of a scheme to pay down the national debt and eliminate federal income tax on individuals by imposing a 1% fee on specified financial transactions: The included link that supposedly showed Nancy Pelosi endorsing the Debt Free America Act antedated the introduction of that bill to Congress; her comments actually referred to a different, earlier transaction tax proposed in December 2009 by Rep. Peter DeFazio. That bill, known as the "Let Wall Street Pay for the Restoration of Main Street Act" (H.R. 4191), called for the funding of investment in middle class jobs by levying small percentage value taxes on the buying and selling of stocks, futures, swaps, options and other securities. (Although Rep. DeFazio's bill had 31 co-sponsors, it too languished in committee without being brought to a vote.)Rep. Fattah reintroduced his Debt Free America Act (as H.R. 1125) to the 112th Congress on 16 March 2011. Like Rep. Fattah's previous efforts along these lines, Govtrack.us tagged it with the prognosis "This bill has a 0% chance of being enacted."

FMD_train_579

EverPet Dog Food

02/19/2015

Claim: EverPet brand dog and cat food is made in China and has caused pets to fall ill and die in the U.S. Example: [Collected via Facebook, February 2015] Origins: On 2 November 2014, the above-quoted message about EverPet brand pet food was posted on Facebook and subsequently shared hundreds of thousands of times. Although that particular warning came in late 2014, rumors about adverse pet reactions to Facebook EverPet brand cat and dog food (commonly sold at Dollar General stores) have circulated on the internet since at least as far back as 2010. It is not uncommon to find stories on social media attributing a pet's death to a particular brand of cat or dog food, as people brand who have experienced the untimely loss of a beloved animal companion attempt to spare other families the trauma they have endured. Similar warnings have circulated about brands such as Purina, with grieving owners similarly convinced the food their pet consumed was responsible for the animal's illness or death. Purina In the absence of confirmation or denial from Dollar General, well-intentioned pet owners seized on anecdotal information about the brand on the web, but the owner of the dog referenced above later admitted that the pet's death had not been linked to EverPet: Unlike Purina, discount brand EverPet has no dedicated website or social media presence where they address such complaints. Consequently, rumors of recalls continue to circulate even though there has never been a recall of EverPet pet food. Representatives from Dollar General have replied to some of the rumors about EverPet food and stated unequivocally that the product is manufactured in the United States (not China), and that no recalls have been ordered for EverPet products. On 20 December 2013, Dollar General's Facebook page published the following response to a user who asked about EverPet rumors: response Last updated: 20 February 2015

NEI

Origins: On 2 November 2014, the above-quoted message about EverPet brand pet food was posted on Facebook and subsequently shared hundreds of thousands of times. Although that particular warning came in late 2014, rumors about adverse pet reactions to It is not uncommon to find stories on social media attributing a pet's death to a particular brand of cat or dog food, as people who have experienced the untimely loss of a beloved animal companion attempt to spare other families the trauma they have endured. Similar warnings have circulated about brands such as Purina, with grieving owners similarly convinced the food their pet consumed was responsible for the animal's illness or death.On 20 December 2013, Dollar General's Facebook page published the following response to a user who asked about EverPet rumors:

FMD_train_1499

Ghetto Hikes

03/13/2015

Claim: A real-life tour guide for inner city children compiled their humorous observations for a blog called Ghetto Hikes. Origins: In March 2015, social media sharing sites including the Meta Picture and DumpADay published articles curating content from an older blog called Ghetto Hikes, which was a set of social media accounts that was briefly popular in 2012 before its creators suddenly stopped updating it. published articles Ghetto Hikes was initially described as a blog inspired by the comments of inner city children during trips to the country. The site's creator, who identified himself as "Cory," described the children as "urban" and explained: I'm 28. I have a full time job leading urban kids on nature hikes. I simply write down shit they say. email: [email protected] The description was later updated to include the modifier "of all races" following "urban kids" after readers opined that "urban" was a code word for black. A Twitter account for Ghetto Hikes was last updated on 22 February 2012 and its final tweets were representative of humor many readers likened to a minstrel show: account "E.J. back there havin' a starin' contest with da sun, slowin' down the whole pack ... homeboy shoulda gone to Space Camp." "Mr. Cody, I ain't no snitch or nuffin' but Denny back there shovin' colored rocks in his pockets. Homie lootin' the forest!" "Is rabbits eatable? Or you just s'posed to cuddle the fuck outta them?" "Yo Mr. Cody, how many these mushrooms I gotta eat fo' I Super Mario da fuck outta dis place?" "I thought Lamar done snuck his puppy Jason on da trip ... turns out that crazy ass just makin' shadow puppets." Ghetto Hikes was briefly popular in the online world throughout January and February of 2012, but readers quickly became suspicious about the veracity of its content. Several critics observed that the premise of Ghetto Hikes (i.e., inner city youth outreach) created a convenient excuse for readers to laugh at thinly-veiled racist jokes that would otherwise be deemed offensive or unacceptable. observed The sudden interest generated by Ghetto Hikes brought with it scrutiny of who was behind the briefly popular social media phenomenon. The cessation of those accounts on or around 22 February 2012 coincided with at least two articles that revealed its connection to other humor sites, Lamebook and MensHumor, as explained by the Daily Dot: @HumorForMens tweeted a screenshot of the domain-name registration for MensHumor.com, an apparently related site. The man behind the account? Jonathan Standefer. According to the domain search conducted by @HumorForMens, Standefer registered the MensHumor.com domain name and most likely tweets from the corresponding Twitter account. We used the Whois search tool on InterNIC's domain-name registry also, but it now comes up as private. But the date Standefer registered the website is the same in the screenshot: Aug. 15, 2011. He also registered GhettoHikes.com, which has a Twitter account of the same name. @GhettoHikes is an offensive, racist account from "Cody" who leads hikes for "urban kids." The tweets are essentially the 21st century version of the racist "blackface" films produced during the Jim Crow era. Some screenshots of the purported domain registration were circulated before it was amended in order to conceal information about the site's registrant to new queries. Ghetto Hikes hasn't been updated since those details came to light in early 2012, but the site's content has been intermittently revived on Twitter and Facebook by users newly discovering it. screenshots Despite its continued circulation, Ghetto Hikes was just a hoax consisting of fabricated quotes based upon things that some people believed inner city children might say. Last updated: 3 February 2016 Valinsky, Jordan. "The Hater: Exposing the Man Behind @MensHumor" Daily Dot. 22 February 2012.

False

Origins: In March 2015, social media sharing sites including the Meta Picture and DumpADay published articles curating content from an older blog called Ghetto Hikes, which was a set of social media accounts that was briefly popular in 2012 before its creators suddenly stopped updating it.The description was later updated to include the modifier "of all races" following "urban kids" after readers opined that "urban" was a code word for black. A Twitter account for Ghetto Hikes was last updated on 22 February 2012 and its final tweets were representative of humor many readers likened to a minstrel show:Ghetto Hikes was briefly popular in the online world throughout January and February of 2012, but readers quickly became suspicious about the veracity of its content. Several critics observed that the premise of Ghetto Hikes (i.e., inner city youth outreach) created a convenient excuse for readers to laugh at thinly-veiled racist jokes that would otherwise be deemed offensive or unacceptable.Some screenshots of the purported domain registration were circulated before it was amended in order to conceal information about the site's registrant to new queries. Ghetto Hikes hasn't been updated since those details came to light in early 2012, but the site's content has been intermittently revived on Twitter and Facebook by users newly discovering it.

FMD_train_1854

Does the CDC operate as a 'Nonprofit Corporation' that is privately owned?

05/05/2021

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

False

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

FMD_train_1604

Reselling U.S. Postage Stamps

12/01/2008

Claim: U.S. postage stamps may not be resold for a price greater than their face value. Example: [Collected via e-mail, October 2007] I was always under the impression that selling a regular US First-Class stamp for profit was illegal. I thought you could only sell it for face value, is this true? Origins: These days postal customers have a multiplicity of options for buying postage: They can purchase stamps not only at post offices but also from private mailbox chain outlets and from many grocery, warehouse, and convenience stores; they can order stamps by phone, through the mail, or over the Internet; and they can even print out postage stamps themselves through programs operated by authorized U.S. Postal Service (USPS) vendors. It wasn't all that long ago, however, when many customers had few (if any) alternatives for obtaining stamps other than by trekking down to the local post office. It might be memories from those days when the U.S. Post Office Department was strictly a government agency (i.e., prior to the creation of the USPS in 1970) and its offices were the only sales outlet for stamps for many people that have fostered the mistaken belief it is illegal to re-sell U.S. postage stamps for a price greater than their face value. Perhaps people viewed postage stamps as a type of government service, and therefore they thought making aprofit from the resale of stamps was a form of illegal profiteering. We know this not to be true from anecdotal evidence: Years ago, one of the few sources of stamps other than the post office was the mechanical, lever-operated machines commonly found in grocery stores which dispensed individual stamps (rather than booklets) and were notorious for not providing full value depositing a dime in such a machine would typically fetch the customer something like one five-cent stamp and two one-cent stamps, or a quarter might buy three six-cent stamps and one three-cent stamp. Even today, the private mailbox outlets that have sprung up across the country often add surcharges to the price of stamps they offer their customers as a convenience. (Plus, if selling stamps for more than their face value were truly prohibited by law, then all philatelic sales of uncancelled stamps would be illegal.) In any case, we don't need to rely on anecdotal evidence, because the Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) section of the USPS's web site explains that it has no control over the prices other entities charge for reselling U.S. postage stamps: FAQ Selling stamps at a higher price The Postal Service sells stamps at face value to everyone. We have no control over the pricing policies of private entrepreneurs, companies or agencies who resell our products. A charge at a higher price is most likely imposed to earn a return on their investment of capital and effort. The prices they charge are, no doubt, established on the basis of their needs and market evaluations. Customers may avoid paying more than the stated value for First-Class Mail postage by purchasing stamps at their Post Office, through Stamps By Mail, phone, online, Automated Postal Centers and retail outlets that are involved with our consignment programs or from one of the many postal stores. Last updated: 19 August 2013

False

In any case, we don't need to rely on anecdotal evidence, because the Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) section of the USPS's web site explains that it has no control over the prices other entities charge for reselling U.S. postage stamps:

FMD_train_959

The United States has experienced 40 straight months of unemployment at 8 percent or higher.

06/11/2012

When the governmentsjobs reportfor May offered a bleak picture of the economy, with employers adding just 69,000 jobs in May, U.S. Rep. Diane Black, R-Gallatin, and other lawmakers expressed their frustrations, often in very partisan terms.The report said the unemployment rate edged up slightly to 8.2 percent, from 8.1 percent in April, and Black issued a press release that among other things said the prospects for unemployed or underemployed Americans finding full-time work are not very good after 40 straight months of unemployment at 8 percent or higher.We know the unemployment has remained stubbornly high, but has it really been at 8 percent or higher for 40 straight months?For the purposes of this ruling, we're only going to look closely at the statistics Black cited and stay out of the political blame game. Suffice to say, its not hard to find Republicans blaming Democratic policies and Democrats blaming Republican obstruction for the inability to move the economy closer to full employment.We called Blacks office and asked them to back up the claim. Her spokeswoman, Allison Huff, pointed us to achartcompiled by the Bureau of Labor Statistics, which is the gold standard for unemployment statistics.According to the bureau, the last time unemployment was below 8 percent was in January 2009, when it was 7.8 percent -- it then spiked quickly to 8.3 percent in February of 2009 and to 9.4 percent by May before topping out at 10.0 percent in October of 2009. It dropped gradually from there, and the May report listing unemployment at 8.2 percent marked the 40th consecutive month it has been at 8 percent or higher.As dismal as that may be, its not the record.The rate of unemployment in the United States has exceeded 8 percent since February 2009, making the past three years the longest stretch of high unemployment in this country since the Great Depression, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office reported in astudyin February 2012.In the Great Depression era, unemployment topped 15 percent annually for six straight years, from 1931 to 1936, and never fell below 8.7 percent over 12 years, according toestimatesadopted by the Bureau of Labor Statistics. In four consecutive years, unemployment exceeded 20 percent a year.Our colleagues at PolitiFact National cited those figures when they rated asFalsea claim by Republican National Committee chairman Reince Priebus, who said, We have unemployment that rivals the Great Depression.There is a qualifier, though. The Depression-era unemployment data counted those age 14 and up, not 16 and up (the standard that began in 1948). In addition, monthly unemployment statistics were not kept until 1948 as well. Thus, all statistics during the Great Depression were on an annual basis.Our rulingRep. Black did not go as far as some other Republicans and claim that unemployment is as bad as during the Great Depression. She merely said it has been at 8 percent or higher for 40 straight months. Based upon the governments own data, we rate her statement as True.

True

When the governmentsjobs reportfor May offered a bleak picture of the economy, with employers adding just 69,000 jobs in May, U.S. Rep. Diane Black, R-Gallatin, and other lawmakers expressed their frustrations, often in very partisan terms.The report said the unemployment rate edged up slightly to 8.2 percent, from 8.1 percent in April, and Black issued a press release that among other things said the prospects for unemployed or underemployed Americans finding full-time work are not very good after 40 straight months of unemployment at 8 percent or higher.We know the unemployment has remained stubbornly high, but has it really been at 8 percent or higher for 40 straight months?For the purposes of this ruling, we're only going to look closely at the statistics Black cited and stay out of the political blame game. Suffice to say, its not hard to find Republicans blaming Democratic policies and Democrats blaming Republican obstruction for the inability to move the economy closer to full employment.We called Blacks office and asked them to back up the claim. Her spokeswoman, Allison Huff, pointed us to achartcompiled by the Bureau of Labor Statistics, which is the gold standard for unemployment statistics.According to the bureau, the last time unemployment was below 8 percent was in January 2009, when it was 7.8 percent -- it then spiked quickly to 8.3 percent in February of 2009 and to 9.4 percent by May before topping out at 10.0 percent in October of 2009. It dropped gradually from there, and the May report listing unemployment at 8.2 percent marked the 40th consecutive month it has been at 8 percent or higher.As dismal as that may be, its not the record.The rate of unemployment in the United States has exceeded 8 percent since February 2009, making the past three years the longest stretch of high unemployment in this country since the Great Depression, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office reported in astudyin February 2012.In the Great Depression era, unemployment topped 15 percent annually for six straight years, from 1931 to 1936, and never fell below 8.7 percent over 12 years, according toestimatesadopted by the Bureau of Labor Statistics. In four consecutive years, unemployment exceeded 20 percent a year.Our colleagues at PolitiFact National cited those figures when they rated asFalsea claim by Republican National Committee chairman Reince Priebus, who said, We have unemployment that rivals the Great Depression.There is a qualifier, though. The Depression-era unemployment data counted those age 14 and up, not 16 and up (the standard that began in 1948). In addition, monthly unemployment statistics were not kept until 1948 as well. Thus, all statistics during the Great Depression were on an annual basis.Our rulingRep. Black did not go as far as some other Republicans and claim that unemployment is as bad as during the Great Depression. She merely said it has been at 8 percent or higher for 40 straight months. Based upon the governments own data, we rate her statement as True.

FMD_train_185

Papa John's is unwilling to distribute 'excessive profits' amongst its employees.

02/18/2016

On 18 February 2016, the Facebook page "I Acknowledge Class Warfare Exists" posted a meme featuring a photograph of Papa John's CEO John Schnatter along with a quote ostensibly uttered by him about not sharing company profits with employees: Although several web sites, such as AZ Quotes, Sherman's Wilderness, and the Straight Dopemessage board,have attributed this phrase to Schnatter, none of these web sites conclusively documents where or when Schnatter purportedly made this statement. In fact, our attempt to source this quote led us through a never-ending circle of memes; in the end, we found no record in any credible publication linking Schnatter to these words. AZ Quotes Sherman's Wilderness Straight Dope The quote was likely created in an attempt to paraphrase comments the Papa John's CEOmade in 2012, just before the implementation of the Affordable Care Act: comments "Our best estimate is that the Obamacare will cost 11 to 14 cents per pizza, or 15 to 20 cents per order from a corporate basis. "We're not supportive of Obamacare, like most businesses in our industry. But our business model and unit economics are about as ideal as you can get for a food company to absorb Obamacare. "If Obamacare is in fact not repealed, we will find tactics to shallow out any Obamacare costs and core strategies to pass that cost onto consumers in order to protect our shareholders best interest." In November 2012, Schnatter wrote an op-ed piecefor the Huffington Post, maintaining that some of his comments had been taken out of context. piece

False

Although several web sites, such as AZ Quotes, Sherman's Wilderness, and the Straight Dopemessage board,have attributed this phrase to Schnatter, none of these web sites conclusively documents where or when Schnatter purportedly made this statement. In fact, our attempt to source this quote led us through a never-ending circle of memes; in the end, we found no record in any credible publication linking Schnatter to these words.The quote was likely created in an attempt to paraphrase comments the Papa John's CEOmade in 2012, just before the implementation of the Affordable Care Act:In November 2012, Schnatter wrote an op-ed piecefor the Huffington Post, maintaining that some of his comments had been taken out of context.

FMD_train_321

Posts about a "loss" on 'Little People, Big World' are deceptive.

01/05/2022

On Jan. 4, 2022, a strange Facebook ad appeared that claimed: "The Sudden Loss That Hit 'Little People, Big World.'" It led to a lengthy article that claimed to reveal news of a death, "shocking truth," or some sort of sad development about the Roloff family. claimed However, this was all very misleading. For readers unfamiliar with "Little People, Big World," it's a reality TV show that follows the lives of the Roloff family. reality TV show "Matt and Amy Roloff, both 4 feet tall, face a variety of challenges in raising their four children: twins Jeremy and Zach, who is 2-feet shorter than his brother, and younger siblings Molly and Jacob, who like Jeremy are average height," a synopsis on TheTVDB.com reads. "The family's 34-acre Oregon farm serves as part playground and part moneymaker. As the series ages, Matt and Amy deal with personal strife, embrace their kids getting older and leading lives of their own, become grandparents, and attempt to keep Roloff Farms operational." synopsis The show began airing on TLC in 2006 and is often referred to by the acronym, "LPBW." Matt and Amy divorced in 2015. airing on TLC divorced In the Facebook ad about the Roloff family's "sudden loss," the caption contained several grammatical errors. It said: "Since the allegation were confirmed to the public, the cast of 'Little People, Big World' has ask for some privacy. Here is all the information given to the public so far." In other words, the ad appeared to imply that there were recent developments about a death that involved someone on "LPBW" or in the Roloff family. This strange Facebook ad came from a page named P-15897-2. The ad was posted on a Facebook page with a strange name: P-15897-2. It was described as a "clothing store." However, the truth was that this was nothing more than a quickly-created page that was being used to profit off of tragic and outdated news. It was likely managed from outside of the U.S. One of the photos showed a young Zach Roloff in a hospital bed. The picture was a screenshot from a 2006 episode of "LPBW" named "Zach's Emergency" where he experienced a "mysterious illness." episode The ad led to a lengthy slideshow-style article on foodisinthehouse.com. Its headline read: "Little People, Big World: Learn the Shocking Truth About the Roloff Family." article However, the Facebook ad and this article were both misleading. The story was nothing more than an extremely long history of the Roloff family. It mentioned several tragic developments. Matt had a brother named Josh who died at the age of 34 in 1999. He had experienced multiple medical problems since his birth, according to a report. Additionally, the story mentioned the August 2021 death of Felix, who was Amy's dog. She posted about his passing on Instagram. This news, which was reported by People.com and others, was around four months old by the time the misleading article was published and the Facebook ad went live. There's no evidence that the family asked "for privacy" about either of these two past deaths, as the Facebook ad claimed. report posted reported by People.com The lengthy article also documented two unrelated, sad developments about Dr. Jennifer Arnold, the star of the former TLC series, "The Little Couple." According to Chron.com, the show provided a "deeper look into the married life of Dr. Jen Arnold and Bill Klein, who happen to be dwarfs." According to Chron.com In 2013, Today.com reported that Dr. Arnold was "diagnosed with stage 3 choriocarcinoma, a rare cancer that began with a September pregnancy loss." reported In sum, an unknown person was paying Facebook to display an ad about "Little People, Big World" that seemed to indicate there were new and tragic developments. It said that the Roloff family asked "for privacy" and hinted with the words "so far" that more information was coming about a recent "loss" or death. However, this was misleading and appeared to be little more than an attempt to profit from past tragedies from two TLC TV shows. For these reasons, we have rated this claim as "Outdated." attempt to profit Snopes debunks a wide range of content, and online advertisements are no exception. Misleading ads often lead to obscure websites that host lengthy slideshow articles with lots of pages. It's called advertising "arbitrage." The advertiser's goal is to make more money on ads displayed on the slideshow's pages than it cost to show the initial ad that lured them to it. Feel free to submit ads to us, and be sure to include a screenshot of the ad and the link to where the ad leads. submit ads to us

NEI

On Jan. 4, 2022, a strange Facebook ad appeared that claimed: "The Sudden Loss That Hit 'Little People, Big World.'" It led to a lengthy article that claimed to reveal news of a death, "shocking truth," or some sort of sad development about the Roloff family.For readers unfamiliar with "Little People, Big World," it's a reality TV show that follows the lives of the Roloff family."Matt and Amy Roloff, both 4 feet tall, face a variety of challenges in raising their four children: twins Jeremy and Zach, who is 2-feet shorter than his brother, and younger siblings Molly and Jacob, who like Jeremy are average height," a synopsis on TheTVDB.com reads. "The family's 34-acre Oregon farm serves as part playground and part moneymaker. As the series ages, Matt and Amy deal with personal strife, embrace their kids getting older and leading lives of their own, become grandparents, and attempt to keep Roloff Farms operational."The show began airing on TLC in 2006 and is often referred to by the acronym, "LPBW." Matt and Amy divorced in 2015. This strange Facebook ad came from a page named P-15897-2.One of the photos showed a young Zach Roloff in a hospital bed. The picture was a screenshot from a 2006 episode of "LPBW" named "Zach's Emergency" where he experienced a "mysterious illness."The ad led to a lengthy slideshow-style article on foodisinthehouse.com. Its headline read: "Little People, Big World: Learn the Shocking Truth About the Roloff Family."It mentioned several tragic developments. Matt had a brother named Josh who died at the age of 34 in 1999. He had experienced multiple medical problems since his birth, according to a report. Additionally, the story mentioned the August 2021 death of Felix, who was Amy's dog. She posted about his passing on Instagram. This news, which was reported by People.com and others, was around four months old by the time the misleading article was published and the Facebook ad went live. There's no evidence that the family asked "for privacy" about either of these two past deaths, as the Facebook ad claimed.The lengthy article also documented two unrelated, sad developments about Dr. Jennifer Arnold, the star of the former TLC series, "The Little Couple." According to Chron.com, the show provided a "deeper look into the married life of Dr. Jen Arnold and Bill Klein, who happen to be dwarfs."In 2013, Today.com reported that Dr. Arnold was "diagnosed with stage 3 choriocarcinoma, a rare cancer that began with a September pregnancy loss."In sum, an unknown person was paying Facebook to display an ad about "Little People, Big World" that seemed to indicate there were new and tragic developments. It said that the Roloff family asked "for privacy" and hinted with the words "so far" that more information was coming about a recent "loss" or death. However, this was misleading and appeared to be little more than an attempt to profit from past tragedies from two TLC TV shows. For these reasons, we have rated this claim as "Outdated."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_1816

Candy Crush Saga

02/19/2014

Claim: King Digital Entertainment, maker of Candy Crush Saga, copied their game from CandySwipe and is attempting to cancel the latter's trademark. OUTDATED Example: [Collected via e-mail, February 2014] There is an "open letter" being circulated that is supposed to have been written by an Albert Ransom from Runsome Apps, Inc, that states that he trademarked a game called CandySwipe prior to King.com creating CandyCrush and that King.com is trying to take over his trademark. Is this true? Synopsis: As of 16 April 2014, the parties in the dispute discussed below have announced the withdrawal of their claims against each other, so this item is no longer current: announced I am happy to announce that I have amicably resolved my dispute with King over my CandySwipe trademark and that I am withdrawing my opposition to their mark and they are withdrawing their counterclaim against mine. I have learned that they picked the CANDY CRUSH name before I released my game and that they were never trying to take my game away. Both our games can continue to coexist without confusing players. Origins: In February 2014, King Digital Entertainment, the company behind the massively popular Candy Crush Saga game, announced they had filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) to issue an Initial Public Offering (IPO) of stock. King said they expected to raise $500 million in capital, with some analysts predicting that the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE) could value the company as high as $5.5 billion based largely on the strength of Candy Crush Saga: filed The game, which involves matching brightly coloured sweets on a grid to solve various puzzles, was played over 1 billion times a day in December [2013], according to the filing. Candy Crush is free but players pay for options within the game. It has proved a lucrative combination. King's profits grew over 7,000% last year, according to the filing. In 2012 the company's revenues were $164.4 million and its net profit $7.8 million, in 2013 those figures rose to $1.88 billion and $567.6 million respectively. But the filing also reveals that King's fortunes are currently closely tied to the continued success of Candy Crush. The game accounts for 78% of King's total gross bookings, according to the filing. Its second most popular game, Pet Rescue Saga, had 15 million daily active users in December, a fraction of Candy Crush's 93 million. King noted in its filing that "a small number of games currently generate a substantial majority of our revenue." However, King has been the subject of controversy due to similarities between Candy Crush Saga and CandySwipe, the latter being an earlier iteration of a comparable game concept and visual design which its creator, independent developer Albert Ransom, maintains King copied from him. Ransom posted an open letter to King on the CandySwipe web site, criticizing the company for attempting to wrest theCandySwipe trademark away from him: CandySwipe open letter Dear King, Congratulations! You win! I created my game CandySwipe in memory of my late mother who passed away at an early age of 62 of leukemia. I released CandySwipe in 2010 five months after she passed and I made it because she always liked these sorts of games. In fact, if you beat the full version of the android game, you will still get the message saying "... the game was made in memory of my mother, Layla ..." I created this game for warmhearted people like her and to help support my family, wife and two boys 10 and 4. Two years after I released CandySwipe, you released Candy Crush Saga on mobile; the app icon, candy pieces, and even the rewarding, "Sweet!" are nearly identical. So much so, that I have hundreds of instances of actual confusion from users who think CandySwipe is Candy Crush Saga, or that CandySwipe is a Candy Crush Saga knockoff. So when you attempted to register your trademark in 2012, I opposed it for "likelihood of confusion" (which is within my legal right) given I filed for my registered trademark back in 2010 (two years before Candy Crush Saga existed). Now, after quietly battling this trademark opposition for a year, I have learned that you now want to cancel my CandySwipe trademark so that I don't have the right to use my own game's name. You are able to do this because only within the last month you purchased the rights to a game named Candy Crusher (which is nothing like CandySwipe or even Candy Crush Saga). Good for you, you win. I hope you're happy taking the food out of my family's mouth when CandySwipe clearly existed well before Candy Crush Saga. I have spent over three years working on this game as an independent app developer. I learned how to code on my own after my mother passed and CandySwipe was my first and most successful game; it's my livelihood, and you are now attempting to take that away from me. You have taken away the possibility of CandySwipe blossoming into what it has the potential of becoming. I have been quiet, not to exploit the situation, hoping that both sides could agree on a peaceful resolution. However, your move to buy a trademark for the sole purpose of getting away with infringing on the CandySwipe trademark and goodwill just sickens me. This also contradicts your recent quote by Riccardo in "An open letter on intellectual property" posted on your website which states, "We believe in a thriving game development community, and believe that good game developers both small and large have every right to protect the hard work they do and the games they create." I myself was only trying to protect my hard work. I wanted to take this moment to write you this letter so that you know who I am. Because I now know exactly what you are. Congratulations on your success! Ransom's statement was penned in response to King's own open letter on the trademark issue, in which the company maintained that they were simply acquiring "Candy"-related trademarks in order to ensure that their "hard work is not simply copied elsewhere" and to defend their product against "games with similar sounding titles and similar looking graphics" (without commenting on the claim that the similar CandySwipe game antedated Candy Crush Saga by about two years and therefore could not have been copied from the latter): open letter There has been a vigorous debate both inside and outside King about how we protect our intellectual property. I want to set the record straight about where we stand on these issues, and clarify our philosophy on intellectual property. At its simplest, our policy is to protect our IP and to also respect the IP of others. We believe in a thriving game development community, and believe that good game developers both small and large have every right to protect the hard work they do and the games they create. Like any responsible company, we take appropriate steps to protect our IP, including our look-and-feel and trademarks. Our goals are simple: to ensure that our employees' hard work is not simply copied elsewhere, that we avoid player confusion and that the integrity of our brands remains. Lets talk about trademarks, and the use of the words "Candy" and "Saga" in casual gaming. Let's start with the fact that Candy Crush Saga has become one of the most successful casual games in history. Millions of people play the game every day. Not surprisingly, some developers have seen an opportunity to take advantage of the game's popularity, and have published games with similar sounding titles and similar looking graphics. We believe it is right and reasonable to defend ourselves from such copycats. To protect our IP, last year we acquired the trademark in the EU for "Candy" from a company that was in bankruptcy and we have filed for a similar trademark in the U.S. We've been the subject of no little scorn for our actions on this front, but the truth is that there is nothing very unusual about trademarking a common word for specific uses. Think of "Time", "Money" "Fortune", "Apple", and "Sun", to name a few. We are not trying to control the world's use of the word "Candy"; having a trade mark doesn't allow us to do that anyway. We're just trying to prevent others from creating games that unfairly capitalise on our success. As Metro chimed in, however, even though King may appear to be the villain in this story, neither side may be correct in claiming the high ground since both CandySwipe and Candy Crush Saga are notably similar to other games dating from the mid-1990s, and what is being disputed is merely the name that each side is using for their version of the game rather than a claim to the original idea itself (i.e., this is a tussle over trademarks, not copyright): Part legal drama, part time travel story, this one has it all. Candy Crush developer King have been in the headlines for all the wrong reasons lately, as they continue their attempts to trademark the words 'candy' and 'saga' which led to them threatening to sue Viking game 'The Banner Saga.' For an encore it later transpired that King had purposefully cloned somebody else's game when a publishing deal fell through. Which was sadly ironic considering how paranoid they are about other people copying them. And now they're responding with legal action of their own, against the makers of CandySwipe, by claiming that it's a clone. Despite the fact that Candy Swipe came out two years before Candy Crush. In fact it's worse than that, as Kings attempts to have CandySwipe's trademark cancelled revolves around them buying the rights to an even earlier game called Candy Crusher. This, they hope, will allow them to claim that they are the original trademark holders of everything video game and candy-related. Although it's hard not to side with Ransom in all this, the idea of all these developers suing each other over who cloned who seems slightly absurd considering they're all just copies of Bejeweled anyway. Indeed, the modern match-three style puzzler has barely changed at all since the days of Nintendo's Panel De Pon/Tetris Attack in 1995. Although the true originator of the concept is little known PC title Shariki, from a year earlier. Shariki Metro also reported an attempt by developers to challenge King's trademark maneuvering by creating "as many games with the word candy in them as possible": Indie developers have fought back against developer King's increasingly bizarre legal actions with a game jam called 'Candy Jam'. To the uninitiated it may look like just another Bejeweled clone, but Candy Crush Saga is currently one of the most popular video games in the world. This means British developer King suddenly has a lot of power and influence, which naturally it's already started to abuse. It's the slightly unhinged nature of the abuse which is unexpected though, with the company currently trying to trademark the word 'candy' so that nobody else can use it. But King's plans don't stop there, as they're also suing Kickstarter game 'The Banner Saga' because it has the word 'saga' in its name. Ignoring the fact that most people omit the word Saga when saying Candy Crush's name, 'The Banner Saga' is an adult-themed tactical role-playing game with a notably morose atmosphere. Although it does contain lots of angry vikings, at no point in the game are you invited to match together three-similarly coloured sweets. Even so Kings legal filing insists that: "The use and registration by Applicant of the mark The Banner Saga for Applicant's goods is likely to cause confusion or to cause mistake or deception in the trade, and among purchasers and potential purchasers, with Opposer's Saga Marks, again resulting in damage to Opposer." We're trying to keep upbeat but frankly the whole business is deeply depressing in its unbridled corporate greed. The only positive element to the story is that indie developers have organised an event called Candy Jam to protest King's actions and to make as many games with the word candy in them as possible. The International Game Developers Association (IGDA) has also weighed in on the issue, describing King's trademark efforts as "overreaching" and "predatory": weighed As an advocacy organization for game developers, the IGDA diligently monitors issues that may restrict a developer's ability to create and distribute his or her work. After reviewing the Trademark filing and subsequent conduct by King Inc. in relation to its popular game, 'Candy Crush Saga,' we feel we should comment. While we understand and respect the appropriate exercise of Trademark rights, King's overreaching filing in its application for the Trademark for its game "Candy Crush Saga," and its predatory efforts to apply that mark to each separate word contained in that name, are in opposition to the values of openness and cooperation we support industry wide, and directly contradict the statement King's CEO, Riccardo Zacconi, made on 27 January. Our Business and Legal Special Interest Group will be providing a more comprehensive analysis of this issue from its perspective soon. Last updated: 17 April 2014 Rushe, Dominic and Stuart Dredge. "Candy Crush Game Maker Aims to Raise $500M in IPO." The Guardian. 18 February 2014. Agence France-Presse. "Candy Crush Developer Defends Trademarking 'Candy' After Backlash." 28 January 2014. Metro. "Candy Crush Makers Sue The Banner Saga, Trademark the Word 'Candy'." 22 January 2014. Metro. "Candy Crush Saga Makers to Sue Game They Copied." 13 February 2014. Reuters. "Candy Crush Saga Developer King Trademarks the Word "Candy.'" 22 January 2014.

True

Synopsis: As of 16 April 2014, the parties in the dispute discussed below have announced the withdrawal of their claims against each other, so this item is no longer current:Origins: In February 2014, King Digital Entertainment, the company behind the massively popular Candy Crush Saga game, announced they had filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) to issue an Initial Public Offering (IPO) of stock. King said they expected to raise $500 million in capital, with some analysts predicting that the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE) could value the company as high as $5.5 billion based largely on the strength of Candy Crush Saga:However, King has been the subject of controversy due to similarities between Candy Crush Saga and CandySwipe, the latter being an earlier iteration of a comparable game concept and visual design which its creator, independent developer Albert Ransom, maintains King copied from him. Ransom posted an open letter to King on the CandySwipe web site, criticizing the company for attempting to wrest theCandySwipe trademark away from him:Ransom's statement was penned in response to King's own open letter on the trademark issue, in which the company maintained that they were simply acquiring "Candy"-related trademarks in order to ensure that their "hard work is not simply copied elsewhere" and to defend their product against "games with similar sounding titles and similar looking graphics" (without commenting on the claim that the similar CandySwipe game antedated Candy Crush Saga by about two years and therefore could not have been copied from the latter):Indeed, the modern match-three style puzzler has barely changed at all since the days of Nintendo's Panel De Pon/Tetris Attack in 1995. Although the true originator of the concept is little known PC title Shariki, from a year earlier.The International Game Developers Association (IGDA) has also weighed in on the issue, describing King's trademark efforts as "overreaching" and "predatory":

FMD_train_1237

I took the state of Ohio from an $8 billion hole to a $2 billion surplus.

08/06/2015

During the Republican presidential debate on his home turf of Cleveland, Ohio Gov. John Kasich touted his economic record in the state. Repeating a claim he has often made --including on his campaign website-- Kasich said, I took the state of Ohio from an $8 billion hole to a $2 billion surplus. We decided to take a closer look. An $8 billion hole? Theres an argument for $8 billion, but theres also an argument for something closer to $6 billion, according to adeep diveby the Cleveland Plain Dealer in 2011. The $8 billion figure is rounded up from a $7.7 billion gap between spending and expected revenues. It was an initial estimate from January 2011, based on the assumption made several months earlier that there would be no new revenue growth. However, revenues did grow as the economy rebounded that year, reducing the gap to between $5.9 billion to $6.1 billion -- a calculation that Kasichs budget director, Tim Keen, agreed with conceptually in a 2011 interview with the newspaper, though he took issue with some of the methodological details. Whatever the number, Kasich avoided a potential misstep when he spoke of this in the debate as a hole rather than a deficit, since Ohio, like most states, cannot run an actual budget deficit. The $8 billion gap is more accurately described as a projected shortfall rather than a deficit. A $2 billion surplus? This figure is clearer. The states Office of Budget and Managementreportedin July 2015 that the states rainy day fund had a little more than $2 billion in it, up from effectively zero when Kasich took office in 2011. Does Kasich deserve credit? Its not unreasonable to give Kasich some credit for the states improving economic fortunes -- he is a governor, after all, and he forged the states fiscal policy in concert with the Legislature. But its important to remember that he took office at the very beginning of the national economic recovery, and as the national economy has improved, so has Ohios. When Kasich was inaugurated in January 2011, the unemployment rate in Ohio was 9.2 percent -- exactly the same as the national rate. Today, the national unemployment rate is 5.3 percent and the rate in Ohio is 5.2 percent. So Kasichs timing has been fortunate. Our ruling Kasich said, I took the state of Ohio from an $8 billion hole to a $2 billion surplus. Its possible to argue over whether the initial amount should be $6 billion rather than $8 billion. But Kasich didnt pull that figure out of thin air, and it certainly was high by historical standards. He also used the term hole, which is more appropriate than deficit would have been. Meanwhile, the $2 billion figure seems solid. Still, its worth noting that Kasich spoke a little grandly when he said that I did it, since the states fiscal improvement got a big assist from the national economic recovery. The statement is accurate but needs additional information, so we rate it Mostly True.

True

Repeating a claim he has often made --including on his campaign website-- Kasich said, I took the state of Ohio from an $8 billion hole to a $2 billion surplus.Theres an argument for $8 billion, but theres also an argument for something closer to $6 billion, according to adeep diveby the Cleveland Plain Dealer in 2011.This figure is clearer. The states Office of Budget and Managementreportedin July 2015 that the states rainy day fund had a little more than $2 billion in it, up from effectively zero when Kasich took office in 2011.

FMD_train_593

Are individuals involved in sex trafficking labeling vehicles as potential victims?

08/25/2020

In August 2020, a photograph showing the figures "1f1b" written on the back window of a vehicle began circulating on social media, accompanied by a warning about an alleged tactic used by sex traffickers to flag potential targets. Those sharing this meme claimed that this term stood for either "1 female 1 boy" or "1 female 1 baby," asserting that cars were being tagged with these codes by sex traffickers. The meme gained viral traction when it was posted on actor James Woods' Twitter account. The text read: "A very close friend of mine was out today shopping with her child at the Bricktown Walmart. When she left the store, a lady stopped her and made her aware of what was written on her back window (1f1b). I'm just going to assume that it stands for 1 female 1 baby. She was then informed that this is how sex traffickers are tagging cars. Please, please, mothers, fathers, grandparents, aunts, and uncles, be AWARE! Feel free to share! I won't be tagging my friend for personal reasons." The claims made in this viral social media post are unfounded. Police in Bricktown, New Jersey, have stated that they are unaware of any such activity. Before we delve into the police statement regarding this matter, let's examine the game of telephone that helped this rumor spread. The text of this post indicates that this incident happened to a "friend of mine." As we read further, we discover that this "friend" was warned about this new criminal tactic by a random stranger—not a police officer, a news reporter, or even a Walmart employee, just an anonymous "lady." The original post received a few thousand shares, but this version garnered far wider circulation. As we moved further away from the rumor's origins, the details became increasingly muddled. One poster, for instance, claimed that this incident took place in Bricktown, Oklahoma City, despite the fact that there is no Walmart in that location. When we attempt to trace this rumor back to its origins, we find that the claim is based on something someone saw on Facebook, written by a person asserting that their friend had heard from a stranger that the code "1f1b" was being used by sex traffickers to flag future targets. In other words, this rumor lacks credible origins. The local Patch website reported that Brick Township Sgt. Jim Kelly said the department had not been notified. "We have no reports of anything like this," Kelly stated. He also mentioned that the department has not been alerted by state or federal authorities about any information indicating that criminals are marking vehicles "as a method for anything." It's simply another Facebook rumor without any facts, Kelly said. A new variant of this rumor emerged on social media in July 2021. "AND THIS, THIS IS WHY I CARRY! Not only do I carry, but I'm educated in how to defend myself if ever put in a circumstance like this! Please be aware of your surroundings AT ALL TIMES!" On July 27, 2021, a post described an incident that occurred around 3:30 PM between Prairie Grove and Hogeye, where a truck was stopped by a black Tahoe. A man exited the vehicle and began asking the female driver for directions. She rolled down her window but kept her seatbelt on and doors locked. As the man approached, he punched her in the left eye and cut her arm. Thankfully, she was armed and managed to grab her gun. He fled the scene. She called the police, who advised her that the mark "1FW" on her back window is a human trafficking mark. She had been marked somewhere, and the man followed her, making a move to take her when she was on a road alone. Thankfully, she returned home to her family that night. We are told they often mark mailboxes and trash cans too. This particular marking stands for one female white. This is not the first time that such baseless warnings have gone viral on social media. In July 2019, for example, we reported on the false claim that sex traffickers were flagging targets by placing zip ties on houses, mailboxes, or vehicles. In December of that year, a false rumor circulated that sex traffickers were lying down in front of vehicles to trick them into stopping. That same month saw the spread of another false rumor claiming that roses were being placed on cars to mark potential targets. Human trafficking is a real problem in the world, but the schemes described above are not based on any real-world threats. In fact, The Polaris Project, a non-profit that operates the U.S. National Human Trafficking Hotline, states that the forced kidnapping aspect of the aforementioned rumors is one of the most prevalent myths surrounding trafficking: "The most pervasive myth about human trafficking is that it often involves kidnapping or physically forcing someone into a situation. In reality, most traffickers use psychological means such as tricking, defrauding, manipulating, or threatening victims into providing commercial sex or exploitative labor."

False

In August 2020, a photograph showing the figures "1f1b" written on the back window of a vehicle started to circulate on social media along with a warning about an alleged tactic being used by sex traffickers to flag potential targets. Those sharing this meme claimed that this term stood for either "1 female 1 boy," or "1 female 1 baby," and that cars were being tagged with these codes by sex traffickers. The meme received a viral boost when it was posted to actor James Woods' Twitter account:The text of this post states that this happened to a "friend of mine." When we read a little further, we see that this "friend" was warned about this new criminal tactic by a random stranger. Not a police officer, a news reporter, or even a Walmart employee just an anonymous "lady." The original post received a few thousand shares, but this post received far wider circulation. And the farther we moved away from the rumor's origins, the muddier the details got. One poster, for instance, informed people that this incident took place in Bricktown, Oklahoma City, despite the fact that there is no Walmart in this location.The local Patch website reported:Nor was this the first time that this type of baseless warning has gone viral on social media. In July 2019, for example, we wrote about the false claim that sex traffickers were flagging targets by placing zip ties on houses, mailboxes, or vehicles. In December of that year, a false rumor circulated that sex traffickers were laying down in front of vehicles in order to trick them into stopping. That same month saw the spread of another false rumor holding that roses were being placed on cars to mark potential targets. Human trafficking is a real problem in the world, but the schemes described above are not based on any real-world threats. In fact, The Polaris Project, a non-profit that runs the U.S. National Human Trafficking Hotline, writes that the forced kidnapping aspect of the aforementioned rumors is one of the most prevalent myths when it comes to trafficking:

FMD_train_1423

There are a lot of casinos across the country that have gone bankrupt.

03/15/2012

It appears likely that come November, Rhode Islanders will decide whether to expand the state's two slot parlors into full-fledged casinos. State legislators have already approved holding a referendum on a proposal to allow table games at Twin River in Lincoln and are considering doing the same for Newport Grand. On March 6, before the House passed legislation to put the Newport Grand question on the ballot, Rep. Robert Jacquard raised concerns about allowing casinos in Rhode Island. "Let's face it: there are a lot of casinos across the country that have gone bankrupt," the Cranston Democrat said. "Just because you give them a casino license is not a guarantee that you are going to save all this money for the state and guarantee all this revenue. It is just not true at all. Management is the most important factor." But doesn't the house always win? Have a lot of casinos around the country really gone bankrupt? We called Jacquard, who explained that he's not necessarily opposed to casinos in Rhode Island, but he does want to ensure that if the state opts to go down that route, responsible operators with a lot of experience in the industry are brought in. He told us that he's read about a number of casinos failing around the country, and although he hasn't kept a list, he recalls bankruptcies occurring particularly in the South. "I know what I read in the paper," Jacquard said. We couldn't find a central repository of information on casino bankruptcies, but we did come across numerous news reports about casinos and their financial struggles. Donald Trump has filed four corporate bankruptcies—in 1991, 1992, 2004, and 2009—in connection with his casinos in Atlantic City, N.J. Tropicana Entertainment, which operates casinos in Nevada, New Jersey, Louisiana, Mississippi, and Indiana, filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy in 2008 and 2009. Station Casinos, which owns or operates 18 casinos in and around Las Vegas, made a similar filing in 2009. And on a side note, Rhode Islanders will be familiar with the struggles of Twin River, which filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy in 2009 and emerged under new ownership the following year. It's not technically a casino, but it is a local reminder of the potential pitfalls of the gambling industry. I. Nelson Rose, distinguished senior professor of law at Whittier Law School in Costa Mesa, Calif., who writes about gambling and legal issues, has kept a partial list of gambling companies that have closed or filed for bankruptcy protection in the last three years as the recession has dragged on. He has counted 18 companies so far. Rose said that other casino operators, including MGM Resorts International, Caesars Entertainment, and Foxwoods, may not be facing bankruptcy but have struggled because of mounting debts and falling revenues. David Schwartz, director of the Center for Gaming Research at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas, said gambling revenues in all major U.S. markets have declined since 2007 as discretionary spending has dried up. He also pointed to heightened competition in the gambling industry as another factor that's squeezing casinos. For example, Atlantic City has lost business to newer casinos in Pennsylvania, whose residents can now gamble closer to home instead of making the trip to New Jersey. It's in that sort of competitive market when management can be particularly important. Rose referred to Colorado's experience in the early 1990s when 68 casinos opened in two or three years. A third of them eventually went bankrupt, and, said Rose, it turned out that the operators of those failed casinos had no previous experience in the industry. Our ruling: Gambling is a boom or bust industry. Even when times are good, casinos fail. And when times are bad, even more fail. As Schwartz told us, casinos definitely are not a sure thing. Good management matters—a point Jacquard made as well. We rate Jacquard's statement True.

True

It appears likely that come November Rhode Islanders will decide whether to expand the states two slot parlors into full-fledged casinos. State legislators have already approved holding a referendum on a proposal to allow table games at Twin River, in Lincoln, and are considering doing the same for Newport Grand.On March 6, before the House passed legislation to put the Newport Grand question on the ballot, Rep. Robert Jacquard raised concerns about allowing casinos in Rhode Island.Let's face it: there are a lot of casinos across the country that have gone bankrupt, the Cranston Democrat said. Just because you give them a casino license is not a guarantee that you are going to save all this money for the state and guarantee all this revenue. It is just not true at all. Management is the most important factor.But doesnt the house always win? Have a lot of casinos around the country really gone bankrupt?We called Jacquard, who explained that hes not necessarily opposed to casinos in Rhode Island, but he does want to make sure that if the state opts to go down that route, responsible operators with a lot of experience in the industry are brought in.He told us that hes read about a number of casinos failing around the country, and although he hasnt kept a list, he recalls bankruptcies occurring particularly in the South.I know what I read in the paper, Jacquard said.We couldnt find a central repository of information on casino bankruptcies, but we did come across numerous news reports about casinos and their financial struggles.Donald Trump has filed four corporate bankruptcies -- in 1991, 1992, 2004 and 2009 -- in connection to his casinos in Atlantic City, N.J. Tropicana Entertainment, which operates casinos in Nevada, New Jersey, Louisiana, Mississippi and Indiana, filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy in 2008 and 2009. Station Casinos, which owns or operates 18 casinos in and around Las Vegas, made a similar filing in 2009.And on a side note, Rhode Islanders will be familiar with the struggles of Twin River, which filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy in 2009 and emerged under new ownership the following year. Its not technically a casino, but it is a local reminder of the potential pitfalls of the gambling industry.I. Nelson Rose, distinguished senior professor of law at Whittier Law School, in Costa Mesa, Calif., who writes about gambling and legal issues, has kept a partial list of gambling companies that have closed or filed for bankruptcy protection in the last three years as the recession has dragged on. He has counted 18 companies so far.Rose said that other casino operators, including MGM Resorts International, Caesars Entertainment and Foxwoods, may not be facing bankruptcy but have struggled because of mounting debts and falling revenues.David Schwartz, director of the Center for Gaming Research at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas, said gambling revenues in all major U.S. markets have declined since 2007 as discretionary spending has dried up.He also pointed to heightened competition in the gambling industry as another factor thats squeezing casinos. For example, Atlantic City has lost business to newer casinos in Pennsylvania, whose residents can now gamble closer to home instead of making the trip to New Jersey.Its in that sort of competitive market when management can be particularly important. Rose referred to Colorados experience in the early 1990s when 68 casinos opened in two or three years. A third of them eventually went bankrupt, and, said Rose, it turned out that the operators of those failed casinos had no previous experience in the industry.Our rulingGambling is a boom or bust industry. Even when times are good, casinos fail. And when times are bad, even more fail.As Schwartz told us, casinos definitely are not a sure thing. Good management matters -- a point Jacquard made as well.We rate Jacquards statement True.(Get updates fromPolitiFactRI on Twitter. To comment or offer your ruling, visit us on ourPolitiFact Rhode Island Facebookpage.)

FMD_train_610

Is Biden from the identical Scranton as the setting of 'The Office'?

10/23/2020

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

True

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

FMD_train_283

Alaskans' Opinions on Sarah Palin

09/07/2008

Claim: Letters written by Alaskans offer viewpoints of Alaska governor and vice-presidential nominee Sarah Palin Origins: In the immediate aftermath of the selection of Alaska governor Sarah Palin as the 2008 Republican vice-presidential nominee came a deluge of Internet-circulated open letters about her, each written by someone claiming a direct or indirect connection to the candidate (e.g., knowing her personally; having lived in the town of Wasilla, Alaska, where Palin served as mayor; or having been a long-time resident of Alaska), and each seemingly attempting to outdo its predecessors in terms of effusive praise or condemnatory criticism of her politics. The letter which was by far the most widely circulated (and which drew the most media attention) was a critical 31 August 2008 missive attributed to a Wasilla resident named Anne Kilkenny, who said she had known Sarah Palin since 1992: ABOUT SARAH PALIN I am a resident of Wasilla, Alaska. I have known Sarah since 1992. Everyone here knows Sarah, so it is nothing special to say we are on a first-name basis. Our children have attended the same schools. Her father was my child's favorite substitute teacher. I also am on a first name basis with her parents and mother-in-law. I attended more City Council meetings during her administration than about 99% of theresidents of the city. She is enormously popular; in every way shes like the most popular girl in middle school. Even men who think she is a poor choice and won't vote for her can't quit smiling when talking about her because she is a "babe". It is astonishing and almost scary how well she can keep a secret. She kept her most recent pregnancy a secret from her children and parents for seven months. She is "pro-life". She recently gave birth to a Down's syndrome baby. There is no cover-up involved, here; Trig is her baby. She is energetic and hardworking. She regularly worked out at the gym. She is savvy. She doesn't take positions; she just "puts things out there" and if they prove to be popular, then she takes credit. Her husband works a union job on the North Slope for BP and is a champion snowmobile racer. Todd Palin's kind of job is highly sought-after because of the schedule and high pay. He arranges his work schedule so he can fish for salmon in Bristol Bay for a month or so in summer, but by no stretch of the imagination is fishing their major source of income. Nor has her life-style ever been anything like that of native Alaskans. [Remainder of letter here.] here This letter was indeed written, as claimed, by Wasilla resident Anne Kilkenny, who explained her motivations for drafting it to a Daily Journal reporter: Recently, we received a note about the Web post, "Letter from Anne Kilkenny," about Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, the Republican vice presidential nominee. We thought for sure it was not really, "a resident of Wasilla, Alaska" who has known Palin since 1992 as the post claims. So, we checked it out. Kilkenny does exist, and she does live in Alaska. We reached her by phone and asked if she wrote the rather long note that calls Palin "smart" but also questions her abilities. We asked Kilkenny, "Did you write that letter?" She replied skeptically, "Well, I don't know. Read me parts of it. I'll tell you if it's mine or not." After we read it to her, she said, "Yes, I wrote that." She sent it out to 40 people, brothers, sisters and friends, on Sunday two days after U.S. Sen. John McCain announced Palin as his choice. On Wednesday, if you enter Kilkenny and Palin's names on Google, about 200 sites refer to this letter. Why did she do it? Kilkenny told The Daily Journal she wanted to offer people information and her experiences. She does not flatter Palin, but she said she did vote for Palin when she ran for city council. "How affirming it has been," she said. "I am pleased to know how idealistic Americans are. They want information not just the politics of destruction." Another popular entry was this 28 August 2008 letter by Wasilla resident Debbie Frost, which cast the Alaska governor as the "US's answer to [British prime minister] Margaret Thatcher": Sarah Palin is the US's answer to Margaret Thatcher! Anyone who thinks she cannot handle the job or deal briskly and efficiently with ANY issue, including foreign governments ... well, they haven't met our Sarah. As an Alaskan resident as well as a resident of Wasilla, AK, where Sarah Palin was at one time Mayor ... I can speak with confidence. Governor Sarah Palin of Alaska is exactly what she portrayed during her introduction this morning and exactly what our US Government needs. She is ethical to a fault (if there is such a thing), a refreshing change to the status-quo and as smart and determined a PERSON (gender really isn't an issue here as far as I'm concerned) as anyone could ask for at the head of government. Sarah is no naive 'small town mayor' she just *started out* there. BTW, as Mayor of Wasilla<, she brought this 'small town' through a lot of GOOD changes and left it at the end of her term having grown to the 4th largest CITY in Alaska a lot of growth and a stronger economic base than ever before. She has EXECTUTIVE experience *running a government* (something NONE of the other candidates can actually boast, even John McCain) as Governor of Alaska and got there by defeating the *incumbent* Republican Governor, who was definitely part of the 'old school' and who WAS very much in the pocket of the big oil companies. We in Alaska wanted change and we got it in the person of Sarah Palin! [Remainder of letter here.] here Yet another letter, this one attributed to Butch King, a "lifetime Alaskan" who is also a proprietor of the Wildman Lake Lodge, attempted to answer (positively) the question of "Who is Sarah Palin?": Many of our friends are asking us "Who is Sarah Palin?" Of course, as Alaskans, Kathy and I are extremely proud of her. We just want to let you know that Sarah "Barracuda" Palin is a straight shooting, hard charging, get it done gal. She knows when to listen, how to analyze the facts and how to make a decision, then implement the plan. She doesn't do a poll before jumping in with both feet like too many of the Washington types. She has little legislative experience because she has always held the EXECUTIVE position; in private life, as mayor of Anchorage 's largest bedroom community or more recently as Governor of our State. She is a smart, attractive home grown Alaska girl with excellent moral and family values. She can see what needs to be done and does not hesitate to get it done. One of our State's major problems is that its Capital is in Juneau, 500 miles from the nearest road and 800 air miles from the population base which is Anchorage, Wasilla and Fairbanks. Our legislature and most of the State government is in Juneau and they ALL behave like a bunch of freshmen in a college town. It has been this way since Statehood in 1959. When Sarah moved to Juneau, so did accountability and responsibility When the oil revenue started flowing and a barrel of North Slope Crude hit $23.00, these people began spending money like drunken sailors. You can only imagine what was happening when oil hit $100.00 a barrel, about the time Sarah took command. My wife Kathy has first-hand experience with this fiasco, as her father and also her ex-husband were Alaska Legislators who served in Juneau as Senators, Senate President, or members of the State House for a combined period spanning nearly three decades. About the time Sarah took the HELM as Governor of Alaska, about half of the State legislature was in the pocket of big oil companies or contractors doing big projects for Native Corporations around Alaska, all funded by State oil revenue. Alaska government was nothing but a good old boys club riding the perpetual wave of prosperity. This filtered down from the legislature, through the Department of Natural Resources, Department of Labor and even spilled in to the Public Safety who are supposed to "preserve and protect". [Remainder of letter here.] here Another entry, attributed only to an "Alaskan" named "Jackie S." (we haven't yet determined the author's true identity), cast Governor Palin as an environmentally unfriendly "redneck": As an Alaskan, I am writing to give all of you some information on Sarah Palin, Senator McCain's choice for VP. As an Alaska voter, I know more than most of you about her and, frankly, I am horrified that he picked her. The most accurate description of her is redneck. Her husband works in the oil fields of Prudhoe Bay and races snow mobiles. She is a life time member of the NRA and has worked tirelessly to allow indiscriminatehunting of wildlife in Alaska, particularly wolves and bears. She has spent millions of Alaska state dollars on aerial hunting of these predators from helicopters and airplanes, dollars that should have been spent, for example, on Alaska's failing school system. We have the lowest rate of high school graduation in the country. Not all of you may think aerial predator hunting is so bad, but how anyone (other than Alaskawolf-haters, of which there are many, most without teeth), could think this use of funds is appropriate is beyond me. If you want to know more about the aerial hunting travesty, let me know and I will send some links to informative web sites. She has been a strong supporter of increased use of fossil fuels, yet the McCain campaign has the nerve to say she has "green" policies. The only thing green about Sarah Palin is her lack of experience. She hasconsistently supported drilling in ANWR, use of coal-burning power plants (as I write this, a new coal plant is being built in her home town of Wasilla), strip mining, and almost anything else that will unnecessarilyexploit the diminishing resources of Alaska and destroy its environment. [Remainder of letter here.] here Last updated: 13 September 2008 Sources: Schultz, Susy. "Alaska Resident Writes About VP Nominee Palin." The [Illinois] Daily Journal. 4 September 2008. White, Rindi. "Palin Asked Wasilla Librarian About Censoring Books." Anchorage Daily News. 4 September 2008. The Nation. "The Word from Wasilla." 4 September 2008.

NEI

[Remainder of letter here.]Sarah is no naive 'small town mayor' she just *started out* there. BTW, as Mayor of Wasilla<, she brought this 'small town' through a lot of GOOD changes and left it at the end of her term having grown to the 4th largest CITY in Alaska a lot of growth and a stronger economic base than ever before. She has EXECTUTIVE experience *running a government* (something NONE of the other candidates can actually boast, even John McCain) as Governor of Alaska and got there by defeating the *incumbent* Republican Governor, who was definitely part of the 'old school' and who WAS very much in the pocket of the big oil companies. We in Alaska wanted change and we got it in the person of Sarah Palin! [Remainder of letter here.][Remainder of letter here.][Remainder of letter here.]

FMD_train_1210

The Minnesota Vikings have opened their stadium to provide shelter for homeless individuals.

12/19/2016

On 18 December 2016, Twitter user David Dellanave posted a message claiming that the Minnesota Vikings football team had opened up U.S. Bank Stadium to shelter the homeless on a particularly cold winter night: posted Although Dellanave is not a reporter or a spokesperson for the Minnesota Vikings, his message was picked up and reported as fact by several news outlets, including Yahoo News and CBS Sports: Yahoo News CBS Sports The Minnesota Vikings are embracing the Christmas spirit early and helping out the community on Sunday night. According to David Dellanave, U.S. Bank Stadium will be open to the local homeless population during a night with crazy cold temperatures. The Minnesota Vikings, however, did not open U.S. Bank Stadium on 18 December 2016 to shelter the homeless. Dellanave eventually deleted his original tweet and posted follow-up messages claiming that he had posted the false information as an attempt to draw attention to a social issue: Tweet deleted. Point was to highlight a social issue and waste of taxpayer money that could help people instead of make private profits 1/3 David Dellanave (@ddn) December 19, 2016 December 19, 2016 Zero interest in retweets or followers, have never cared and never will. 2/3 David Dellanave (@ddn) December 19, 2016 December 19, 2016 But most importantly if I thought for a second someone in need would take it seriously, wouldn't be worth the potential good. 3/3 David Dellanave (@ddn) December 19, 2016 December 19, 2016 I'm sorry if this obviously misguided attempt at highlighting a social issue hurt anyone. Didn't think a tweet would go so far & I regret it David Dellanave (@ddn) December 19, 2016 December 19, 2016

False

On 18 December 2016, Twitter user David Dellanave posted a message claiming that the Minnesota Vikings football team had opened up U.S. Bank Stadium to shelter the homeless on a particularly cold winter night:Although Dellanave is not a reporter or a spokesperson for the Minnesota Vikings, his message was picked up and reported as fact by several news outlets, including Yahoo News and CBS Sports: David Dellanave (@ddn) December 19, 2016 David Dellanave (@ddn) December 19, 2016 David Dellanave (@ddn) December 19, 2016 David Dellanave (@ddn) December 19, 2016

FMD_train_938

Was the United States' low unemployment rate a result of President Trump's policies reaching a historical low?

10/13/2020

During the U.S. vice presidential debate on Oct. 7, 2020, Republican candidate Mike Pence claimed he and U.S. President Donald Trump worked "from day one" in the White House to drive down American unemployment to "record" low levels evidence, he alleged, that voters should re-elect Trump on Nov. 3 to try and reshape the economy after unprecedented job losses during the COVID-19 pandemic. Oct. 7, 2020 COVID-19 pandemic The statement echoed previous comments by the president. In October 2019, the White House issued a news release suggesting the Trump administration's "pro-growth agenda" was the reason for new jobs and a declining unemployment rate, reaching a level not seen in 50 years. news release Then, on Jan. 29, 2020, roughly one week after the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) confirmed the first COVID-19 case in the U.S., Trump reiterated on Twitter: reiterated About six weeks later as the deadly virus spread nationwide, Trump doubled down on that "50 year" claim and said his administration is responsible for the "best unemployment numbers in the history of our Country." He tweeted: tweeted The claim took on another layer as the pandemic worsened: Trump alleged without evidence that his administration was responsible for helping Black Americans, specifically, get jobs. For instance, on June 2, he claimed he "has done more for the Black Community than any President since Abraham Lincoln," and that the country's unemployment figure among Black Americans was evidence of that work. claimed After that, Trump supporters went a step further by circulating the below-displayed meme online, alleging that Trump not only drove down unemployment rates for people who identify as Black or African American but also women and Hispanic workers. This was true: U.S. Unemployment Reached 50-year Low Under Trump But no evidence showed Trump was responsible for causing the dip. First, to determine the validity of the underlying claim that Trump shaped the economy so that U.S. unemployment dipped to the lowest rate ever we considered the data available. The Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) began calculating the country's unemployment rate the number of people seeking work divided by the sum of that amount and total people employed in March 1940, when demographers first launched a monthly survey of households nationwide called the "Current Population Survey." Before that, more subjective and less comprehensive data existed. So to ensure accuracy in this report, we only considered the country's unemployment figure post-1940, as compiled by BLS and the U.S. Census Bureau and to which government officials refer. Bureau of Labor Statistics According to our analysis of the labor statistics before Trump's inauguration on Jan. 20, 2017 (see below for our analysis of the jobless rate during his presidency), the country recorded the lowest unemployment rate in 1944, near the end of World War II. At that time, just 1.2% of Americans were unemployed and seeking jobs, per BLS data, which included workers over the age of 14. (Note: The survey in modern years only counted adults and teenagers over the age of 16, not 14.) The survey Next, we considered BLS unemployment data over the course of 50 years before Trump's inauguration to determine whether the country's jobless rate indeed fell to the "the lowest level in more than 50 years" under his leadership. We learned 1969's annual unemployment rate was about 3.6%, in part, because millions of men were drafted for the Vietnam War and left the American workforce, making the sum of all those seeking or maintaining employment significantly lower. In May 1969, for instance, the unemployment rate was 3.4%. After that, we obtained statistics to gauge the country's monthly unemployment rate from the beginning of Trump's term Jan. 20, 2017 to January 2020, when the U.S. COVID-19 outbreak began and businesses on a grand scale prepared to temporarily close or furloughed workers to prevent the spread of the deadly virus. (We did not consider U.S. unemployment during the outbreak since the claim was framed by the Trump campaign that he was more suited than Democratic rival Joe Biden to revive the pandemic-stricken economy.) Per the BLS' Current Population Survey, the country's unemployment rate in February 2017, which was compiled including survey responses in the weeks before and after Trump took office in January, was 4.6%. From that point, the proportion of Americans seeking work compared to the total number of people in the country's workforce slightly decreased under the Trump administration. By September 2019, the percentage reached 3.5% the lowest rate since December 1969. That meant Trump was correct in saying that unemployment dropped to the lowest point in about 50 years under his watch. However, his second tweet that that metric was the lowest in U.S. history (or since the comprehensive unemployment data existed) was false. The World War II-era 1.2% unemployment rate was lower. Trump was correct According to BBC economists' analysis of the recent employment figure, the change was a result of 490,000 Americans leaving the workforce. Jerome Powell, whom President Barack Obama appointed to the Federal Reserve System's board of governors and Trump promoted to the agency's chairman in 2018, told CBS News at the time that "an unusually large number of people in their prime working years" were not seeking employment or maintaining jobs for a variety of reasons, such as the U.S. opioid crisis, and that the U.S. workforce participation rate was lower than almost every other advanced country. BBC economists' analysis Federal Reserve System's board of governors CBS News We also obtained data showing the country's unemployment rate by race and gender to determine the accuracy of the above-displayed meme that alleged the percentage of unemployed female workers, as well as people who identify as Black, African Americans or Hispanic, was higher in 2009 than in 2019, among other things. According to the monthly data, these facts were true at face value: were true technically ended But that statistical snapshot is missing necessary context to consider the claim that Trump's fiscal and regulatory policies led to millions of workers finding jobs accurate: In February 2009, roughly one month after Obama was sworn into office, he signed a $787 billion stimulus package to save jobs and reverse the economic downturn. The increased public spending on everything from roads to science programs to unemployment benefits, as well as other market trends, created new jobs on a mass scale. And, in turn, labor statistics showed a steady increase in job growth and a gradual decrease in the country's jobless rate over the course of a decade until the pandemic hit. Looking at the graph above, we determined no significant disruptions or changes in the country's unemployment rate when Trump took office the steady decrease is essentially indistinguishable from the Obama years after the recession. "At best, you would say it's been a continuation of a steady trend," economist Austan Goolsbee told MSNBC. told MSNBC In other words, it was false to claim that Trump moved into the White House and jumpstarted a failing economy. Rather, conditions were improving for American workers years before voters elected the real estate billionaire as president. NBC News reported in August 2020: NBC News The president rightly takes credit for having low unemployment during his presidency. In December of 2019, the unemployment rate was a scant 3.5 percent, the lowest it had been in 50 years. However, as good as that number was, when Trump took office the rate was already at 4.7 percent. That figure is quite low by historical standards (lower than all of the 1980s as well as most of the 1990s and 2000s). In December of 2017, it was the lowest the number had been since the Great Recession. In fact, Obama saw a much steeper drop in unemployment in his second term, a 3.3 drop in the rate, than Trump did in his first three years, a decline of 1.2 points. Thats not to besmirch the remarkably low unemployment under Trump, but its hard to ignore that the unemployment track under Obama had been downward. Again, the numbers look like the continuation of a trend, not something new. Another analysis of labor statistics by NPR came to the same conclusion: that job growth remained consistent since the end of the recession in 2010 and 2018, while the unemployment rate steadily decreased. NPR reported: labor statistics by NPR So while the White House can certainly point to some yardsticks that indicate a meaningful turnaround on Trump's watch including small business sentiment, business investment and goods-producing job growth broader measures of the overall job market and wages show the economy continues to follow the steady, upward glide path that began under Obama. In sum, considering no evidence showed policies enacted by the Trump administration drove down the country's unemployment rate but rather the roughly 50-year low in fall 2019 was essentially a continuation from the Great Recession's recovery, per economists' analysis of BLS data we rate this claim "false." per economists BBC News. "US Jobless Rate At Lowest Since 1969." 3 May 2019. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. "BLS Data Viewer." Accessed 13 October 2020. Wingfield, Brian. "The End of the Great Recession? Hardly." Forbes. 20 September 2010. Jones, Chuck. "Trump's Economic Scorecard: 3 Years In Office." Forbes. 10 February 2020. Horsley, Scott. "FACT CHECK: Who Gets Credit For The Booming U.S. Economy." NPR. 12 September 2018. Ruhle, Stephanie. "Which President Gets The Credit For The Booming Economy?" MSNBC. 10 September 2018.

False

During the U.S. vice presidential debate on Oct. 7, 2020, Republican candidate Mike Pence claimed he and U.S. President Donald Trump worked "from day one" in the White House to drive down American unemployment to "record" low levels evidence, he alleged, that voters should re-elect Trump on Nov. 3 to try and reshape the economy after unprecedented job losses during the COVID-19 pandemic.The statement echoed previous comments by the president. In October 2019, the White House issued a news release suggesting the Trump administration's "pro-growth agenda" was the reason for new jobs and a declining unemployment rate, reaching a level not seen in 50 years.Then, on Jan. 29, 2020, roughly one week after the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) confirmed the first COVID-19 case in the U.S., Trump reiterated on Twitter:About six weeks later as the deadly virus spread nationwide, Trump doubled down on that "50 year" claim and said his administration is responsible for the "best unemployment numbers in the history of our Country." He tweeted:The claim took on another layer as the pandemic worsened: Trump alleged without evidence that his administration was responsible for helping Black Americans, specifically, get jobs. For instance, on June 2, he claimed he "has done more for the Black Community than any President since Abraham Lincoln," and that the country's unemployment figure among Black Americans was evidence of that work.The Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) began calculating the country's unemployment rate the number of people seeking work divided by the sum of that amount and total people employed in March 1940, when demographers first launched a monthly survey of households nationwide called the "Current Population Survey." Before that, more subjective and less comprehensive data existed. So to ensure accuracy in this report, we only considered the country's unemployment figure post-1940, as compiled by BLS and the U.S. Census Bureau and to which government officials refer.According to our analysis of the labor statistics before Trump's inauguration on Jan. 20, 2017 (see below for our analysis of the jobless rate during his presidency), the country recorded the lowest unemployment rate in 1944, near the end of World War II. At that time, just 1.2% of Americans were unemployed and seeking jobs, per BLS data, which included workers over the age of 14. (Note: The survey in modern years only counted adults and teenagers over the age of 16, not 14.)After that, we obtained statistics to gauge the country's monthly unemployment rate from the beginning of Trump's term Jan. 20, 2017 to January 2020, when the U.S. COVID-19 outbreak began and businesses on a grand scale prepared to temporarily close or furloughed workers to prevent the spread of the deadly virus. (We did not consider U.S. unemployment during the outbreak since the claim was framed by the Trump campaign that he was more suited than Democratic rival Joe Biden to revive the pandemic-stricken economy.)That meant Trump was correct in saying that unemployment dropped to the lowest point in about 50 years under his watch. However, his second tweet that that metric was the lowest in U.S. history (or since the comprehensive unemployment data existed) was false. The World War II-era 1.2% unemployment rate was lower.According to BBC economists' analysis of the recent employment figure, the change was a result of 490,000 Americans leaving the workforce. Jerome Powell, whom President Barack Obama appointed to the Federal Reserve System's board of governors and Trump promoted to the agency's chairman in 2018, told CBS News at the time that "an unusually large number of people in their prime working years" were not seeking employment or maintaining jobs for a variety of reasons, such as the U.S. opioid crisis, and that the U.S. workforce participation rate was lower than almost every other advanced country.We also obtained data showing the country's unemployment rate by race and gender to determine the accuracy of the above-displayed meme that alleged the percentage of unemployed female workers, as well as people who identify as Black, African Americans or Hispanic, was higher in 2009 than in 2019, among other things. According to the monthly data, these facts were true at face value:Looking at the graph above, we determined no significant disruptions or changes in the country's unemployment rate when Trump took office the steady decrease is essentially indistinguishable from the Obama years after the recession. "At best, you would say it's been a continuation of a steady trend," economist Austan Goolsbee told MSNBC.In other words, it was false to claim that Trump moved into the White House and jumpstarted a failing economy. Rather, conditions were improving for American workers years before voters elected the real estate billionaire as president. NBC News reported in August 2020:Another analysis of labor statistics by NPR came to the same conclusion: that job growth remained consistent since the end of the recession in 2010 and 2018, while the unemployment rate steadily decreased. NPR reported:In sum, considering no evidence showed policies enacted by the Trump administration drove down the country's unemployment rate but rather the roughly 50-year low in fall 2019 was essentially a continuation from the Great Recession's recovery, per economists' analysis of BLS data we rate this claim "false."

FMD_train_1347

Did the Trump Campaign Have To Issue Refunds for Recurring Donations?

04/07/2021

In early April 2021, Snopes readers asked about social media posts and memes that claimed that former U.S. President Donald Trump "tricked" them into making recurring campaign donations. For instance, one such meme said contributors to the campaign who though they were making a one-time donation "were unaware the fine print stated they would be billed the same amount every single week until election day." Donald Trump In many cases, these claims are rather exaggerated, mean-spirited takes on a New York Times story, as we will explain below. As we previously reported, it's true that the Trump campaign was soliciting recurring donations with a pre-checked box, even after the Nov. 3, 2020, presidential election. It's also true that many Trump supporters demanded refunds from the Trump campaign, although it seems mathematically impossible that the number of people who requested refunds was in the millions (as was claimed in social media posts). New York Times story previously reported The April 3 Times report details the experience of Trump donor Stacy Blatt, a retiree who was in hospice care, suffering from cancer, when he discovered his bank account depleted from those recurring donations. Stacy Blatt was in hospice care last September listening to Rush Limbaughs dire warnings about how badly Donald J. Trumps campaign needed money when he went online and chipped in everything he could: $500. It was a big sum for a 63-year-old battling cancer and living in Kansas City on less than $1,000 per month. But that single contribution federal records show it was his first ever quickly multiplied. Another $500 was withdrawn the next day, then $500 the next week and every week through mid-October, without his knowledge until Mr. Blatts bank account had been depleted and frozen. When his utility and rent payments bounced, he called his brother, Russell, for help. What the Blatts soon discovered was $3,000 in withdrawals by the Trump campaign in less than 30 days. They called their bank and said they thought they were victims of fraud. Contrary to the takes offered in partisan memes and posts, Blatt and others like him were not "low IQ," but instead, fell victim to the complicated and evolving wording in a pre-checked box on Trump's online donation portal, according to the Times. As a result, the Times reported, the Trump campaign and WinRed, a for-profit company that processed the online donations, were forced to issue $122 million in campaign contribution refunds to people like Blatt. pre-checked box As Election Day neared in November 2020, the Times report described what amounted to a sense of panic that cropped up inside the Trump campaign, as Democrats out-raised and spent them. During that time, the text on the online donation portal for Trump's donation website changed from simply asking donors to make donations a monthly gift, to including a pre-checked box with more complicated text that made donations weekly. asking donors As the election drew closer, text in that bright yellow box went from containing a pre-checked field that in March 2020 simply said, "Make this a monthly recurring donation," to more complicated and emphatic demands by late 2020 that contained fake ultimatums. As of Sept. 30, 2020, the box looked like this: looked like this As the pre-checked box evolved, the result was an increase in refunds issued to donors who had missed the finer print in the box that allowed the refunds to be weekly recurring. The refunds issued by the Trump campaign outpaced and dwarfed the $21 million in refunds issued by his political rival, now-U.S. President Joe Biden. The effect can be seen in a graph posted by Shane Goldmacher, the Times report's author: The evolution of the text in the box on Trump's online donation portal can be viewed by clicking on various dates via the Internet Archive. Internet Archive A search for Blatt's name can be found on OpenSecrets.org, a campaign finance transparency tool run by the nonpartisan organization Center for Responsive Politics, which tracks money in politics. It confirms the Times reporting that Blatt, who listed himself as retired, was billed $500 multiple times by the Trump campaign between mid-September and October 11, 2020. Sadly, Blatt died of cancer in February 2021, according to the Times. found on OpenSecrets.org We sent emails to WinRed and the Trump campaign seeking comment, but didn't get an answer in time for publication. We will update if we do. But we note that in their public statements responding to the Times story that neither Trump nor WinRed refute the financial figures or facts laid out by the Times. Instead, the stance taken by both WinRed and Trump is that the Times' report was unfairly negative about their approach to fundraising. In a series of tweets, WinRed called the Times report a "hit piece" and said WinRed's practices were comparable to that of ActBlue, the fundraising portal that serves Democratic candidates. "So when Republicans do it to stay competitive, its nefarious, and when Dems - who created the technology - do it, its a 'platform for little experiments that gently squeeze even more money out of donors,'" WinRed tweeted. called tweeted In a statement responding to the report, Trump referenced his pre- and post-election disinformation campaign, namely false claims that the 2020 election was beset by a massive-scale voter fraud conspiracy. Like WinRed, Trump said his own fundraising efforts were based on those of ActBlue, and also like WinRed, he claimed that the percentage of donors who formally disputed the charges with their financial institutions was low: statement We learned from liberal ActBlue and now were better than they are! In fact, many people were so enthusiastic that they gave over and over, and in certain cases where they would give too much, we would promptly refund their contributions. Our overall dispute rate was less than 1% of total online donations, a very low number. This is done by Dems also The Times story reported that WinRed "typically granted [refunds] to avoid more costly formal disputes." It also pointed out that while WinRed is a for-profit company, ActBlue is a non-profit organization. As such, WinRed "makes its money by taking 30 cents of every donation, plus 3.8 percent of the amount given. WinRed was paid more than $118 million from federal committees the last election cycle; even after paying credit card fees and expenses like payroll and rent, the profits are believed to be significant." We reached out to ActBlue for a response to WinRed and Trump's comments. A spokesperson told us by email that the average contribution amount across the platform in 2019-2020 was $38.08. The spokesperson also referred to this portion of the Times report that included a statement by ActBlue: was $38.08 ActBlue said in a statement that it had begun to phase out prechecked recurring boxes unless groups were explicitly asking for recurring contributions. Some prominent Democratic groups, including both congressional campaign committees, continue to precheck recurring boxes regardless of that guidance. Still, Democratic refund rates were only a small fraction of the Trump campaigns last year. On April 7, 2021, Timothy Miller, a writer for the political news site The Bulwark, tweeted that he received a fundraising text from the National Republican Congressional Committee with a similar, pre-checked fundraising box: Despite aggressive efforts to pursue claims of widespread voter fraud, no evidence was ever presented by the Trump camp that widespread fraud occurred in the 2020 election. Biden won by 7 million votes and 74 electoral college points. widespread voter fraud won

True

In early April 2021, Snopes readers asked about social media posts and memes that claimed that former U.S. President Donald Trump "tricked" them into making recurring campaign donations. For instance, one such meme said contributors to the campaign who though they were making a one-time donation "were unaware the fine print stated they would be billed the same amount every single week until election day."In many cases, these claims are rather exaggerated, mean-spirited takes on a New York Times story, as we will explain below. As we previously reported, it's true that the Trump campaign was soliciting recurring donations with a pre-checked box, even after the Nov. 3, 2020, presidential election. It's also true that many Trump supporters demanded refunds from the Trump campaign, although it seems mathematically impossible that the number of people who requested refunds was in the millions (as was claimed in social media posts).Contrary to the takes offered in partisan memes and posts, Blatt and others like him were not "low IQ," but instead, fell victim to the complicated and evolving wording in a pre-checked box on Trump's online donation portal, according to the Times. As a result, the Times reported, the Trump campaign and WinRed, a for-profit company that processed the online donations, were forced to issue $122 million in campaign contribution refunds to people like Blatt.As Election Day neared in November 2020, the Times report described what amounted to a sense of panic that cropped up inside the Trump campaign, as Democrats out-raised and spent them. During that time, the text on the online donation portal for Trump's donation website changed from simply asking donors to make donations a monthly gift, to including a pre-checked box with more complicated text that made donations weekly.As the election drew closer, text in that bright yellow box went from containing a pre-checked field that in March 2020 simply said, "Make this a monthly recurring donation," to more complicated and emphatic demands by late 2020 that contained fake ultimatums. As of Sept. 30, 2020, the box looked like this:The evolution of the text in the box on Trump's online donation portal can be viewed by clicking on various dates via the Internet Archive.A search for Blatt's name can be found on OpenSecrets.org, a campaign finance transparency tool run by the nonpartisan organization Center for Responsive Politics, which tracks money in politics. It confirms the Times reporting that Blatt, who listed himself as retired, was billed $500 multiple times by the Trump campaign between mid-September and October 11, 2020. Sadly, Blatt died of cancer in February 2021, according to the Times.In a series of tweets, WinRed called the Times report a "hit piece" and said WinRed's practices were comparable to that of ActBlue, the fundraising portal that serves Democratic candidates. "So when Republicans do it to stay competitive, its nefarious, and when Dems - who created the technology - do it, its a 'platform for little experiments that gently squeeze even more money out of donors,'" WinRed tweeted.In a statement responding to the report, Trump referenced his pre- and post-election disinformation campaign, namely false claims that the 2020 election was beset by a massive-scale voter fraud conspiracy. Like WinRed, Trump said his own fundraising efforts were based on those of ActBlue, and also like WinRed, he claimed that the percentage of donors who formally disputed the charges with their financial institutions was low:We reached out to ActBlue for a response to WinRed and Trump's comments. A spokesperson told us by email that the average contribution amount across the platform in 2019-2020 was $38.08. The spokesperson also referred to this portion of the Times report that included a statement by ActBlue:Despite aggressive efforts to pursue claims of widespread voter fraud, no evidence was ever presented by the Trump camp that widespread fraud occurred in the 2020 election. Biden won by 7 million votes and 74 electoral college points.

FMD_train_983

American Flag House

05/20/2013

Claim: Photograph shows a house painted in protest by its owner after he was barred from displaying a U.S. flag in his yard. REAL PHOTOGRAPH; INACCURATE DESCRIPTION Example: [Collected via Facebook, May 2013] I have received an email that stated a man was told by his homeowner's association that he could not fly his flag. It showed what he'did about it', and the house was beautifully painted like an American flag: This guy was told by his Homeowners Association that he couldn't fly the American flag in his yard ... Origins: Recent years have seen a number of "viral" news stories about homeowners (often military personnel or veterans) who have run afoul of local ordinances or homeowners association (HOA) rules that prevented them from displaying U.S. flags on their property, such as the 2009 case of Van T. Barfoot and the 2013 case of Brandon Weir. Usually such problems arise not because of a general prohibition on the flying of U.S. flags, but because some facet of a particular flag's display violates an existing rule: the flag is too large, the flagpole from which it is flown is too high, or the flag is attached to a portion of a home (such as a balcony or stairway) which is required to be kept free from adornment. Van T. Barfoot Brandon Weir In May 2013 a photograph (displayed above) of a home with its exterior painted in the pattern of an American flag (white stars amidst a blue field adjacent to red and white horizontal striping) was circulated on the Internet, with accompanying text identifying the paint scheme as one the homeowner resorted to after being told by his HOA "that he couldn't fly the American flag in his yard." Although the picture is real and the unusual paint job it depicts was something undertaken as a form of protest, the true backstory had nothing to do with a homeowner's being barred from displaying a U.S. flag in his yard. The American flag house pictured above is located in Cambridge, Maryland, and its owner, Branden Spear, gave it that distinctive paint job after being angered that his restored Victorian property was declared by building inspectors to be non-compliant with historical code: Cambridge Homeowners who choose to paint their houses with non-traditional colors risk running afoul of their neighbors and local politicians, but owner and contractor Branden Spear never set out to paint his restored Victorian properties with colors that were out of the norm. But when local building inspectors told him that the windows he chose to restore the home weren't up to historical code, he got angry. "It would have cost one-third of the restoration budget just to install those windows," says Spear. Then he realized the building code said nothing about what colors the old Victorians should be painted. So as a show of his anger, and as a protest against what he says are unfair regulations, he painted one home all black, and the adjacent home with an American flag theme. They've become something of a tourist attraction since, and even though Spear is still at odds with local government officials, he has proven one point that paint and color can also be used as protest. In June 2014, Florida news outlets reported a case of a resident of Bradenton who had also painted his house in the style of a U.S. flag as a protest over the city's code compliance enforcement: A prestigious road in Bradenton is now home to a very patriotic house. Brent Greer, who lives on Riverview Boulevard, recently painted the outside of his house red, white and blue. Greer said he decided to turn his home into the American flag to send a message. Greer grew up in the 100-year-old home and now lives there with his wife and seven adopted children. He said they changed the color of their house after getting into a dispute with the city's code enforcement. A few months ago, code enforcement officers said they went to the home acting on an anonymous tip. "Late February, we received a complaint about a dead Christmas tree on the balcony," said Volker Reiss, Community Services and Code Compliance Manager for City of Bradenton. Reiss said his officers asked the family to remove it and they complied. Greer said to his surprise, they were told about more violations. The city sent Greer a two page letter, listing several violations at the home. Some of the issues were about missing window screens, painting, pressure washing, loose railings, and trash on the property. Greer said while everything was upsetting, one complaint made him furious. He said he was told his home's exterior painting was not up to city standards. The Greers do not live in a deed-restricted community. He said he feels like he's being treated as if he does. Last updated: 5 June 2014 Smith, Summer. "Manatee Man Paints American Flag on Home During Dispute with City." Bay News 9. 4 June 2014.

False

prevented them from displaying U.S. flags on their property, such as the 2009 case of Van T. Barfoot and the 2013 case of Brandon Weir. Usually such problems arise not because of a general prohibition on the flying of U.S. flags, but because some facet of a particular flag's display violates an existing rule: the flag is too large, the flagpole from which it is flown is too high, or the flag is attached to a portion of a home (such as a balcony or stairway) which is required to be kept free from adornment.The American flag house pictured above is located in Cambridge, Maryland, and its owner, Branden Spear, gave it that distinctive paint job after being angered that his restored Victorian property was declared by building inspectors to be non-compliant with historical code:

FMD_train_985

Southwest Airlines Las Vegas Ticket Giveaway Fraudulent Scheme

02/06/2016

Scammers and malware purveyors are always looking for ways to entice online users into following web links that will lead those victims into the traps set for them, and offers of free airline tickets are prime bait in that pursuit of prey. Airline tickets are something nearly everyone uses and have considerable value, but their non-material nature and the fact that they're not tremendously expensive (compared to, say, a new car) makes it seem plausible to the public that they're something a business might actually be giving away for free as part of an advertising promotion. The name of Southwest Airlines, a major U.S. airline which is also the world's largest low-cost carrier, has frequently been invoked in various online "free ticket" giveaway scams in recent years. In February 2016, social media users encountered posts that appeared to be from Southwest Airlines, offering to give away four tickets to Las Vegas and $5,000 spending money to Facebook users who shared and liked a page. The primary type of free ticket fraud is the "sweepstakes scam," which intended to lure victims into completing numerous surveys, disclosing a good deal of personal information, and then agreeing to sign up for costly, difficult-to-cancel "Reward Offers" hidden in the fine print. The scammers spread links via e-mail and Facebook that purport to offer free air travel tickets to those who follow those links. These web pages (which are not operated or sponsored by Southwest Airlines) typically ask the unwary to click what appear to be Facebook "share" buttons and post comments to the scammer's site (which is really a ruse to dupe users into spreading the scam by sharing it with all of their Facebook friends). Those who follow such instructions are then led into a set of pages prompting them to input a fair amount of personal information (including name, age, address, and phone numbers), complete a lengthy series of surveys, and finally sign up (and commit to paying) for at least two "Reward Offers" (e.g., Netflix subscriptions, credit report monitoring services, prepaid credit cards): Pursuant to the Terms & Conditions, you are required to complete 2 of the Reward Offers from the above. You will need to meet all of the terms and conditions to qualify for the shipment of the reward. For credit card offers, you must activate your card by making a purchase, transferring a balance, or making a cash advance. For loan offers you must close and fund the loan. For home security and satellite tv offers you must have the product installed. You may not cancel your participation in more than a total of 2 Reward Offers within 30 days of any Reward Offer Sign-Up Date as outlined in the Terms & Conditions (the Cancellation Limit). Not only that, but the fine print on the "free" tickets offers typically states that by accepting its terms, the user agrees to receive telemarketing phone calls and text messages from a variety of different companies: Similar phony free ticket lures are used to spread malware. In those versions of the scam, those who attempt to reach the URL provided for the purpose of claiming the free tickets are instead victimized by a Facebook "lifejacking" attack, a malicious script that takes over a user's Facebook profile without their knowledge and propagates itself to their friends' accounts as well. lifejacking Southwest Airlines has responded to such scams by issuing messages on Twitter that read: "Hey folks! There is a scam being passed around on Facebook about a free ticket offer from SWA. Please don't click or share the links!" As well, Southwest spokesperson Christi McNeill has said of these attempts to defraud that "We are aware of the scam for free tickets being spread across Facebook. This offer is in no way affiliated with Southwest Airlines and we are working with Facebook to get it removed."

False

Similar phony free ticket lures are used to spread malware. In those versions of the scam, those who attempt to reach the URL provided for the purpose of claiming the free tickets are instead victimized by a Facebook "lifejacking" attack, a malicious script that takes over a user's Facebook profile without their knowledge and propagates itself to their friends' accounts as well.

FMD_train_181

Estee Lauder Boycott

05/30/2002

Claim: American Muslims for Jerusalem have called for a boycott of Estee Lauder products. Example: [Collected on the Internet, 2002] Estee Lauder Corporation (which is also is the parent company of Prescriptives, Mac, Bobbie Brown, La Mer, Jo Malone, Origins, Aramis, Aveda and Bumble and Bumble) is being boycotted by a loud and ambitious campaign of the world's Arab and Muslim community due to Ron Lauder's (Estee Lauder's President) support for Israel. Mr. Lauder has been extremely courageous and public in his support for the Jewish State and has taken real personal and financial risks to inform the world of the war that the Palestinian Authority has declared on Israel and Jews worldwide. To combat this boycott I suggest that we all go out and buy as much Estee Lauder and Clinique products as possible. Make the Estee Lauder and Clinique counters your gift of choice. Switch brands at least for a while. It is said that beauty has many discomforts. So does supporting those who speak for us. Am Yisrael Chai! PLEASE FORWARD THIS TO EVERYONE YOU KNOW! LET'S SHOW THE ARABS THAT PEOPLE ALL OVER THE WORLD WILL STAND TOGETHER. Ronnie Lauder is married to Jo Carol Knopf Lauder born and raised in Wilmington, Delaware. Her parents were humble Holocaust survivors! He also works undauntingly for the re-establishment of the Hungarian Jewish community. A good man! PLEASE PASS THIS MESSAGE! Origins: In February 2001, the American Muslims for Jerusalem, a political group in Washington, called for a worldwide Arab boycott of Estee Lauder products. The group was acting in protest against Ronald Lauder, chairman of Estee Lauder International and Clinique Laboratories, because of his "activities in support of Israeli right-wing extremists." A spokesman for the group said Muslims and Arabs had long been offended by Mr. Lauder's pro-Israeli views, but had not decided to call for a boycott until Mr. Lauder appeared at the "One Jerusalem" rally of religious and nationalist Israelis in January of that year. The call for an Arab and Muslim boycott of Estee Lauder almost immediately inspired an appeal to Jews and those of pro-Israeli sentiment to support the company by buying its products. This call to arms was circulated in many forms, including via the Internet. (No mention of the Arab/Muslim boycott, the anti-boycott, or Ron Lauder's actions appears on either the Estee Lauder or the American Muslims for Jerusalem web sites, though.) Ron Lauder has been a vocal supporter of Israel and Israeli causes for many years. In 1999 he attempted to broker a peace pact between Israel and Syria by acting as a go-between for Syrian President Hafez Assad and then-Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. The deal failed because the two parties could not reach agreement on the disposition of the Golan Heights. Whether any boycott or a show of support would have an appreciable impact on Estee Lauder's bottom line is debatable when a multinational coporation with sales in the billions of dollars is involved, only the sustained, concerted actions of millions of consumers can make the needle so much as twitch. For the fiscal year ended 30 June 2001, Estee Lauder had net sales of $4.62 billion, which was an 8% increase on the preceding year's $4.37 billion. For the first three quarters of the fiscal year that will end on 30 June 2002, net sales are $3.57 billion, which is the nearly the same sales figure as the equivalent period last year. More simply, if there's a boycott or counter-boycott going on, the income statement isn't demonstrating any impact from it. Barbara "estee of execution" Mikkelson Additional Information: Estee Lauder Corporation Last updated: 1 October 2007 Sources: Barron, James. "Boldface Names." The New York Times. 28 February 2001 (p. B2). Dan, Uri and Niles Lathem. "Lauder Was a Go-Between for Israel, Syria." The New York Post . 6 October 1999 (p. 18). DeNitto, Emily. "New York, New York." Crain's New York Business. 13 August 2001 (p. 6). The New York Post. "Unkindest Cut for CNN Legend." 5 March 2001 (p. 8).

True

Additional Information: Estee Lauder Corporation

FMD_train_427

Is It True That Every Vote Used To Be Counted on Election Night?

11/08/2022

On Nov. 1, 2022, the @catturd2 Twitter account, described by The Daily Beast as a "MAGA troll account," tweeted to its nearly 1 million followers, "Funny how we could easily count every vote in every state on election night until a few years ago." Similarly, Arizona Republican Rep. Paul Gosar claimed, hours before Election Day, that "one day is all it took until very recently" to "count all legal votes in an election." However, this assertion about past U.S. elections is false. On Nov. 7, The Associated Press reported that "no state releases complete and final results on election night" and that they haven't done so in modern history, according to experts. The tweet appeared to be pushing the notion that it now takes much longer to count the votes on and after Election Day to bolster the broader (and false) conspiracy theory alleging there has been widespread voter fraud in U.S. elections in recent years. The implication appears to be that the "delay" is caused by some sort of tampering on a massive scale in the days after an election. But researchers have never found any credible evidence of large-scale voting fraud in American elections. We're going to dive into reporting on past elections and show examples of how it wasn't true that every vote was counted by election night. Bear in mind that there are multiple examples like the following from each election year and that the certified, or final, vote count always occurs later. For the purpose of keeping this story brief, we have documented only a few examples from each past election year. Also, we want to note off the top that some states begin counting mail-in and absentee ballots early, whereas others wait to start tabulating votes until Election Day. Readers can find data on these states and their vote-counting procedures on the website for the National Conference of State Legislatures. On Nov. 1, 2020, The Arizona Republic newspaper reported of that year's U.S. presidential election, "Actual vote counts take weeks to tabulate." The reporting also noted that, "It's possible we won't know the winners of major races for more than a week." According to newspaper archives on Newspapers.com, votes were still being counted after Election Day in California, Delaware, and Florida, to name just the first three examples we found. On Nov. 6, 2018, KQED.org reported of Election Day, "For close races—for example, some of the hotly contested congressional contests—the final results may not be known for days, or possibly even weeks." The story added, "What will be needed tonight is generally in short supply these days: patience." We were able to quickly find newspaper articles published after election night that said votes for the midterms were still in the process of being counted in New Jersey, Florida, and California, and again, those were simply the first three examples we encountered in search results. On Nov. 7, 2016, Utah's Deseret News newspaper published a story with the headline, "Here's why precinct results don't tell the whole story on election night." The reporting said, "Don't be shocked if you don't know whether or not your county voted for a certain candidate. The majority of Utah's votes are now mail-in votes, which delay the count." After Election Day, votes were still being counted days later in Pennsylvania, Ohio, Arizona, and other states. On Nov. 5, 2014, the Burlington Free Press newspaper reported that Vermont's Democratic and Republican gubernatorial candidates in the 2014 election had chosen to wait until the morning after election night to make statements, so that all votes would have a chance to be counted. Further, we quickly found examples that showed votes were still being counted after Election Day in Illinois, California, Alaska, Virginia, Louisiana, and other states. On Oct. 30, 2012, the Honolulu Star-Advertiser newspaper reported via USA Today that U.S. President Barack Obama and Republican rival Mitt Romney were "prepared to take their presidential campaign to the courts" in the case that "election night doesn't produce a clear winner." Election Day was on Nov. 6 in 2012. The story documented how some states might take days to count all of the votes. "In Ohio, for example, provisional and absentee ballots can be counted as late as Nov. 16," the reporting said. After Election Day, multiple newspapers reported that Florida, Montana, and Maryland were still counting votes, and once again, those were just the first three examples we found when performing a quick and simple online search. In 2010, The New York Times reported that ballots in the state of Washington were still being counted as of Nov. 3, the day after the election. Similarly, the Naples Daily News published that votes were still being counted in Florida after Election Day. More examples were easily located on Newspapers.com, such as votes still being counted after Election Day in Minnesota, Illinois, and California, just to name a few. In 2008, a presidential election year, Election Day was on Nov. 4. On the next day, The Guardian, Politico, and many others reported that ballots were still being counted in some states. We quickly found newspaper articles that were published after the election that said it took days or even more than a week to count all of the votes in Massachusetts, Georgia, and Oregon, for example. On Nov. 9, 2006, two days after the 2006 election, the Billings Gazette newspaper reported that votes were still being counted in Montana. We also found that votes were still being counted in North Carolina as of Nov. 12, according to the Charlotte Observer. On Nov. 3, 2004, the Santa Fe New Mexican newspaper reported that votes were still being counted in a number of states for the U.S. presidential election. The same was also the case in Iowa, the Miami Herald published. These were just the first two examples we found. Election Day was on Nov. 2. In the 2002 election, The Monitor newspaper in McAllen, Texas, reported that votes were still being counted two days after Election Day. The same was the case days later in California, North Carolina, and Arizona, just to name a few examples we found. In the 2000 election, the winner of the presidential contest was not known for more than one month. As PBS.org reported, "A few hundred votes separated Republican George W. Bush and Democrat Al Gore in Florida," which led to a recount and the famous term, "hanging chads." The story from PBS, which was originally published by The Associated Press, also noted that Election Day ended without a clear winner in the presidential contests of 1876, 1824, and 1800. The data in this story goes back more than two decades, with PBS and AP adding context for elections from the 19th century. With all of this information in mind, it seems clear that some people could use a subscription to Newspapers.com.

False

On Nov. 7, The Associated Press reported that "no state releases complete and final results on election night" and that they haven't done so in modern history, according to experts.The tweet appeared to be pushing the notion that it now takes much longer to count the votes on and after Election Day to bolster the broader (and false) conspiracy theory, pushed by former U.S. President Donald Trump and others, alleging there has been widespread voter fraud in U.S. elections in recent years. The implication appears to be that the "delay" is caused by some sort of tampering on a massive scale in the days after an election. But researchers have never found any credible evidence of large-scale voting fraud in American elections.Also, we want to note off the top that some states begin counting mail-in and absentee ballots early, whereas others wait to start tabulating votes until Election Day. Readers can find data on these states and their vote-counting procedures on thewebsitefor the National Conference of State Legislatures.On Nov. 1, 2020, The Arizona Republic newspaperreported of that year's U.S. presidential election, "Actual vote counts take weeks to tabulate." The reporting also noted that, "It's possible we won't know the winners of major races for more than a week."According to newspaper archives on Newspapers.com, votes were still being counted after Election Day in California,Delaware, andFlorida, to name just the first three examples we found.On Nov. 6, 2018, KQED.org reported of Election Day, "For close races for example, some of the hotly contested congressional contests the final results may not be known for days, or possibly even weeks." The story added, "What will be needed tonight is generally in short supply these days: patience."We were able to quickly find newspaper articles published after election night that said votes for the midterms were still in the process of being counted inNew Jersey, Florida, andCalifornia, and again, those were simply the first three examples we encountered in search results.On Nov. 7, 2016, Utah's Deseret News newspaperpublished a story with the headline, "Here's why precinct results don't tell the whole story on election night." The reporting said, "Don't be shocked if you don't know whether or not your county voted for a certain candidate. The majority of Utah's votes are now mail-in votes, which delay the count."After Election Day, votes were still being counted days later in Pennsylvania, Ohio, Arizona, and other states.On Nov. 5, 2014, the Burlington Free Press newspaperreported that Vermont's Democratic and Republican gubernatorial candidates in the 2014 election had chosen to wait until the morning after election night to make statements, so that all votes would have a chance to be counted.Further, we quickly found examples that showed votes were still being counted after Election Day in Illinois, California, Alaska, Virginia, Louisiana, and other states.On Oct. 30, 2012, the Honolulu Star-Advertiser newspaperreported via USA Today that U.S. President Barack Obama and Republican rival Mitt Romney were "prepared to take their presidential campaign to the courts," in the case that "election night doesn't produce a clear winner." Election Day was on Nov. 6 in 2012. The story documented how some states might take days to count all of the votes."In Ohio, for example, provisional and absentee ballots can be counted as late as Nov. 16," the reporting said.After Election Day, multiple newspapers reported thatFlorida, Montana, and Marylandwere still counting votes, and once again, those were just the first three examples we found when performing a quick and simple online search.In 2010, The New York Times reported that ballots in the state of Washington were still being counted as of Nov. 3, the day after the election. Similarly, the Naples Daily News published that votes were still being counted in Florida after Election Day. More examples were easily located on Newspapers.com, such as votes still being counted after Election Day in Minnesota, Illinois, and California, just to name a few.In 2008, a presidential election year, Election Day was on Nov. 4. On the next day, The Guardian, Politico, and many others reported that ballots were still being counted in some states. We quickly found newspaper articles that were published after the election that said it took days or even more than a week to count all of the votes in Massachusetts, Georgia, and Oregon, for example.On Nov. 9, 2006, two days after the 2006 election, the Billings Gazette newspaperreported that votes were still being counted in Montana. We also found that votes were still being counted in North Carolina as of Nov. 12, according to the Charlotte Observer.On Nov. 3, 2004, the Santa Fe New Mexican newspaper reported that votes were still being counted in a number of states for the U.S. presidential election. The same was also the case in Iowa, the Miami Herald published. These were just the two first examples we found. Election Day was on Nov. 2.In the 2002 election,the The Monitor newspaper in McAllen, Texas, reported that votes were still being counted two days after Election Day. The same was the case days later in California, North Carolina, and Arizona, just to name a few examples we found.In the 2000 election, the winner of the presidential contest was not known for more than one month. As PBS.org reported,"Afew hundred votes separated Republican George W. Bush and Democrat Al Gore in Florida," which led to a recount and the famous term, "hanging chads."The data in this story goes back more than two decades, with PBS and AP adding context for elections from the 19th century. With all of this information in mind, it seems clear that some people could use a subscription to Newspapers.com.

FMD_train_44

Did President Trump submit his re-election papers early in order to prevent nonprofits from engaging in political speech?

02/01/2017

On 29 January 2017, a community member at Daily Kos posted a string of tweets from "The Resisterhood" account, which claimed that because President Donald Trump had filed early for re-election, nonprofit organizations cannot oppose him without risking their nonprofit status. The story, which was widely shared, was created in a section of the site that allows Daily Kos community members to create their own posts. Under the Internal Revenue Code, all section 501(c)(3) organizations are absolutely prohibited from directly or indirectly participating in or intervening in any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for elective public office. Contributions to political campaign funds or public statements of position (verbal or written) made on behalf of the organization in favor of or in opposition to any candidate for public office clearly violate the prohibition against political campaign activity. Violating this prohibition may result in the denial or revocation of tax-exempt status and the imposition of certain excise taxes. It is true that President Trump filed a letter on Inauguration Day, 20 January 2017, notifying the Federal Elections Commission that he had met the legal threshold for filing for reelection in 2020 (though the letter states that it is not a formal candidate announcement). The move appears to be geared toward getting a fundraising head start, as legal experts agree that Trump becoming a de facto candidate for 2020 on his first day in office will have no effect on the activities of charities. In the era of perpetual campaigning, tax laws have been interpreted by the Internal Revenue Service to mean that charities are free to criticize or praise public office holders as long as they avoid electioneering, which they are prohibited from doing anyway, said Marc Owens, a Washington, D.C.-based attorney who represents nonprofit organizations. Even though Trump is a candidate for the 2020 election now that he's registered, that really should not stop any charity from commenting on how he is doing as president of the United States, as long as they don't put it in the context of the 2020 election. The reality is that as long as they don't mention the election, which they shouldn't be doing anyway as charities, they're going to be fine. He added the caveat: "That's assuming Trump obeys the law." The Lawyers Alliance for New York later sent out a notice addressing the rumor: False Rumor: Nonprofit organizations cannot criticize President Trump because he filed a Statement of Candidacy form with the Federal Election Commission regarding the 2020 election. True: Organizations with 501(c)(3) status cannot take a position on who should win an election, such as the 2020 Presidential election. But all public charities can criticize or praise sitting public officials, including the President, for actions that they take while in office; take a position on issues, such as the environment, refugees, or school reform; and take a position on specific government actions, including Executive Orders and proposed laws and regulations. Taking such a position may count towards a public charity's limit on lobbying activity, and if the charity spends more than a minimal amount of money on this activity, it may be required to register as a lobbyist, but only if it asks a public official to act or asks members of the public to contact a public official. Notre Dame law professor Lloyd Hitoshi Mayer agreed, saying that in the modern era, most politicians are in a constant state of campaigning, whether they are formally declared as candidates or not. Charities can praise or criticize representatives as long as they do it in a way that's about them being in the House. The views of the IRS have always been that obviously you can praise or criticize someone because they're a public official, as a public official, even if they're running. Loyola law professor Ellen Aprill concurred, noting that Trump himself had advocated for lifting the prohibition on charities and campaigning. It seems inconsistent with the intent behind the campaign intervention prohibition for a president to prevent 501(c)(3)s from criticizing his policies and actions by declaring a candidacy so far in advance. Moreover, Trump is on record as wanting to eliminate the campaign intervention prohibition, although we have not seen anything on that since he became President. Nonprofits can address current topics like the environment, President Trump's proposal to build a new U.S.-Mexico border wall, or his recent executive order restricting refugee entry into the United States. They are also free to litigate on causes, as the American Civil Liberties Union and Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington have done in recent high-profile cases. The fact that he has filed campaign paperwork with the FEC early does not mean any of these organizations are suddenly muzzled. Mayer also pointed out that pro-President Trump nonprofits are under the same laws as all the others, which casts further doubt on his early re-election filing being about anything other than getting a fundraising advantage.

False

On 29 January 2017, a community member at the Daily Kos posted in a string of tweets by "The Resisterhood" account, which claimed that because President Donald Trump had filed early for re-election, it means that nonprofit organizations cannotoppose him without risking their nonprofit status. The story, which was widely shared, was created in a portion of the site that allows Daily Kos community members to create their own posts:It is true that President Trump filed a letteron Inauguration Day, 20 January 2017, notifying the Federal Elections Commission that he has met the legal threshold for filing for reelection in 2020 (though the letter says that it is not a formal candidate announcement).The Lawyers Alliance for New York later sent out a notice addressing the rumor:

FMD_train_564

The Marlboro Man Died of Lung Cancer?

09/11/1999

Claim: The actor who portrayed the "Marlboro Man" in print and television cigarette advertisements died of lung cancer. Examples: [Collected via e-mail, 1999] I heard that the actor who was the Marlboro Man in TV commercials died of lung cancer from smoking. Is that true? Origins: When a prominent study was released in the 1950s linking smoking to lung cancer, it presented Philip Morris, the manufacturer of the Marlboro brand of cigarettes, with a dilemma: many consumers were concerned enough about the health issues associated with smoking to want to switch to filtered cigarettes (which were perceived as safer), but many men viewed filtered cigarettes and the Marlboro brand in particular, which had originally been marketed as a woman's product, advertised as being mild and ladylike and featuring a red band around one end to disguise lipstick stains as too feminine. Philip Morris' response to this issue was to reposition Marlboro as a men's cigarette promoted via advertisements featuring strong masculine figures; the rugged 'Marlboro Man' cowboy became one of the most prominent advertising icons of the mid-twentieth century, propelling Marlboro from a niche brand to the world's best-selling cigarette. The visibility of the Marlboro Man as an icon has diminished greatly in the U.S. since its peak in the 1960s and 1970s, however, as increasing evidence linking cigarette smoking to a variety of medical ailments has caused the prevalence of smoking to decline and prompted the passage of restrictions limiting the media in which cigarettes could be advertised. Many anti-smoking advocates have since cited claims that "the Marlboro Man died of lung cancer" as an apt irony highlighting the dangers of smoking, a literal death foreshadowing the eventual demise of the product the Marlboro Man helped prompted to many millions of consumers. Any claim about "the" Marlboro Man is somewhat indefinite, though, as many different men have portrayed the rugged-looking cowboys featured in Marlboro cigarette advertisements since 1954. An Oklahoma native named Darrell Winfield (who passed away in January 2015) was the main Marlboro Man from the mid-1970s onwards; but dozens of other men (many of them "real" cowboys) have also modeled for television commercials, magazine and newspaper advertisements, billboards, and other advertising materials promoting Marlboro brand of cigarettes over the last sixty years. A few of those men, all long-time smokers, have died of diseases of the lungs (although most of them lived at least as long as the average life expectancy of their time): Model David Millar, one of the original Marlboro Men who appeared in television commercials for the cigarette brand in the 1950s, died of emphysema at the age of 81 in 1987: [Neighbor Stephen] Taylor said Millar smoked, but had quit about 20 years ago. He also quit horses after his early stints with Marlboro. "They used to boost him up by a rope and put him down on the horse because he didn't like horses," said Charles Dudley, a longtime friend. Dudley added that Millar often said he was "the only Marlboro Man who doesn't smoke, drink or like horses." Although Millar had quit [smoking] about 1965, he had smoked for "probably 40 to 45 years" before that, Dudley said. After Millar, Marlboro gravitated toward more authentic cowboys. Born in St. Louis, Millar worked as an advertising executive in magazine publishing and modeled for fashion magazines, his wife, Maria, said. In New Hampshire, where he had lived since retiring in 1961, he was an avid outdoorsman and active in civic and community affairs. Wayne McLaren, who posed for some promotional photographs on behalf of Marlboro in 1976, succumbed to lung cancer at age 51 on 22 July 1992. McLaren was a former professional rodeo rider who appeared in small parts in various television series and movies (primarily Westerns) throughout the 1960s and 1970s, and he modeled for print advertising between acting jobs in the mid-1970s, including a Marlboro campaign in 1976. McLaren, who had a pack-and-a-half a day smoking habit, was diagnosed with lung cancer at age 49. Despite chemotherapy, the removal of one lung, and radiation treatments, the cancer eventually spread to his brain and killed him. After learning he had cancer, McLaren embarked on an anti-smoking campaign that included the production of a commercial described as follows: Wayne McLaren In the powerful TV spot, images of the handsome young Wayne McLaren in a Stetson hat are juxtaposed with shots of his withered form in a hospital bed just prior to his death. His brother, Charles, provides the voiceover and chides tobacco companies for promoting an 'independent' lifestyle and asks, 'Lying there with all those tubes in you, how independent can you really be?' In the last months of his life McLaren appeared before the Massachusetts legislature when it was considering a bill to add taxes to cigarettes to pay for health education and also spoke at the annual Philip Morris stockholders' meeting to support a resolution that the company limit its advertising. Philip Morris initially denied that McLaren had ever appeared in Marlboro advertising, but a company spokesperson later conceded that McLaren's image had been used in a retail display for Marlboro Texan Poker Cards. (The woman McLaren lived with for the last eight years of his life also produced a Marlboro magazine advertisement which she claimed pictured McLaren.) David McLean, who appeared in many Marlboro television and print advertisements starting in the early 1960s, also died of cancer at age 73 on 12 October 1995. McLean starred in the short-lived 1960 television Western Tate, and he played roles in numerous television series and feature films during the 1960s and 1970s. McLean took up smoking at age 12, began to suffer from emphysema in 1985, and had a cancerous tumor removed from his right lung in 1993. David McLean Despite the surgery, the cancer remained and spread to his brain and spine, and McLean succumbed to it in 1995. In August 1996 McLean's widow and son filed a wrongful death lawsuit against Philip Morris, Inc., claiming that McLean was unable to stop smoking because of his nicotine addiction, and that his smoking habit was the cause of his lung cancer. (The lawsuit contended, among other issues, that McLean had been obligated to smoke up to five packs per take in order to get the right look while posing for advertisements, and that he received cartons of Marlboro cigarettes as gifts from Philip Morris.) At last report (in 1999) the lawsuit was still pending, having outlasted all attempts by defendant Philip Morris to have it dismissed. In 2014, Eric Lawson, another television actor who appeared in Marlboro advertisements between 1978 to 1981, died of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) at the age of 72. Like Wayne McLaren, Lawson was also a habitual smoker from an early age who in later life publicized the dangers of smoking and contributed to the production of an anti-smoking commercial: Eric Lawson A smoker since age 14, Lawson later appeared in an anti-smoking commercial that parodied the Marlboro man and an "Entertainment Tonight" segment to discuss the negative effects of smoking. Susan [Lawson] said her husband was proud of the interview, even though he was smoking at the time and continued the habit until he was diagnosed with COPD. "He knew the cigarettes had a hold on him," she said. "He knew, yet he still couldn't stop." Although diseases such as lung cancer and COPD are strongly linked to cigarette smoking, it is not possible to definitively determine that any particular instance of such a disease was caused by smoking. Last updated: 15 January 2015

NEI

Wayne McLaren, who posed for some promotional photographs on behalf of Marlboro in 1976, succumbed to lung cancer at age 51 on 22 July 1992. McLaren was a former professional rodeo rider who appeared in small parts in various television series and movies (primarily Westerns) throughout the 1960s and 1970s, and he modeled for print advertising between acting jobs in the mid-1970s, including a Marlboro campaign in 1976. McLaren, who had a pack-and-a-half a day smoking habit, was diagnosed with lung cancer at age 49. Despite chemotherapy, the removal of one lung, and radiation treatments, the cancer eventually spread to his brain and killed him. After learning he had cancer, McLaren embarked on an anti-smoking campaign that included the production of a commercial described as follows:David McLean, who appeared in many Marlboro television and print advertisements starting in the early 1960s, also died of cancer at age 73 on 12 October 1995. McLean starred in the short-lived 1960 television Western Tate, and he played roles in numerous television series and feature films during the 1960s and 1970s. McLean took up smoking at age 12, began to suffer from emphysema in 1985, and had a cancerous tumor removed from his right lung in 1993. In 2014, Eric Lawson, another television actor who appeared in Marlboro advertisements between 1978 to 1981, died of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) at the age of 72. Like Wayne McLaren, Lawson was also a habitual smoker from an early age who in later life publicized the dangers of smoking and contributed to the production of an anti-smoking commercial:

FMD_train_409

Says Texas tax legislation would save the average homeowner in Texas $20,000 a year over the next 20 years or so.

05/23/2017

Texas Lt. Gov . Dan Patrick made such a dramatic claim about must-pass tax-rate legislation--$20,000 in savings for the average homeowner every year!--we launched a fact check. Patrick, during17 minutes of remarks to Capitol reporters May 17, 2017, namedSenate Bill 2, authored by Sen. Paul Bettencourt, R-Houston, as one of two measures--along with the Senate-backed proposal barring local governments and school districts from letting transgender residents use bathrooms of choice--that must pass, in Patricks view, for lawmakers to avoid one or more special sessions possibly called by Gov. Greg Abbott after the regular session that must end by midnight Memorial Day. Patrick, mindful the House then had yet to vote on SB 2, said the Senate-approved version of the measure would bring about the largest property tax reform in Texas history. It would bring local government spending under control, give the voters an automatic election on government spending, of anything over 5 percent, and, Patrick said, save the average homeowner in Texas $20,000 a year over the next 20 years or so. Patrick aide: He meant $20,000 cumulatively Is that correct? To our inquiry, Patrick spokesman Alejandro Garcia said by email that Patrick had intended to tout savings adding up to $20,000 over 20 years. He pointed out a Texas Tribunenews storyposted two days after Patrick spoke quoting an unnamed Patrick staffer saying the same. The Tribune story said Patrick provided its reporter with asheet of figuressuggesting $20,856 in cumulative savings to the average homeowner, a conclusionpredicatedon local tax-rate hikes running higher than usual. The story quoted Dick Lavine, a tax analyst for the liberal Center for Public Policy Priorities,which opposes SB 2, saying: This calculation certainly does not portray what an average homeowner could expect in any given year, to say nothing of experiencing these savings every year for the next 20 years. Bettencourt offers backup We didnt draw any backup from Patrick. But Bettencourt replied to our inquiry by offeringa chartsuggesting escalating savings for what he described as the owner of the median-valued Texas home based, he said, onresearch by the Texas Taxpayers and Research Association, which drew on data on home sales culled monthly by the Real Estate Center at Texas A&M University: SOURCE:Chartprojecting homeowner savings from Senate-approved version of Senate Bill 2 (received by email from Lauri Saathoff, director of communications, state Sen. Paul Bettencourt, May 17, 2017) In phone messages, Bettencourt noted that the associations analysis suggests that over five recent years, through 2015, the owner of a median-valued home saw a nearly 34 percent escalation in property taxes paid to the local government entities targeted by SB 2, which averages out to increases of more than 6 percent a year. Those entities are cities, counties and special districts though not school districts. How the chart gets to a $22,761 cumulative savings in year 20 figure: It shows first-year savings under SB 2 for the median-value homeowner of $46, second-year property tax savings of $99 with annual savings exceeding $1,100 starting in year 12--and topping $2,100 a year starting in year 17. Each years savings, the chart shows, reflects the difference between what the homeowner would face in local property taxes if all government units raised taxes 8 percent minus what the homeowner would face if the local government entities all raised taxes 5 percent. Under existing law, local governments may raise effective tax rates up to 8 percent without residents being able to petition for a rollback election.The effective raterefers to the rate needed for the governing unit to raise the same total amount of taxes from the same local properties as the unit garnered the year before. Under the Senates version of SB 2, any of the affected entities could raise such taxes up to 5 percent with any additional bump automatically touching off a rollback election. Realistic tax-rate assumptions? We asked Bettencourt about the basis of the charts assumption that local governments will every year across-the-board raise effective tax rates 5 percent and if its realistic to compare that to an assumption that such governments would otherwise uniformly be driving up rates 8 percent every year. In phone messages, Bettencourt stressed the TTARA chart showing the recent average 6-percent-plus increases in property taxes charged the owner of a median-valued home. Separately, Dale Craymer of TTARA declined to comment. Bettencourt also gave us analternate savings projectionpremised on all government entities affected by SB 2 annually raising effective rates 6 percent (rather than 3 percent) without a change in law. Upshot: Cumulative savings to the median-value homeowner would exceed $17,000 in year 20, the second chart suggests. We asked Bettencourt about available data showing local governments had widely maximized tax rates every year of late.In writing, he replied that hed heard testimony along those lines from an Arlington and a Dallas official during pre-session hearings of the Bettencourt-chairedTexas Senate Select Committee on Property Tax Reform and Relief. Actual county, city tax rate changes Advocates for cities and counties say the senators assumption--that local governments will always uniformly raise effective tax rates to the maximum level allowable without risking a rollback vote at the polls--doesnt reflect what Texas governments have been doing. By phone, Don Lee of the Texas Conference of Urban Counties,representing38 member-counties home to most of the states residents, said that from 2014 through 2016, the counties averaged 2.2 percent effective tax rate increases, falling far short of the 8 percent rate that would open the way to a rollback vote. Lee emailed us aspreadsheetindicating the member counties averaged effective tax rate increases of 3.1 percent in 2014; 3.2 percent in 2015; and 0.7 percent in 2016. We also queried the Texas Municipal League,which says it represents most of the states cities, and whose legislative counsel, Bill Longley, emailed spreadsheets he described as based on effective city tax ratesposted by the Texas state comptrollers officefor a couple of recent years. The sheets show, Longley noted, that the vast majority of cities havent been increasing their tax rates above the current 8 percent rollback rate. According to the sheets, in2014and2015, respectively, about 21 percent of the states cities adopted effective rates equal to or exceeding 8 percent. And, in keeping with SB 2s proposed 5 percent rollback rate, how many cities lately have escalated rates that much or more? According to the sheets, 38 percent (382 of 1,002 cities) in 2014 and 39 percent (376 of 963 cities) in 2015. In both cases, Longley wrote, more than 60 percent of cities were under a 5 percent rollback rate, if it had been in place. Texas A&M expert For an outside perspective, we askedJim Gaines, chief economist of the Real Estate Center at Texas A&M University, to appraise Bettencourts analysis and chart. By phone, Gaines said TTARA presented an accurate figure on its spreadsheet for a median-valued Texas home. But Gaines called highly questionable the assumptions behind the dollar figures in Bettencourts chart--both of local governments uniformly and annually driving up effective tax rates 8 percent without a change in law and of such governments under SB 2 all increasing rates 5 percent year after year. Counties, for instance, dont act identically, Gaines said. Each county is going to be unique, he said. Comptroller makes no homeowner savings estimate Next, we checked thefiscal noteon the Senate-approved version of SB 2 that was public by the time Patrick spoke (a more recentversionappeared May 19, 2017). The March 16, 2017,note, prepared by the advisory Legislative Budget Board staff, states up front that the financial effects of reducing the rollback rate cant be estimated. However, it also says, the table below is a hypothetical example of potential costs of the bill to counties, cities, and special districts based in part on assuming that no voters approve rates exceeding the 5 percent rollback rate and that future rate-setting practices would be similar to the rate-setting practices demonstrated in the available historical tax rate data. And in fiscal 2019, the first year of tax effects, cities, counties and special districts would lose nearly $199 million in revenue, the comptrollers office estimated, an indication of some taxpayer savings, it seemed to us. The hypothetical shows additional costs to affected government entities in subsequent years. Does the hypothetical lost revenue, we wondered, mean the comptroller got a fix on how much homeowners and other property taxpayers might save? By phone, a spokeswoman for the comptrollers office, Lauren Willis, said the agency has not estimated particular savings for homeowners. Tim Wooten, a comptroller consultant who worked on the table, told us by phone thats because we cant predict what local taxing entities will do in setting rates or if voters indeed will reject all increases at the polls. We asked Wooten to unpack how he reached the hypothesized revenue losses. Wooten said he applied the SB 2 limits to 2015 tax rates set by the targeted entities, finding that in that year, 60 percent of cities and special districts and 70 percent of counties did not set rates high enough to touch off the rollback elections envisioned in SB 2. Wooten said too that a lot of the remaining government entities would have sustained small 2015 losses in revenue if SB 2 had been law then. Bettencourt stands by $20,000-plus figure Following up, we asked Bettencourt if most local entities covered by SB 2 dont reach existing or proposed rollback tax rates, arent homeowner savings impossible to precisely forecast? Of course, Bettencourt saidin writing, because we are dealing with future projections to a 20-year degree. However, downward pressure on property tax rates means tax rate reductions across the board in probability. When we said it looked to us like his projected homeowner savings were based on unrealistic assumptions about all the affected government entities maximizing tax rates every year, Bettencourt replied: Disagree strongly, urging us to revisit the spreadsheet he attributed to TTARA. Our ruling Patrick said legislation targeting local tax rate growth will result in the average Texas homeowner saving $20,000 a year over 20 years. Thats an absurd amount. Even if we look at what Patrick purportedly meant to say $20,000 over 20 years we find major flaws in the assumptions underlying that calculation. To reach that amount, one must assume that every city, county and special taxing district will raise tax rates by 8 percent every year without this legislation in place and by 5 percent a year with it. Neither assumption is in line with recent history, making the total savings figure highly suspect, at best a wild guess. Pants on Fire! PANTS ON FIRE The statement is not accurate and makes a ridiculous claim. Click here formoreon the six PolitiFact ratings and how we select facts to check. CORRECTION, 9:55 a.m., May 24, 2017: Thanks to a reader's nudge, we amended this story to correct our description of the second tax-rollback savings chart provided by Bettencourt. This revision did not affect our rating of the claim.

False

Patrick, during17 minutes of remarks to Capitol reporters May 17, 2017, namedSenate Bill 2, authored by Sen. Paul Bettencourt, R-Houston, as one of two measures--along with the Senate-backed proposal barring local governments and school districts from letting transgender residents use bathrooms of choice--that must pass, in Patricks view, for lawmakers to avoid one or more special sessions possibly called by Gov. Greg Abbott after the regular session that must end by midnight Memorial Day.Is that correct? To our inquiry, Patrick spokesman Alejandro Garcia said by email that Patrick had intended to tout savings adding up to $20,000 over 20 years. He pointed out a Texas Tribunenews storyposted two days after Patrick spoke quoting an unnamed Patrick staffer saying the same.The Tribune story said Patrick provided its reporter with asheet of figuressuggesting $20,856 in cumulative savings to the average homeowner, a conclusionpredicatedon local tax-rate hikes running higher than usual. The story quoted Dick Lavine, a tax analyst for the liberal Center for Public Policy Priorities,which opposes SB 2, saying: This calculation certainly does not portray what an average homeowner could expect in any given year, to say nothing of experiencing these savings every year for the next 20 years.We didnt draw any backup from Patrick. But Bettencourt replied to our inquiry by offeringa chartsuggesting escalating savings for what he described as the owner of the median-valued Texas home based, he said, onresearch by the Texas Taxpayers and Research Association, which drew on data on home sales culled monthly by the Real Estate Center at Texas A&M University:SOURCE:Chartprojecting homeowner savings from Senate-approved version of Senate Bill 2 (received by email from Lauri Saathoff, director of communications, state Sen. Paul Bettencourt, May 17, 2017)Under existing law, local governments may raise effective tax rates up to 8 percent without residents being able to petition for a rollback election.The effective raterefers to the rate needed for the governing unit to raise the same total amount of taxes from the same local properties as the unit garnered the year before. Under the Senates version of SB 2, any of the affected entities could raise such taxes up to 5 percent with any additional bump automatically touching off a rollback election.Bettencourt also gave us analternate savings projectionpremised on all government entities affected by SB 2 annually raising effective rates 6 percent (rather than 3 percent) without a change in law. Upshot: Cumulative savings to the median-value homeowner would exceed $17,000 in year 20, the second chart suggests.We asked Bettencourt about available data showing local governments had widely maximized tax rates every year of late.In writing, he replied that hed heard testimony along those lines from an Arlington and a Dallas official during pre-session hearings of the Bettencourt-chairedTexas Senate Select Committee on Property Tax Reform and Relief.By phone, Don Lee of the Texas Conference of Urban Counties,representing38 member-counties home to most of the states residents, said that from 2014 through 2016, the counties averaged 2.2 percent effective tax rate increases, falling far short of the 8 percent rate that would open the way to a rollback vote. Lee emailed us aspreadsheetindicating the member counties averaged effective tax rate increases of 3.1 percent in 2014; 3.2 percent in 2015; and 0.7 percent in 2016.We also queried the Texas Municipal League,which says it represents most of the states cities, and whose legislative counsel, Bill Longley, emailed spreadsheets he described as based on effective city tax ratesposted by the Texas state comptrollers officefor a couple of recent years. The sheets show, Longley noted, that the vast majority of cities havent been increasing their tax rates above the current 8 percent rollback rate.According to the sheets, in2014and2015, respectively, about 21 percent of the states cities adopted effective rates equal to or exceeding 8 percent. And, in keeping with SB 2s proposed 5 percent rollback rate, how many cities lately have escalated rates that much or more? According to the sheets, 38 percent (382 of 1,002 cities) in 2014 and 39 percent (376 of 963 cities) in 2015. In both cases, Longley wrote, more than 60 percent of cities were under a 5 percent rollback rate, if it had been in place.For an outside perspective, we askedJim Gaines, chief economist of the Real Estate Center at Texas A&M University, to appraise Bettencourts analysis and chart.Next, we checked thefiscal noteon the Senate-approved version of SB 2 that was public by the time Patrick spoke (a more recentversionappeared May 19, 2017).The March 16, 2017,note, prepared by the advisory Legislative Budget Board staff, states up front that the financial effects of reducing the rollback rate cant be estimated. However, it also says, the table below is a hypothetical example of potential costs of the bill to counties, cities, and special districts based in part on assuming that no voters approve rates exceeding the 5 percent rollback rate and that future rate-setting practices would be similar to the rate-setting practices demonstrated in the available historical tax rate data.Of course, Bettencourt saidin writing, because we are dealing with future projections to a 20-year degree. However, downward pressure on property tax rates means tax rate reductions across the board in probability.PANTS ON FIRE The statement is not accurate and makes a ridiculous claim. Click here formoreon the six PolitiFact ratings and how we select facts to check.

FMD_train_52

Does Joe Biden Own the Largest Mansion in His State?

10/23/2019

On Aug. 23, 2019, conservative radio personality Mark Simone posted a message on Twitter asserting that that former U.S. Vice President (and 2020 presidential candidate) Joe Biden owned the largest mansion in his state: posted Since Simone's tweet, near verbatim copies of this message "Joe Biden lives in the biggest mansion in his state and just bought another mansion in DC, Bernie Sanders has 4 hours, Obama just got his 3rd mansion. All of this money was made from lecturing you on income inequality!" have been reposted by a several additional Twitter accounts. This message was also turned into a meme that has been shared hundreds of thousands of times on Facebook: reposted several additional Twitter accounts meme shared While Simone's post mentioned politicians Bernie Sanders and former President Barack Obama, for the purposes of this article we'll be focusing on the real estate rumors concerning Biden. It's unclear which state this meme is referring to by "his state." Biden was born in Scranton, Pennsylvania, but he represented Delaware in the U.S. Senate for more than 30 years between 1973 and 2009. As Biden doesn't own any property in Pennsylvania (and therefore couldn't own the largest mansion in that state), we'll assume that this meme references Delaware, where Biden owns two properties. The Washington Post reported in June 2019 that Biden owned two homes in Delaware: his primary residence, a 7,000-square-foot lakeside home in Wilmington, and a 4,800-square-foot vacation house in Rehoboth Beach. While these are both sizable and expensive properties (the beach house was purchased for $2.7 million), neither of them would be considered the "biggest mansion" in the state of Delaware. reported By one measure, the Winterthur Estate could be considered Delaware's largest mansion. The house was originally built in 1839 but has been enlarged considerably over the years. Henry Francis du Pont renovated the building between 1929 and 1931, resulting in a 175-room mansion sitting on 2,500 acres. This estate was turned into a museum in 1951, however, so some may not consider it to be the "largest mansion" in Delaware. Winterthur Estate The Du Pont family built another massive property in Delaware in the early 1900s. While the Nemours Mansion dwarfs the properties owned by Biden at 47,000 sq. ft. (compared to 7,000), this property, too, no longer serves as a single-family residence and therefore may not be an applicable comparison. Nemours Mansion Still, Biden's Delaware homes are not the biggest in the state. We were able to find several articles concerning homes with more square footage than Biden's residence in Wilmington. The image below shows a 17,588-square-foot estate in Wilmington, for instance, according to Homes of the Rich: Homes of the Rich The most expensive home in Delaware, according to Delaware Online, is a $14.9 million, 7,800-square-foot oceanfront home. Redfin.com also lists properties in excess of 7,000-square-feet, including this 9,957-square-foot property in Dewey Beach, and this 12,000-square-foot home in Wilmington. Delaware Online Dewey Beach Wilmington While Biden's Delaware homes are certainly large, they are not the biggest mansions in the state. The Washington Post's June 2019 article about Biden's finances also mentioned that he had started renting a large home in McLean, Virginia, after leaving the White House: The Georgian-style home from the front a brick version of the White House once belonged to Alexander Haig, the former secretary of state. Nestled on a wooded lot in McLean, the nearly 12,000-square-foot residence has five bedrooms and 10 bathrooms, marble fireplaces, a gym and a sauna. While the McLean property is larger than both of Biden's Delaware properties, it is not the biggest mansion in Virginia. For instance, a $62.95 million, 48,900-square-foot residence dubbed The Falls went up for sale in McLean in 2018. for sale Zap, Claudine. "Oceanfront Opulence: $14.9M Shell House Is Delaware's Most Expensive Home." Realtor.com. 5 February 2019. Gerhardt, Nick. "The Biggest Home in Each State That Will Stun You." Family Handyman. Retrieved 22 October 2019. Viser, Matt. "Once the Poorest Senator, 'Middle Class Joe Biden Has Reaped Millions in Income Since Leaving the Vice Presidency." The Washington Post. 25 June 2019. Polus, Sarah. "A New Listing Sets the Record for the Most Expensive Home to Ever Hit the D.C. Area Market." The Washington Post. 29 May 2018.

False

On Aug. 23, 2019, conservative radio personality Mark Simone posted a message on Twitter asserting that that former U.S. Vice President (and 2020 presidential candidate) Joe Biden owned the largest mansion in his state:Since Simone's tweet, near verbatim copies of this message "Joe Biden lives in the biggest mansion in his state and just bought another mansion in DC, Bernie Sanders has 4 hours, Obama just got his 3rd mansion. All of this money was made from lecturing you on income inequality!" have been reposted by a several additional Twitter accounts. This message was also turned into a meme that has been shared hundreds of thousands of times on Facebook:The Washington Post reported in June 2019 that Biden owned two homes in Delaware: his primary residence, a 7,000-square-foot lakeside home in Wilmington, and a 4,800-square-foot vacation house in Rehoboth Beach. While these are both sizable and expensive properties (the beach house was purchased for $2.7 million), neither of them would be considered the "biggest mansion" in the state of Delaware.By one measure, the Winterthur Estate could be considered Delaware's largest mansion. The house was originally built in 1839 but has been enlarged considerably over the years. Henry Francis du Pont renovated the building between 1929 and 1931, resulting in a 175-room mansion sitting on 2,500 acres. This estate was turned into a museum in 1951, however, so some may not consider it to be the "largest mansion" in Delaware.The Du Pont family built another massive property in Delaware in the early 1900s. While the Nemours Mansion dwarfs the properties owned by Biden at 47,000 sq. ft. (compared to 7,000), this property, too, no longer serves as a single-family residence and therefore may not be an applicable comparison.Still, Biden's Delaware homes are not the biggest in the state. We were able to find several articles concerning homes with more square footage than Biden's residence in Wilmington. The image below shows a 17,588-square-foot estate in Wilmington, for instance, according to Homes of the Rich:The most expensive home in Delaware, according to Delaware Online, is a $14.9 million, 7,800-square-foot oceanfront home. Redfin.com also lists properties in excess of 7,000-square-feet, including this 9,957-square-foot property in Dewey Beach, and this 12,000-square-foot home in Wilmington.While the McLean property is larger than both of Biden's Delaware properties, it is not the biggest mansion in Virginia. For instance, a $62.95 million, 48,900-square-foot residence dubbed The Falls went up for sale in McLean in 2018.

FMD_train_1670

Did an Oregon Department of Transportation Employee Say That Immigrants Should be 'Shot at the Border'?

06/21/2018

In the summer of 2018, the Trump administration's implementation of a "zero tolerance" immigration policy which saw thousands of children separated from their migrant parents, often in difficult and uncertain circumstances provoked widespread and often impassioned opposition and public debate. One such discussion around the issue of immigration sparked a wave of outrage after screenshots went viral online which appeared to show an employee of the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) calling for immigrants into the United States to be shot at the border. ODOT In a 19 June 2018 Facebook post, Angela Ochoa shared a screenshot which appeared to show Lori McAllen, an employee of ODOT, writing: post I personally think they should shoot them all at the border and call it good...it'll save us hard working AMERICAN'S [sic] billions of dollars on our taxes!! ;) The post went viral. A spokesperson for ODOT confirmed that the agency was "looking into a posting that was connected to ODOT." Without naming McAllen, the spokesperson said the employee had been "put on administrative leave" while ODOT investigates the facts surrounding the post, as well as its authenticity. "We take this very seriously and very personally," the spokesperson told us, adding that the post "does not reflect the values of ODOT," and that its content was "deeply disturbing and hurtful." We can confirm that McAllen's post is authentic. We spoke to a person with knowledge of the posts and whose identity we were able to verify. That person told us that McAllen made her remarks during the course of a 19 June 2018 Facebook debate involving several people about the ongoing "zero tolerance" immigration policy, and the separation of children from their parents. The conversation was held on the Facebook page of another user. We also received multiple screenshots from that conversation, which both corroborate the authenticity of McAllen's post, and show excerpts from the exchanges that led up to, and came after, her "shoot them all at the border" comment. We have edited these images only to preserve the anonymity of other participants. Some time after McAllen posted the comment in question, another participant, outraged at its content, warned that they would make her "famous." In this screenshot, McAllen responds mockingly to a reference to her own offending remarks: Another screenshot shows a third person, supportive of McAllen, acknowledging the fact that she did indeed post the remarks in question ("ONE comment Lori made") and attacking another participant in the conversation. Another series of screenshots sent to us clearly shows McAllen responding to further references to her "shoot them at the border" comments. McAllen has deleted her social media profiles and we were unable to contact her for comment.

True

In the summer of 2018, the Trump administration's implementation of a "zero tolerance" immigration policy which saw thousands of children separated from their migrant parents, often in difficult and uncertain circumstances provoked widespread and often impassioned opposition and public debate. One such discussion around the issue of immigration sparked a wave of outrage after screenshots went viral online which appeared to show an employee of the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) calling for immigrants into the United States to be shot at the border. In a 19 June 2018 Facebook post, Angela Ochoa shared a screenshot which appeared to show Lori McAllen, an employee of ODOT, writing: