Datasets:

lzw1008

/

COLING25-FMD

like 1

FMD_test_300

Were These Children Separated From Their Parents Under Obama?

06/21/2018

During the ongoing national debate over a novel policy of separating families at the border, a photograph circulated, originally from Joshua Feuerstein, a self-styled "American evangelist, Internet and social media personality," who last made headlines in 2015 when he manufactured a so-called "Christmas cup controversy." The photograph purportedly depicted a room full of immigrant children that former President Barack Obama had supposedly removed from their parents' custody. The attached text read: "As you stare at this picture of innocent children being separated from their parents at the border and feel your hatred toward President Trump start to boil over from the bowels of your soul... I'd just like to point out it was taken in 2014... when Obama was President! #share" Some versions were shared with no accompanying text, inviting readers to project their own interpretations onto the image. Images of this type, dated to the Obama administration, were often described as having been ignored at the time they were originally taken. However, this image did appear in anti-immigration memes from 2014 and 2015, such as one framing the photograph as evidence that the Obama administration (described here as a "cabal") was encouraging ("seducing") immigrant ("illegal alien") children to come to the United States. The meme's text read: "INSIDE AN OBAMA APPROVED REFUGEE CAMP 140,000 Illegal Alien Children Seduced into coming to America By the Obama Cabal. MORE COMING NEXT YEAR TOO Hey Obama... Why not use the FEMA CAMPS?? Or are those being prepped for Patriot Resistance Fighters!!" The first iteration we could find of that image was alongside a June 5, 2014, post published by Breitbart. Although Breitbart shared the photograph on Facebook on June 21, 2018, the outlet did not include a link to its earlier reporting. In its original article, the children were described as "unaccompanied," indicating that they came without their parents, not that they were separated from their families by American authorities. Breitbart Texas obtained internal federal government photos depicting the conditions of foreign children warehoused by authorities on U.S. soil on Wednesday night. Thousands of illegal immigrants have overrun U.S. border security and their processing centers in Texas along the U.S./Mexico border. Unaccompanied minors, including young girls under the age of 12, are making the dangerous journey from Central America and Mexico, through cartel-controlled territories, and across the porous border onto U.S. soil. The photograph was subsequently disseminated by numerous websites and news outlets. National Review's "Immigration Bedlam" reported that some 6,775 unaccompanied alien children (UAC) crossed the U.S.-Mexican border in 2011, according to the U.S. Office of Refugee Resettlement. ORR expects 60,000 UACs this year, and this number could reach 130,000 in 2015. Detaining them for $252 each per day will cost taxpayers $453.6 million per month this year and could cost $982.8 million per month next year. The image and events surrounding it were widely reported for several months, appearing in the Houston Chronicle, Splinter News, the Los Angeles Times, Mashable, and Reuters, among others. Stories during that time specifically reiterated that the photographs showed unaccompanied minor children in the custody of United States Customs and Border Protection and temporarily housed at a Texas Air Force base. The photos have a timestamp of May 27, 2014. A spokesperson for U.S. Customs and Border Protection stated that the agency has not officially released any photos at this time in order to protect the rights and privacy of unaccompanied minors in their care. A temporary shelter at Joint Base San Antonio Lackland has housed and provided services to 1,820 unaccompanied minors from Central America since May 18, as reported by San Antonio Express-News reporter Melissa Fletcher Stoeltje. The immigration surge is said to be a result of children fleeing poverty and violence in their home countries. Although the photograph is real, it does not show children separated from their parents by the Obama administration. In June 2014, the image was published as part of numerous news stories and occasionally alongside editorial pieces objecting to the presence of unaccompanied minor children. The image did not develop a different backstory until June 2018, during a controversy that specifically involved family separation at the behest of the Trump administration.

FMD_test_301

Says our unemployment insurance trust fund is broke. We're over a billion dollars in debt to the federal government.

12/11/2011

New Jersey has gone into debt to cover unemployment benefits for people who lost their jobs in the Garden State. Assemblyman Jay Webber (R-Morris) made this argument in a recent NJToday interview regarding his opposition to proposed legislation aimed at providing unemployment benefits to certain individuals whose work hours have been reduced. "It might be a good idea. The problem I have is that our unemployment insurance trust fund is broke," Webber said during the Nov. 28 interview. "We're over a billion dollars in debt to the federal government, and what this bill does is create another stream of income out of the fund." PolitiFact New Jersey found that Webber is correct. After more than two and a half years of borrowing money to cover unemployment benefits, New Jersey still owed about $1.3 billion to the federal government as of Dec. 6, according to federal and state officials. Kerri Gatling, a spokeswoman for the state Department of Labor and Workforce Development, stated that the state expects to pay off the loan in late 2013. "There is currently a negative fund balance resulting from the severe economic downturn, whereby unemployment insurance benefit payments exceed contributions to the fund," Gatling said in an email. Webber emphasized that the fund must be protected and its solvency ensured. "Regardless of how we got there, now we've got to fix it," Webber said. Here's how we got into so much debt: New Jersey's unemployment insurance trust fund is made up of payroll taxes paid by employers and employees. The fund is used to pay unemployment benefits to people who worked in New Jersey. The idea behind such trust funds is to build up reserves when the economy is performing well in order to pay unemployment benefits during economic downturns. However, state officials repeatedly diverted money from the trust fund to cover charity care payments to hospitals, ultimately reaching a total of about $4.6 billion in funds by 2005, according to the state's nonpartisan Office of Legislative Services. As more people lost their jobs during the recent recession and sought unemployment benefits, the trust fund was depleted by March 2009, and the state began borrowing from the federal government to cover the payments, according to OLS. The borrowing peaked in April 2011, when New Jersey owed $2.1 billion for the loan, Gatling said. On Sept. 30, New Jersey paid nearly $48 million to the federal government to cover interest on the loan, she said. The state anticipates an interest payment of between roughly $55 million and $60 million to be made in September 2012, Gatling said. "As we minimize the interest expense, we take excess funds and pay the loan balance," Gatling said. Payroll taxes are used to pay benefits and pay the loan balance. In November 2010, New Jersey voters overwhelmingly approved a constitutional amendment prohibiting the diversion of money from the unemployment insurance trust fund and other benefit funds for any other purposes. But New Jersey isn't the only state that owes the federal government money to cover unemployment benefits. As of Dec. 6, 27 states and the U.S. Virgin Islands owed a total of roughly $38.3 billion in principal alone, including New Jersey's roughly $1.3 billion, according to the U.S. Treasury Department. California owes the most, about $9.4 billion, according to the department. Webber claimed in a television interview that New Jersey's unemployment insurance trust fund is broke. "We're over a billion dollars in debt to the federal government." The assemblyman's statement is accurate. New Jersey currently owes more than $1 billion to the federal government for money borrowed to pay unemployment benefits. We rate the statement True. To comment on this ruling, go to NJ.com.

FMD_test_302

Women have come through the recession worse off than men the numbers bear that out. We went from a 7 percent unemployment rate for women when he (President Barack Obama) was elected to an 8.1 percent now.

06/04/2012

The recession and its aftereffects have been hard on millions of people across the country.But its been especially hard on women, according to state Assemblywoman Caroline Casagrande (R-Monmouth).Women have come through the recession worse off than men the numbers bear that out, Casagrande said to My9TVs Brenda Blackmon on the April 29 New Jersey Now program. We went from a 7 percent unemployment rate for women when he (President Barack Obama) was elected to an 8.1 percent now.Casagrande is correct about most of her data, PolitiFact New Jersey found.Obama was elected in November 2008 and took office on Jan. 20, 2009. Anita Velardo, Casagrandes communications director, said in an e-mail that Casagrandes statistic referred to the period from January 2009 to March 2012. But since Casagrande said elected, well look at the unemployment rate for both periods.From November 2008 to March 2012, unemployment among women rose to 8.1 percent from 6.2 percent, according to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. For men, the rate climbed to 8.3 percent from 7.4 percent.From January 2009 to March 2012, unemployment for women rose from 7 percent to 8.1 percent. The rate for men, however, decreased from 8.6 percent to 8.3 percent. Thats because the male-dominated industries that lost jobs prior to January 2009 were starting to rebound.Now lets look at data for the recession, which the nonprofit National Bureau of Economic Research said occurred from December 2007 to June 2009.During the recession, unemployment among women spiked from 4.9 percent to 8.3 percent. For men, the rate more than doubled, from 5.1 percent to 10.6 percent.Mens unemployment was higher than women during the recession, but women have had a tougher time getting work and living day-to-day during the ongoing economic recovery, according to a September 2011 report, Women and Men Living on the Edge: Economic Insecurity After the Great Recession, prepared by the Institute For Womens Policy Research and funded by the Rockefeller Foundation.Economic and labor experts we talked with supported Casagrandes claim.Male-dominated fields such as construction and manufacturing often are hit first in recessions and tend to rebound first during an economic recovery, according to Elisabeth Jacobs, a Governance Studies fellow at the Brookings Institution; Gary Burtless, a senior fellow in Economic Studies at Brookings; and Harry Holzer, a professor of Public Policy at Georgetown University. Female-dominated fields such as education, public sector jobs and retail often are hit later and rebound slower, they said.In terms of lost jobs, men suffered worse than women and have seen a bigger drop in their employment rate, said Burtless, who contributed $750 to Obamas campaign in 2011 but also was an adviser on aspects of labor policy to the presidential campaign of Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.). In terms of the number of adults who are still looking for work, womens situation looks (proportionately) a bit worse than that of men.The recovery has progressed more slowly for women than for men, and the unemployment rate for women is indeed higher today than it was when President Obama was elected president, Jacobs said in an e-mail.But is Obama to blame?Our colleagues at PolitiFact.com addressed this issue in April after Mitt Romneys campaign claimed women were hit hard by job losses under Obama. Their report showed that women have had a more difficult jobs recovery than men, but Obama cannot bear all the blame, just as he couldnt take the credit if jobs were booming when he took office.Our rulingCasagrande said, women have come through the recession worse off than men the numbers bear that out. We went from a 7 percent unemployment rate for women when he was elected to an 8.1 percent now. Labor statistics show and some experts told us that while men took the brunt of job loss during the recession, the industries they dominate construction and manufacturing tend to bounce back first during economic recovery. Women often are affected much later than men during a recession, meaning they are more likely to have a slower rate of gaining employment. Casagrandes timeframe is off slightly for the statistic she cited, and Obama cant be held completely responsible for the slow recovery among women. We rate Casagrandes statement Mostly True. To comment on this story, go toNJ.com.

FMD_test_303

Was Trump's SAG-AFTRA Letter Signed 'President Donald J. Trump'?

02/05/2021

In a letter shared by the joint labor union Screen Actors Guild and American Federation of Television and Radio Artists (SAG-AFTRA) on Feb. 4, 2021, former U.S. President Donald Trump resigned as a member of the union. Trumps resignation came just as the union leadership was moving to expel Trump in the wake of his alleged provocation of a mob that attacked the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6. shared resignation The letterhead appeared to carry the logo for what was called the Office of the Former President, created by Trumps team in Palm Beach, Florida, to serve as the official outlet for Trumps statements and to share his future plans. Office of the Former President However, now, the stationery on which the letter was submitted says Office of Donald J. Trump. The letter was shared on SAG-AFTRAs website, along with the union's response to Trump, which was a simple, Thank you. website response As seen in the document, the end of the letter is indeed signed with President Donald J. Trump. In the letter, Trump cited his own acting experience and contributions to television: Im very proud of my work on movies such as Home Alone 2, Zoolander and Wall Street: Money Never Sleeps; and television shows including The Fresh Prince of Bel-Air, Saturday Night Live, and of course, one of the most successful shows in television history, The Apprentice to name just a few! Ive also greatly helped the cable news television business (said to be a dying platform with not much time left until I got involved in politics), and created thousands of jobs at networks such as MSDNC and Fake News CNN, among many others. He concluded with a criticism of the unions actions: Your organization has done little for its members, and nothing for me besides collecting dues and promoting dangerous un-American policies and ideas as evident by your massive unemployment rates and lawsuits from celebrated actors, who even recorded a video asking, Why isnt the union fighting for me? These, however, are policy failures. Your disciplinary failures are even more egregious. I no longer wish to be associated with your union. Professor and author Seth Abramson pointed out how signing the letter this way is troubling, given that Trump is on trial for inciting the riots: However, signing a letter as President does not appear to be out of the ordinary. Former President Barack Obama's statements are also released under "President Obama." Former presidents are still addressed as President [insert name] or Mr. President. All U.S. presidents retain their titles for life. statements addressed Given that the official letter was shared by SAG-AFTRA, along with Trumps signature, we rate this claim as True.

FMD_test_304

Was Donald Trump's Grandfather's Wealth Accumulated through the Prostitution Business?

12/02/2015

In November 2015, the biography of Frederick Trump, Donald Trump's grandfather, was condensed into two paragraphs and then circulated on the internet via a meme. While some of the information included in the meme is accurate, much of it is either exaggerated or incomplete. This particular rumor centers on the idea that Frederick Trump made his fortune through brothels and opium dens. While there is anecdotal evidence that Trump dabbled in prostitution, there is no proof that this constituted the bulk of his fortune. In Gwenda Blair's 2000 book, The Trumps: Three Generations of Builders and a Presidential Candidate, she describes how Frederick Trump opened a series of restaurants and hotels during the Klondike Gold Rush in the 1890s. One of those hotels, The Arctic Restaurant and Hotel, was described as decadent and far superior to other restaurants in the area. In the larder were salmon and an extraordinary variety of meats, including duck, ptarmigan, grouse, goose, and swan, as well as caribou, moose, goat, sheep, rabbit, and squirrel. Incredibly, the New Arctic served fresh fruit: red currants, raspberries, strawberries, blueberries, blackberries, and even cranberries. A small oasis of luxury, the Arctic's menu was a vast improvement over what the two restaurateurs had been able to offer on the trail. An anonymous letter to the Yukon, however, claimed that The Arctic Restaurant and Hotel was also known for prostitution: "I would advise respectable women traveling alone, or with an escort, to be careful in their selection of hotels at Bennett," he wrote. "For single men, the Arctic has excellent accommodations as well as the best restaurant in Bennett, but I would not advise respectable women to go there to sleep as they are liable to hear that which would be repugnant to their feelings and uttered, too, by the depraved of their own sex." While it's unclear if Frederick Trump directly profited from prostitution at his hotel (or whether it even occurred there), it should be noted that the world's oldest profession was relatively commonplace during the Gold Rush. The meme also claims that Frederick Trump decided to return to Germany when police started cracking down on "his criminal rackets." Again, this is based on little more than a morsel of truth and does not tell the whole story. In 1901, Trump sold his assets and returned to Germany. While one could argue that Trump made the decision because he believed that police were going to start enforcing prostitution laws, that is only one factor that led to Trump's departure for Germany; Frederick Trump saw that it was time to leave. If Major Wood actually enforced the laws regarding prostitution, gambling, and liquor, hotels and restaurants would be far less profitable. Not only that, the economic boom was bound to be short-lived. There was not nearly enough solid economic development to absorb these newcomers in any long-term way; when the placer deposits were emptied, they would go back home. Without the umbrella of gold, other local industries would not be strong enough to sustain themselves and compete with cheaper sources farther south. The boom was over, Frederick Trump realized. He left just in time. He avoided the uproar when his erstwhile partner hit the skids, and he escaped the economic decline that would soon sweep over White Horse. Once again, in a situation that created many losers, he managed to emerge a winner. He had made money; perhaps even more unusually in the Yukon, he had also kept it and departed from White Horse with a substantial nest egg. He had accomplished his goal of making and saving enough money to marry. But he had no intention of doing so in America. For this important moment, he would have to return to Germany. While the meme exaggerated Trump's involvement in "criminal rackets," it did correctly state that Trump returned to the United States after the German government determined that he had originally left Germany in 1885 to avoid taxes and the army. In summation, Donald Trump's grandfather Frederick Trump was a German immigrant who made his fortune by opening several restaurants and hotels in Seattle and British Columbia during the Yukon Gold Rush. While some of these hotels may have been used for prostitution, gambling, or other seedy activities common on the trail, it is incorrect to say that Trump built his fortune on illegal activities.

FMD_test_305

The IRS doesn't have to prove something against you ... you've got the burden of proof.

05/22/2013

The Internal Revenue Service has been on the defensive since the news broke that the agency has been giving extra scrutiny to conservative groups seeking tax-exempt status. Among the lawmakers expressing concern about the IRS was Rep. Randy Forbes, R-Va. In a May 17, 2013, interview, Fox News anchor Gretchen Carlson asked Forbes, What's your No. 1 concern about the IRS being in charge of Obamacare? (Carlson was wrong about the agency's role. It is not in charge, as we addressed with ourrecent fact-check of Michele Bachmann.) Forbes responded, Well, Gretchen, first of all, it is the power that the IRS has that's different than any other agency, any other department. The IRS doesn't have to prove something against you. They can walk in and you've got the burden of proof. The idea that the burden of proof rests on the accuser is a bedrock principle of justice around the world. While neither of the terms burden of proof or presumption of innocence appears in the U.S Constitution, an accusers burden of proving that someone has committed a criminal act goes back to ancient times. In 1895, when the Supreme Court issued a resounding defense of the concept in the caseCoffin vs. United States, it cited sources as varied as the Bible, Sparta, Athens and Rome. The principle that there is a presumption of innocence in favor of the accused is the undoubted law, axiomatic and elementary, and its enforcement lies at the foundation of the administration of our criminal law, the court wrote. So we wondered whether its really the case that the IRS doesn't have to prove something against you. You've got the burden of proof. The ways in which Forbes is correct Saving receipts and canceled checks in case the IRS calls is all too familiar to many taxpayers. And generally speaking -- beyond some exceptions that well outline below -- the burden of supplying information is indeed on the taxpayer when he or she is told by the IRS that they underpaid their taxes or when they face an IRS audit. This is a traditional rule, going back a long way, said David Weisbach, a University of Chicago law professor who worked earlier in his career as an attorney-advisor in the Department of Treasurys Office of the Tax Legislative Counsel. The IRS lays out the specifics on aWeb pagetitled Burden of Proof. The responsibility to prove entries, deductions, and statements made on your tax returns is known as the burden of proof, it says. You must be able to prove certain elements of expenses to deduct them. Generally, taxpayers meet their burden of proof by having the information and receipts for the expenses. You should keep adequate records to prove your expenses or have sufficient evidence that will support your own statement. You generally must have documentary evidence, such as receipts, canceled checks, or bills, to support your expenses. In other words, the IRS is presumed to be correct unless the taxpayer produces credible evidence to counter the agencys finding, said Timothy Jacobs, a partner specializing in tax law at the firm Hunton & Williams. Its worth noting that as frustrating as this burden may be, the alternative is even worse, said Neil H. Buchanan, a law professor at George Washington University. If the IRS had the burden to produce evidence, it would have to be given access to individuals' private files, in order to find that evidence, he said. Is that what we really want the IRS to be doing? So, for the most common interactions with the IRS, the burden of proof is indeed on the taxpayer. The exceptions to the rule There are a few exceptions to this rule. The most notable, since the penalties are so severe, are for tax-related criminal cases and civil fraud cases. In these types of cases, the burden of proof is essentially the same as it is for any other criminal case: The government, not the taxpayer, has to prove their case. If the government wants to convict you of murder, it has to show that you intentionally killed someone, said Kermit Roosevelt, a law professor at the University of Pennsylvania. And if the IRS takes you to court, he said, it has to show that you owe a certain amount of taxes and didnt pay it. Technically, Forbes was referring to the burden of production, which is the burden of providing supporting evidence, rather than the burden of proof, which typically refers to the burden of proving a case in court, Buchanan said. Still, the IRS uses the term burden of proof on the Web page that spells out what people have to provide to justify their deductions. So how common are the exceptions? Tax experts said criminal and civil-fraud cases are rare today when compared to ordinary tax-liability cases. Essentially all tax cases are normal, non-fraudulent adjustments, Weisbach said. This ratio of cases suggests that Forbes claim is largely accurate. Nothing the congressman said on the burden of proof would strike me as outside of the norm or the general rule if I or any other tax litigator heard it in everyday conversation, Jacobs said. Our ruling Forbes said the IRS doesn't have to prove something against you. They can walk in and you've got the burden of proof. Hes correct for most tax disputes. As long as no criminal or fraud charges are being tried, and as long as the case is taken up administratively rather than in court, the burden of justifying a taxpayers calculations falls upon the taxpayer. But in the relatively small number of criminal or civil fraud cases, the burden is on the government, just as it is in other types of prosecutions. On balance, we rate Forbes claim Mostly True.

FMD_test_306

The lawyer who brought the case against NationsBank said publicly that Alex Sink had nothing to do with the case, had nothing to do with the situation and didn't know about the problems.

10/26/2010

In their third and final gubernatorial debate on Oct. 25, 2010, Rick Scott and Alex Sink traded accusations that each had been party to fraud. Sink again criticized Scott for his time running Columbia/HCA, highlighting the hospital company's convictions and $1.7 billion in fines for defrauding Medicare and Medicaid. This time, however, Scott countered with allegations that Sink was the president of NationsBank operations in Florida when that company was accused of fraud and forced to pay government fines and settle a class-action lawsuit. Unlike Scott, Sink claimed she had what amounted to a get-out-of-jail-free card. "That case, the lawyer who brought that case -- it was a class-action case against another company -- has even said publicly that Alex Sink had nothing to do with the case, had nothing to do with the situation, and didn't know about the problems," Sink told CNN's John King and the St. Petersburg Times' Adam C. Smith, the debate's moderators. "What more can I say?" In a separate item, we dealt with Scott's accusations. You can read that item here. In this fact check, we'll explore Sink's rebuttal. Some quick background about the case: In 1994, while Sink was president of NationsBank's Florida operations, a stockbroker with the bank's subsidiary, NationsSecurities, came forward with what he described as an orchestrated nationwide scheme to persuade bank customers to move investments from safe, federally insured accounts to riskier brokerage and mutual funds. NationsSecurities broker David Cray, who worked in Florida, stated that the bank intentionally blurred the lines between its traditional banking business and its securities business, misleading customers into thinking those securities investments were protected by the bank or the federal government. The scheme permeated the entire bank, Cray and later others said. Brokers were given sales scripts to convince bank customers to move their money into riskier securities. NationsSecurities branch managers encouraged employees to use fear to sell securities. In one orientation sales meeting, a manager suggested that a broker could ask customers: "Is this your risky money or safe money? If this is risky, I know a guy at Merrill or Dean Witter." NationsBank assisted NationsSecurities by providing brokers with lists of customers who had Certificates of Deposit about to mature. The bank and stockbrokers pushed the mutual funds because they received more lucrative fees, Cray said. The allegations led to a class-action lawsuit from investors who lost money by unknowingly making risky investments, which ultimately resulted in losses. The Department of Justice and the Securities and Exchange Commission also began investigations. Eventually, NationsBank and NationsSecurities settled the investigations, agreeing to pay $8.1 million to investors in 2002, along with civil fines to the federal government of $6.75 million in 2000, $6.4 million in 2002, and $4 million to the SEC in 1998. No criminal charges were ever filed. Sink asserts that the lawyer who initiated the case, Jonathan Alpert of Tampa, has stated that she had nothing to do with the scheme. Here's what Alpert told the St. Petersburg Times and Miami Herald in October when previously asked about Sink's role in selling the risky investments: "Alex Sink could've done nothing about it. It was run out of Charlotte," referring to NationsBank's headquarters. "I know she knew what was going on—that investments were being sold in the bank—but that's it. And she was powerless to stop it, anyway. I had emails where the state presidents were being told what to do, that they had to help the securities people. They would dig into customers' bank accounts to identify people who had enough money to buy securities. Charlotte said: 'This is what's going to happen in your bank lobbies and this is the way it's going to be.' They didn't say you're going to do A, B, C, and D; they would say the bank cooperates fully with NationsSecurities," Alpert said. "If Alex Sink were involved in it, it would be a wonderful story for the gubernatorial election. But she didn't know anything about it." Alpert, who said he voted for Sink, acknowledged that she likely knew that riskier investments were being sold in the bank, but he believed she was probably not aware of how brokers were manipulating customers to close the sales. Sink has previously stated that she had no authority or control over the securities sales. "There were very, very strict firewalls between any kind of securities and brokerage operations and operations of commercial banking," she said. Those firewalls, Sink explained, were the result of the Depression-era Glass-Steagall law that separated commercial and investment banking (the act was repealed in 1999). However, this did not prevent Sink from finding out what was happening in her bank, noted Yale University finance expert Jonathan Macey. "She's the state bank president," he said. "She has the authority and perhaps the responsibility to know what's going on in her lobby." The original whistleblower in the case, former NationsSecurities broker Cray, stated, "I would tend not to point the finger at Alex Sink for this." This brings us back to her statement. At the CNN/St. Petersburg Times debate, Sink said that the lawyer who brought the case against NationsBank publicly stated that Alex Sink had nothing to do with the case, had nothing to do with the situation, and didn't know about the problems. We believe Sink is mostly quoting the lawyer in the NationsBank case, Jonathan Alpert, accurately. Alpert stated that Sink wasn't involved in the deceptive selling of riskier investments through NationsSecurities and didn't know anything about the deceptive practices being employed. The companies NationsBank and NationsSecurities were managed separately. However, Sink did know that securities were being sold in her banks and was in a position to voice questions or concerns about the practice if she sensed anything was being handled inappropriately. This connection is enough for us to rate this claim as Mostly True.

FMD_test_307

Has No Presidential Candidate 'Won Iowa, Florida and Ohio' and Still Lost?

12/10/2020

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. In December 2020, as states certified their election results and confirmed that Democratic candidate Joe Biden had won the U.S. presidential election, President Donald Trump continued to push baseless claims that the election was "rigged," "stolen," or marred by widespread voter fraud. On Dec. 9, Trump furthered this false narrative by claiming on social media that his election loss was an historic oddity in that no other candidate had won the states of Florida and Ohio but still lost the general election. As we pointed out in an article at the time, Trump was wrong. Precedent did exist for a candidate losing an election while winning both Florida and Ohio, namely Richard Nixon in 1960, who—despite capturing those two key states—was defeated by Democratic candidate John F. Kennedy. The following day, Trump doubled down on his erroneous claim, moving the goalposts by asserting that no previous presidential candidate had won the states of Ohio, Florida, and Iowa and "even come close to losing an election"—as Trump himself did in 2020. But Trump was wrong again, for the very same reason. Nixon won all three of those states in the 1960 general election but nevertheless lost the presidency to Kennedy. Like Nixon 60 years earlier, Trump won Florida, Ohio, and Iowa during the 2020 election, but he fell short of the 270 electoral college votes required to secure the presidency. Trump's electoral college total of 232 votes was slightly better than Nixon's 219, but it simply wasn't enough compared to Biden's 306.

FMD_test_308

Was it Denzel Washington who said, "Simply because you do not post it on social media does not imply that you are not working on significant goals"?

04/19/2022

On April 17, 2022, the Anxiety Freedom Today Facebook page shared a post with a quote credited to movie actor Denzel Washington, which included the words, "Just because you don't share it on social media doesn't mean you're not up to big things. Live it and stay low-key. Privacy is everything." It was somewhat ironic that the post about the state of social media led many users to respond with the words, "So true!" Washington has previously discussed the subject of social media, and it is entirely possible that he might agree with the sentiment of this quote. However, there is no record of him ever saying these words. The quote was misattributed, meaning it originally came from someone else. The quote appeared to have originated in a 2016 tweet from author Idil Ahmed on the @idillionaire Twitter account. This was not the first time this sort of thought was expressed, but it was the first record of these exact words that we could find. It wasn't until 2018, two years after @idillionaire's tweet was created, that Washington's name first appeared with the quote. A fake tweet screenshot began circulating that purportedly came from the @Denzel Twitter account; however, that account doesn't exist. This isn't a real tweet. It was likely created using a fake tweet generator website. Additionally, it could be argued that if Washington were to join Twitter, he probably wouldn't use this profile picture. As of April 2022, Washington did not appear to have an official Twitter account. An account named @OfficialDenzel was active on Twitter in the past, but it is not verified by the social media platform, and it's unclear if it has any affiliation with the actor. After the quote about social media appeared in the fake tweet screenshot with Washington's name and face, it was shared as text and in memes. From these posts and memes, the quote then spread to websites that collect quotes from famous people. For example, Goodreads.com has a page dedicated to the misattributed quote, even though Washington never said those words. Over the years, we have found that these kinds of websites that collect quotes aren't reliable sources of information, no matter how high they rank in Google search results. Again, there is no record of Washington ever saying, "Just because you don't share it on social media, doesn't mean you're not up to big things. Live it and stay low-key. Privacy is everything." However, he has previously shared his thoughts on the state of social media. For example, he once spoke to CBN News about the subject in a Facebook video from November 2017. In the video, Washington said the following about the potentially negative effects of social media: "Turn it off. That's what I'd say. It's hard for young people now because they're addicted. If you don't think you're addicted, and I'm talking about anyone, from the highest to the lowest. If you don't think you're addicted, then see if you can turn it off for a week. It got quiet in here, didn't it? Didn't it get real quiet? It's a tool, so we should use it. God has blessed us with free will. Now it's free will magnified. Free will on steroids. You're free to go in any direction you want. It will allow you, and it's not the enemy. It's just a reflection of our own free will. And we all want to be liked. But now we want to be liked by 16 million. And now, some of us will do anything to be liked. We used to do anything to be liked, but it was by the person in front of you. Now it's to be liked by 16 million people that you don't know. We have to ask ourselves what is the long-term, if not the short-term, effect of too much information." The video, which was also reposted elsewhere, resulted in various users replying (again, on social media) about the effects of social media with the words, "So true!" Washington also spoke about the subject in a YouTube video that was posted in 2017. In summary, while it's true that Washington has spoken before about the potential dangers of social media, there is no record of him ever saying the following quote: "Just because you don't share it on social media doesn't mean you are not up to big things. Live it and stay low-key. Privacy is everything." As a parting thought, we also noticed that the quote was being misattributed with Washington's name on Reddit. At the bottom of the page, the very last comment appeared to receive no attention or upvotes. However, it made a strong point through the use of humor.

FMD_test_309

Is the 2020 Election 'Far From Over'?

11/20/2020

Voting in the 2020 U.S. Election may be over, but the misinformation keeps on ticking. Never stop fact-checking. Follow our post-election coverage here. here In mid-November 2020, after all major news organizations declared former U.S. Vice President Joe Biden the winner of the presidential election, President Donald Trump's campaign claimed in a series of fundraising emails that the election was "far from over," and that supporters should not believe messages to the contrary. (Read more fact checks like this one here.) Joe Biden Donald Trump here In other words, the emails claimed either Biden or Trump could serve as the country's 46th president come Inauguration Day on Jan. 20, 2021 even though Biden won key battleground states, including Michigan and Pennsylvania, by comfortable vote margins and exceeded the 270 Electoral College votes required to win the presidency. The emails like the president's tweets that falsely claimed he had won or denied Biden's victory were part of an aggressive disinformation campaign attempting to attack the integrity of America's democratic process and convince supporters that Trump had a significant chance to serve another term. falsely claimed he had won "Joe Biden only won in the eyes of the FAKE NEWS MEDIA. I concede NOTHING. We have a long way to go this was a flawed ELECTION," said a Nov. 19 campaign email obtained by Snopes. To unpack the underlying claim that American elections provide losing candidates an opportunity to defy the outcome of the popular vote let's first lay out the country's steps for presidential elections under the Constitution, federal statutes, and state laws. Every four years, when Americans cast ballots in presidential elections, they are participating in the countrys popular vote. That happened Nov. 3 in the Trump-Biden race. Days later on Nov. 7, Biden was announced the winner of the popular vote based on the number of votes counted so far compared to the margin of votes between him and Trump in key battleground states. (Read why and how journalists make that determination in presidential races here.) here Typically, at that point in an election, the losing candidate acknowledges defeat by conceding to his opponent and addressing supporters in a speech. But Trump not only did not do that, he and his allies went a step further by spewing the unfounded conspiracy theory that any person or group who acknowledged Biden's victory was working to undermine the president. defeat by conceding Whether a candidate accepts the outcome of the popular vote or not, state officials at polling sites nationwide continue to count remaining ballots over the course of days or weeks, according to their respective rules. That process, which historically is a procedural step to cement the outcome of the popular vote, requires governors to prepare whats called a Certificate of Ascertainment that lists their state's slate of electors. For example, Biden won the popular vote in Minnesota, so that's state's certificate would list 10 Democratic electors who pledged to vote for Biden through the Electoral College. popular vote electors Likewise, if, hypothetically, Trump had won the Midwestern state, the state's certificate would list a different group of 10 people electors who pledged to vote for the Republican candidate. All of this said, electors meet at state capitals in early December, weeks after Election Day, to formally cast votes for president and vice president, per guidelines outlined in the Constitution. No constitutional provision, nor any federal law, requires electors to vote according to the results of the popular vote; however, the majority of states and the District of Columbia have their own laws governing the Electoral College and aim to keep electors from defying the popular vote. Here are specific deadlines for those above-described steps in presidential elections, per The Associated Press: The Associated Press Dec. 8 is the deadline for resolving election disputes at the state level. All state recounts and court contests over presidential election results are to be completed by this date. Dec. 14: Electors vote by paper ballot in their respective states and the District of Columbia. Thirty-three states and D.C. have laws or party regulations requiring electors to vote the same way the popular vote goes in the state, and in some states, electors can even be replaced or subjected to penalties, according to the Congressional Research Service. Dec. 23: The certificates must be delivered to the designated officials. If they are not delivered, the law provides alternative avenues for getting the results to Washington. Jan. 6, 2021: The House and Senate hold a joint session to count the electoral votes. If one ticket has received 270 or more electoral votes, the president of the Senate, currently Vice President Mike Pence, announces the results. So, in short, a presidential election doesn't end on Election Day, nor when a candidate is projected the winner by news media. Rather, presidential elections officially conclude the following year, in January. But it's a false interpretation of state and federal laws governing presidential elections to consider those continuing steps after polls close on Election Day when states certify results or choose electors, or the Electoral College votes for president as opportunities to defy the popular vote. Per analysis of the guidelines by constitutional experts and election academics, the post-election day procedures mainly serve to cement what voters decided at the county and state level. We should note here: The emails from Trump's campaign alleging the election was "far from over" asked supporters to chip in to a so-called "Official Election Defense Fund" or "Election Defense Task Force," both of which the campaign framed as costly initiatives involving ballot recounts or various lawsuits to challenge Biden's win. But according to Brendan Fischer, director of the federal reform program at Campaign Legal Center, the average donor's money was not covering those expenses. Brendan Fischer "Small donors who give to Trump thinking they are financing an 'official election defense fund' are in fact helping pay down the Trump campaigns debt or funding his post-presidential political operation," Fischer tweeted. tweeted In sum, it was accurate to claim the 2020 presidential election was incomplete as of mid-November. However, it was false to categorize the remaining procedures as reasonable opportunities for Trump to overturn Biden's victory. For those reasons, we rate this claim "false."

FMD_test_310

Are Costco shutting down stores throughout the country?

02/10/2021

On Feb. 10, 2021, an online advertisement appeared announcing significant news about Costco Wholesale. The ad was displayed on various websites via the Outbrain advertising network. It featured a picture of a Costco store and read: "[Pics] Say Goodbye: Stores Closing In 2020 Across The Nation." The outdated ad mentioned the year 2020, likely indicating that it had been displayed prior to the new year and had not yet been disabled. Readers who clicked the ad were led to a lengthy slideshow article on the Housecoast website, which spanned more than 50 pages and appeared to have been originally published on Feb. 10, 2020. Companies such as Lowe's, Kohl's, JCPenney, and Macy's made the list. While several of the stores in the article had experienced financial troubles, many of them had not yet closed. Costco never appeared in the story. The clickbait ad led readers to believe that Costco would be closing its stores, which was false. The story itself was poorly written and contained numerous grammatical errors. When e-commerce started expanding in the last few years, "brick and mortar" stores began to face the brunt of the economic crisis. In the years leading up to 2020, many major stores closed their physical locations, including international outlets. This was a significant blow to the business of commerce, as the closing rate had been growing rapidly and was projected to worsen in 2020. We compiled a list of stores that noted they would be closing their doors in 2020; for some, this meant closing all their outlets. On Dec. 10, 2020, Costco Wholesale released its fiscal year 2020 financial results, which were strong. There was no indication that Costco would be closing stores: net sales for fiscal 2020 totaled $163 billion, an increase of 9%, with a comparable sales increase of 8%. Net income was $4 billion, or $9.02 per diluted share, also an increase of 9%. Additionally, the company surpassed 100 million members worldwide, contributing to membership revenue of $3.54 billion. Costco.com played a vital role in meeting members' needs, especially for those choosing or required to stay at home. Our e-commerce business saw a 50% increase in sales, particularly in same-day and 2-day grocery deliveries, prescription medications, electronics, and office supplies. Additional strong sales were observed in apparel, appliances, health and beauty products, and home furnishings. Our depots responded to unprecedented volume by shifting certain operations to 24 hours a day, seven days a week. As circumstances allowed, expansion in fiscal 2020 continued with the opening of 13 new warehouses. In fiscal 2021, we expect to open 20 new buildings. In summary, a misleading ad suggested that Costco was closing its stores, but the resulting story never mentioned Costco even once. In the past, the Housecoast website published a similar misleading ad about CNN Chief White House Correspondent Kaitlan Collins. Snopes debunks a wide range of content, and online advertisements are no exception. Misleading ads often lead to obscure websites that host lengthy slideshow articles with numerous pages. This practice is known as advertising "arbitrage." The advertiser's goal is to earn more money from ads displayed on the slideshow's pages than it cost to show the initial ad that attracted viewers.

FMD_test_311

Fannie Mae is relaxing credit requirements to support mortgage lending.

10/02/2008

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

FMD_test_312

Did Kurt Cobain Say of 'Nevermind' Album Cover, 'If You're Offended by This You Must Be a Closet Pedophile'?

08/25/2021

In 1991, as the cover art for Nirvana's second studio album a now iconic photograph of a naked baby in a pool swimming after a dollar on a fishing hook was being prepared, there was some discussion about censoring the image by airbrushing out the nudity. Late front man Kurt Cobain reportedly replied by saying that they could censor it by placing a sticker over the baby's genitals along with the statement: "If you're offended by this you must be a closet pedophile." This quote resurfaced in August 2021 when the model who portrayed the baby, Spencer Elden, filed a lawsuit against the band claiming that he was exploited and that the artwork bordered on child pornography. resurfaced filed a lawsuit against the band This is a genuine quote from Cobain. Art Director Robert Fisher was one of the first to suggest that the baby's genitalia could be censored if anyone thought that it would be problematic. A photograph showing early concept art for the album's cover includes two written comments by Fisher. Fisher wrote: "If anyone has a problem with his dick we can remove it." Image via cait22888 on Flickr Flickr Cobain responded to Fisher's comments by saying that they could censor the nudity with a sticker, reading "If you're offended by this, you must be a closet pedophile." This incident is recalled in a passage from Michael Azerrad's book "Come As You Are: The Story of Nirvana." Come As You Are: The Story of Nirvana. The only thing was, the baby's penis was quit visible. "If there's a problem with his dick," Fisher said, "we can cut it off." Some people in the Geffen/DGC sales department did worry that the traditionally conservative chain stores might object to the penis and Fisher even went so far as to begin preparing cover with the penis airbushed out. Kurt had anticipated some outcry as well, and has already composed some copy to put on a sticker over the problematic member. It read, "If you're offended by this, you must be a closet pedophile." Cobain recounted his version of these events during an interview for "Hot Metal" with journalist Robyn Doreian in 1991. In Cobain's version, he doesn't quite take credit for the idea, instead saying that "we prepared" to deal with censorship issues with a sticker. interview As with most artists signed to the Geffen label, Nirvana have complete artistic control over everyting they do. "I designed out T-shirts, and we have had control over things like how long we tour and who we tour with, and we had control over what songs we recorded." Whilst on the subject of the aesthetically pleasing cover of Nevermind, I enquire as to whether the boy is actually a photo of Kurt as a little tacker. "No, it's not," he remarks drly. Has there been any trouble from censorship groups such as the PMRC for blatantly displaying a willy on the cover? "No, surprisingly not. We prepared to alleviate that problem if anyone were to freak out about it by putting a sticker on it saying, "if you are offended by this, you must be a closet pedophile.'" The sticker wasn't needed in the end as the album was released without any alterations to the baby's body. But now, just over 30 years after the album's release, the band is being sued, as Elden alleges that the picture violates child pornography laws. Elden alleges Sources:

FMD_test_313

Charge Your Phone Using Body Electricity

03/27/2015

Claim: You can recharge your cell phone using body electricity. Example: [Collected via e-mail, March 2015] Is there any truth to this video? i.e. you can charge your phoneusing body electricity? Seems just too simple: Origins: According to the video displayed above (titled "Charge Your Phone with Body Electricity!"), the perpetual modern dilemma of how to ensure your cell phone is always charged or charging can be solved with just two silver coins, a piece of paper, a paper clip, and your hot, sweaty body. In terms of appealing propositions, this one features the advantages of frugality, ease of use, and the enticing tempt of never suffering a temporarily bricked device again. Mobile users can be spared the shame of ever having to ask virtual strangers for loans of their charger cords, if they can put aside the notion that body-charging a cell phone phone is a fairly awkward public proposition. Whether the human body can charge electronic devices (such as phones, or pacemakers, or hearing aids) is not a subject that lies entirely within the realm of science fiction. A September 2014 Newsweek article tackled the potential offered by body-based device charging, but with the caveat that the technology was nowhere near accessible just yet: Newsweek Of course, with all due respect to Voix's cool invention, talk is cheap. Piezoelectrics energy harvesters haven't yet made a dent in the real world, for the most part. On the other hand, all of the researchers and industry reps interviewed for this story agree that piezoelectrics is very much poised to become a real commercial forceperhaps within the next three to five years. The gait-powered backpacks and knee braces look likely to break through even sooner. It is perhaps telling that these two last products don't use piezoelectrics and produce somewhere around 1,000 times more electricity. But as electronic devices continue to shrink and need less juice to work, and piezoelectronic ones are tweaked to produce more power, the technologies will likely meet in the middle. While you one day might be able to harness body-generated power to charge a phone, no useful manner of doing so existed when the video in question was posted online. Moreover, its extraordinary claims about harnessing body-generated power to recharge cell phones were not proved within the video; viewers were simply informed that the trick worked without being presented with any corroborating evidence that the phone shown in the video hadn't been charged in some other fashion. Some viewers attempted to replicate the feat shown in the impressive clip with multiple devices, only to come up short: A Quora user also opined that the body electricity claim didn't wash in terms of the mechanical process of recharging cell phones: This particular video is pure rubbish. There are 4 contacts in a USB connector, only one of them is power. You do not make a capacitor with a piece of paper and two "silver" coins, and anyway a capacitor is not what you need. And you can get a few tenths of a volt if your skin is damp and if you used two different metallic coins, but that is less than a tenth of the voltage you need and less than a thousandth of the current required. So it's wrong on so many levels it's funny. Whether or not phones could eventually be charged using body electricity, there's no evidence the video shown here managed that feat. No corroborating videos of people charging phones in such a manner have turned up, and multiple viwers have reported that the steps outlined in the video did not work to successfully recharge any cell phone. Last updated: 27 March 2015

FMD_test_314

No, Pfizer Does Not Own Neil Young's Music Catalog

02/04/2022

In early 2022, folk-rock legend Neil Young found himself the target of a laughable conspiracy theory after he spoke out against COVID-19-related misinformation. On Jan. 24, Young wrote that he wanted his music removed from the streaming platform Spotify, unless the company ended its agreement to host Joe Rogan's podcast, which has on several occasions provided a forum for potentially harmful misinformation about COVID-19 vaccines. In response, Spotify removed Young's back catalog from its library, rather than cutting ties with Rogan. wrote misinformation removed In the midst of that controversy, vaccine skeptics and COVID-19 conspiracy theorists shared a ludicrous conspiracy theory claiming that the pharmaceutical company Pfizer which produces a widely-used COVID-19 vaccine either owned the rights to Young's music catalog or, through a chain of connections, held sway over the rock star and influenced, or even ordered, his pro-vaccination stance. For example, some social media users posted a meme with the text, "When you realize Neil Young's music catalogue is owned by Pfizer": posted meme Others did not explicitly claim that Pfizer itself owned some or all of Young's catalog, but did suggest that the company held sway over him, by way of a series of connections, and that therefore Young's opposition to Rogan and his criticism of vaccine misinformation should be dismissed as the result of corruption and self-compromise, rather than a principled stance. did suggest series connections On social media, a conspiracy theorist who uses the moniker An0maly outlined the theory in helpful detail, starting with the observation that in January 2021, Young reportedly sold half of his catalog to a U.K.-based investment fund called Hipgnosis, for around $150 million. An0maly continued: outlined the theory So, 50% to UK investment fund Hipgnosis. In October of 2021, Blackstone and Hipgnosis Song Management launched [a] "$1 billion partnership to invest in songs, recorded music, music IP and royalties." Interesting. Blackstone is "an American alternative investment management company" who, interestingly enough, in 2020 announced the appointment of "Jeffrey B. Kindler, former chairman and CEO of Pfizer, as [a] senior adviser." Now I don't know the answer to this, but did Neil Young independently make the decision to try and blackball Joe Rogan for questioning big pharma and the government narrative? Or was it a team decision with a multi-billion-dollar investment firm who also owns a big chunk of his music? The first point to note here is that, even among those promulgating the Young-Pfizer theory, it is not seriously suggested that Pfizer itself which is, after all, a pharmaceutical company owns the rights to any of Young's music. That claim can be dismissed. Before assessing the logic behind the theory, and its coherence, it's worth briefly evaluating the accuracy of each of its components. First, it appears to be true that, in January 2021, Young sold half of his songs to Hipgnosis. In a news release, Hipgnosis wrote: "...The Company has acquired 50% of Neil Youngs worldwide copyright and income interests in his entire song catalogue comprising 1,180 songs." news release Secondly, it is also true that in October 2021, Blackstone bought an ownership stake in Hipgnosis, as demonstrated in news releases published by both companies. Finally, it is also true that in August 2020, Blackstone hired Jeff Kindler as a senior advisor, and that Kindler used to be the chairman and CEO of Pfizer. both companies hired Jeff Kindler used to be However, rather than having uncovered a web of corruption, those pushing the Young-Pfizer story were engaging in the classic conspiracy theorist's fallacy of finding whatever possible connection they can between two separate entities (in this case, Young and Pfizer) without first testing the logical or chronological basis of that putative link. In other words, "connecting the dots" by whatever means available, rather than uncovering an actual, organic conspiracy. Let's look at the sequence of events. Kindler left Pfizer in 2010 a full decade before he joined Blackstone, and before the emergence of the COVID-19 pandemic prompted Pfizer to develop a vaccine along with its German partner BioNTech. left Pfizer in 2010 Blackstone is a publicly traded company, meaning it has a fiduciary duty to its shareholders, and Kindler, in turn, has a professional obligation to provide sound business and strategic advice to Blackstone. Aside from presenting no concrete evidence whatsoever, those pushing the Young-Pfizer conspiracy theory appear to be asking readers to believe, despite these circumstances, one of two explanations: publicly traded company As outlandish as these scenarios are, they are premised on even shakier assumptions: for example, that Kindler was even consulted on the Blackstone-Hipgnosis deal; or that if he was, he was in favor of it; and that Young has any remaining financial or commercial obligations to Hipgnosis and/or Blackstone after the sale of half his music after all, if that deal is already done, what is the supposed basis of Hipgnosis or Blackstone's putative leverage over Young? It's not necessary to list, in excruciating detail, each of the known factual and logical flaws associated with the Young-Pfizer conspiracy theory. The claim that the pharmaceutical company "owned Young's music catalog" was patently false, and the theory of a fantastical web of corruption, with Kindler at its centre, was presented without any concrete evidence and, perhaps more importantly, made no sense whatsoever.

FMD_test_315

Did Joe Biden Use the N-Word in a Recorded Speech?

02/25/2021

In late February 2021, several social media users alleged U.S. President Joe Biden used the N-word while addressing world leaders at a virtual event to discuss international security policies. As part of the Munich Security Conference, an annual event that convenes hundreds of policy makers from across the world, Biden spoke on camera for roughly 20 minutes on Feb. 19, describing his administration's desire to be on good terms with the European Union. Approximately three-quarters of the way into his remarks, social media users alleged he uttered the racial slur referring to Black people. Some people accused the president of saying the N-word accidentally, while others raised the possibility that he intentionally made the alleged racist comment. accidentally intentionally One conservative commentator pointed to closed captioning on recordings of the speech on YouTube as alleged evidence of the president indeed saying the word, despite the fact the video platform's captioning system runs on computer-generated, speech-recognition software that is known for error and not necessarily a true indication of what someone said. conservative commentator known for error To investigate the legitimacy of the underlying allegation whether the president at any point during the virtual Munich Security Conference event used the N-word for whatever reason we obtained an official White House transcript, as well as a video recording via C-SPAN, of Biden's speech. White House transcript C-SPAN Considering that the social media posts made use of brief video clips of his alleged comments around the 16-minute mark in the C-Span footage, we focused on that portion of his remarks, specifically. At that point, he said, according to the transcript and video footage: "Look, the range of challenges Europe and the United States must take on together is broad and complex. And Im eager to hear Im eager to hear Im eager to hear next from my good friends and outstanding leaders, Chancellor Merkel, about her thoughts on the way forward together." While saying "I'm eager to hear," Biden stuttered, repeating the phrase three times. On the third time, the consonant "mmmm" in the word "I'm" blended with the next word, "eager," to make a "mnnm-eager" sound. That was the source of the social media posts' allegations, despite the fact that the hypothetical insertion of the N-word there would be abrupt and confusing, contextually speaking, no matter what the speaker's reason for saying it. A more plausible reason for the president's phrasing in that moment was his speech disorder. On several occasions, Biden has openly discussed his struggle with stuttering over the course of his life. It is a speech impediment and neurological disorder that may result in repetitions (D-d-d-dog), prolongations (Mmmmmmilk), or blocks (an absence of sound), according to the non-profit National Stuttering Association. The instance Munich Security Conference appeared to be a combination of repeating and prolonging phonetic sounds. discussed his struggle non-profit National Stuttering Association In other words, the claim is false Biden did not use the N-word in that moment, nor at any other time during the virtual speech. The February 2021 posts were not the first to twist Biden's words to accuse him of using the racial slur. During a 1985 Senate Judiciary Committee hearing when the president was a senator representing Delaware Biden read out loud portions of a memo by Louisiana legislators that included the N-word, and supporters of former President Donald Trump attempted to frame that moment of Biden reciting other people's words as an example of his alleged racism. See our fact check into the claim here. here

FMD_test_316

Tagg Romney Owns Ohio Voting Machines?

10/23/2012

Claim: Mitt Romney's son Tagg owns a company that manufactures voting machines. Example: [Collected via e-mail, October 2012] Is it true that Tagg Romney, son of Mitt Romney, buys voting machines through Bain Capitol? Tagg Romney, the son of Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney, has purchased electronic voting machines that will be used in the 2012 elections in Ohio, Texas, Oklahoma, Washington and Colorado. Through a closely held equity fund called Solamere, Mitt Romney and his wife, son and brother are major investors in an investment firm called H.I.G. Capital. H.I.G. in turn holds a majority share and three out of five board members in Hart Intercivic, a company that owns the notoriously faulty electronic voting machines that will count the ballots in swing state Ohio November 7. Hart machines will also be used elsewhere in the United States. In other words, a candidate for the presidency of the United States, and his brother, wife and son, have a straight-line financial interest in the voting machines that could decide this fall's election. These machines cannot be monitored by the public. But they will help decide who "owns" the White House. Origins: This somewhat tangled tale of intrigue has Tagg Romney, the son of Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney, as owner of a company that manufactures voting machines which will be used in the upcoming presidential election through the following chain: After his father's 2008 presidential campaign ended, Mitt Romney's son, Tagg Romney, started Solamere Capital, a private equity fund, along with Spencer Zwick, the Romney campaign's top fund raiser, and a third partner, Eric Scheuermann. Tagg Romney's parents, Mitt and Ann Romney, contributed $10 million to the firm's first fund. Solamere Capital According to the New York Times, "unlike many private equity funds that specialize in scouting out companies to invest in directly, Solamere is a 'fund of funds' that invests in 22 other private equity funds," and one of the equity firms with which Solamere Capital has partnered is H.I.G. Capital. In 2011, H.I.G. Capital made a controlling investment in Hart InterCivic, a national provider of "election voting systems, election management products and services" used in hundreds of voting jurisdictions in several states, including a high-population county in the key swing state of Ohio. investment jurisdictions Therefore, Tagg Romney allegedly holds a significant ownership interest in the manufacturer of voting machines that will be used in an election determining whether his father will become President of the United States. However, according to a Solamere spokesman quoted by the Weekly Standard, although Solamere has some shared investments with H.I.G. Capital, the latter firm's investment in Hart Intercivic is not one of them: "Not only does Solamere have no direct or indirect interest in this company [Hart Intercivic], Solamere and its partners have no ownership in this company, nor do they have any ownership in nor have made any investments in the fund that invested in the voting machine company," the spokesman said. So while Solamere does partner with HIG on investments, none of those investments involve Hart Intercivic. HIG may be simultaneously managing investments with both companies, but the investments are kept separate, as required by law. Put simply, Tagg Romney is not an "investor in a voting machine company." An H.I.G. spokesman quoted by the Huffington Post also said Solamere itself has no investment in the H.I.G. Capital fund that is invested in Hart Intercivic: [Charles] Sipkins [said] that there is no connection at all between Solamere and Hart Intercivic. "Solamere has invested in a certain H.I.G. Capital fund. Solamere has no interest in the specific H.I.G. fund that invested in Hart Intercivic." He added that Solamere's total investment in H.I.G. represents 0.05 percent of H.I.G.'s total assets. It is true that H.I.G. Capital's co-founder, Anthony Tamer, and several of H.I.G.'s managing directors once worked at Bain & Company (whose CEO was Mitt Romney); that Anthony Tamer and his wife are donors to the Romney campaign; and that H.I.G. Capital is the sixth-largest financial contributor to Romney fundraising contributor committees; and it is true that Tagg Romney's firm, Solamere, has investments in other H.I.G. funds that are run by partners who are former Romney colleagues and current Romney fundraisers, and those partners also manage the fund invested in Hart Intercivic. That close a connection between the Romney family, Romney campaign contributors, and a provider of voting systems may raise some eyebrows, but it doesn't establish any direct ownership link between Tagg Romney and a provider of voting systems. Additionally, the potential for vote-tampering in Ohio through manipulation of Hart Intercivic's equipment is quite low. As the Cleveland Plain-Dealer reported, the pieces of Hart InterCivic equipment to be used in Ohio aren't electronic voting machines that record voters' selections directly through touch screens they are merely standalone scanners that tabulate paper ballots, so any close or suspect results could be confirmed through a recount: Elections officials in Ohio's Hamilton and Williams counties the only two of Ohio's 88 counties that use equipment made by Hart InterCivic as well as company representatives say there's no way such meddling could occur. Both counties use a paper balloting system in which results are tallied by scanners made by Hart InterCivic. All programming of the machines, diagnostic testing, and vote tabulation is done by elections staff in each county and no vote tabulation is done over the Internet, county election board representatives say. The paper ballots are there as backup and can be recounted with Democratic and Republican party representatives on hand. "There is no truth to the idea that anyone could get into our system and tamper with the results," said Hamilton County elections board deputy director Sally Krisel. Steven Rosenfeld also noted on AlterNet that: AlterNet Even if an investment (which is fairly hands-off) led to some sort of manipulative scanning (which is far-fetched) that wasn't caught in pre-election audit testing (even more far-fetched), the problem with this theory is that any significant deviation from the expected turnout models and exit polls (and pre-election polls) will lead to an examination and audit of the paper ballots. Any real deviation would not just be noticed; it would be quarantined and examined. If you're planning to steal an election, leaving a paper trail is not how to do it. This is a guilt-by-association theory. Too many eyes are on every step of the voting process this year. It's not 2004. And the machines in question are no better or worse than optical scan systems from other manufacturers, Ohio's former Democratic secretary of state found in independent testing. In contrast, other electronic voting machines used across Ohio don't leave as extensive a record of actual balloting as the optical scan systems, as they rely on cash register-like tape rolls to record every vote. Last updated: 27 October 2012 Eaton, Sabrina. "Elections Boards Deny That Mitt Romney Backers Could Tamper with Results." The Cleveland Plain-Dealer. 24 October 2012. Fang, Lee. "Tagg Team: The Romney Family Recipe for Crony Capitalism." The Nation. 29 October 2012. Froomkin, Dan. "Pro-Romney Firm's Purchase of Voting Machine Company Raises Alarms." The Huffington Post. 23 October 2012. Luo, Michael and Julie Creswell. "Ties to Romney '08 Helped Fuel an Equity Firm." The New York Times. 30 April 2012. Rosenfeld, Stephen. "5 Reasons Karl Rove Is NOT Going to Electronically Steal This Election." AlterNet. 27 October 2012. Warren, Michael. "Tagg Romney Is Not an 'Investor in a Voting Machine Company'." The Weekly Standard. 23 October 2012.

FMD_test_317

Does Video Show 'US Military Sending Huge Planes Full of Heavy-Duty Equipment to Israel' in 2023?

10/11/2023

On Oct. 11, 2023, a user on X named Matt Wallace (@MattWallace888) posted a video with a caption that claimed it showed the U.S. military "sending huge planes full of heavy-duty equipment to Israel," apparently to be used in its war against Hamas. However, the video in the post contained clips that were at least four years old. In other words, the video had nothing to do with the Israel-Hamas war. As we previously reported, the account bearing Wallace's name is known for spreading baseless conspiracy theories following massive tragic events. He has even bragged about making money on X by promoting such false rumors. He was warned not to post this video from Maui, Hawaii, which, it turns out, is actually an explosion in Macul, Chile, from May. It received 20,000 retweets, 54,000 likes, and 10 million views before being Community Noted. The video in question showed a C-5M Super Galaxy taxiing and taking off from a runway. During the taxiing process, several aircraft, possibly CV-22 Ospreys and other helicopters, were visible on the ground. The video consisted of three clips in total. We traced the first and third clips to a YouTube video that was uploaded on Oct. 5, 2019. It appeared to have been recorded the day before it was uploaded. The number on the side of the airplane appeared to be "7030." The second clip in the video showed an airplane with the number "7045." That clip was at least months old, according to another YouTube video that displayed the exact same shot at the 4:42 mark. In other words, Wallace's video showed two different aircraft. In Wallace's upload of these clips, the shots were mirrored horizontally. This mirroring made the words and numbers appear backward. Sometimes, misinformation and disinformation purveyors mirror images and videos to try to avoid reverse-image search detection. We reached out to Wallace to ask if he was aware that the video was old. We also inquired whether he was the person who horizontally mirrored the shots. This story will be updated if we receive answers to our questions. While the video itself was unrelated to the war, the rest of Wallace's post contained genuine reporting from The Associated Press that was published days after Hamas' surprise terrorist attack in Israel. That story read as follows: A plane carrying advanced armaments designed to facilitate significant military operations landed Tuesday evening at the Nevatim Airbase in southern Israel, the Israel Defense Forces said. We are grateful for the U.S. backing and assistance to the IDF and to the State of Israel in general during this challenging period. Our common enemies know that the cooperation between our militaries is stronger than ever and is a key part in ensuring regional security and stability, the IDF said in a statement. Further, on Oct. 10, the U.S. Department of Defense published specifics of the kind of equipment being sent to Israel: [U.S. President Joe] Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris spoke with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu today, and Biden assured him that the U.S. response to the events will be swift, decisive, and overwhelming. "My team has been in near constant communication with our Israeli partners and partners all across the region and the world from the moment this crisis began," the president said. "We're surging additional military assistance, including ammunition and interceptors to replenish Iron Dome. We are going to make sure that Israel does not run out of these critical assets to defend its cities and its citizens." For more details about the war, including the most recent death toll figures, we recommend referencing live updates from ABC News, The New York Times, and The AP.

FMD_test_318

As Jim Doyles Commerce secretary, Mary Burke spent $12.5 million dollars to buy a vacant lot for a company that said it had no plans to create jobs in Wisconsin and had laid off 800 workers.

07/10/2014

In his latest TV ad, Gov. Scott Walker rips challenger Mary Burkes attempt to attract a giant Illinois-based company to add thousands of jobs in Wisconsin when Burke ran the state Commerce Department under Democratic Gov. Jim Doyle. As Jim Doyles Commerce secretary, Mary Burke spent $12.5 million dollars to buy a vacant lot for a company that said it had no plans to create jobs in Wisconsin,the adsays. In fact, the same company had already laid off over 800 workers when Burke closed the deal. The ads kicker: Mary Burke says shell work to create jobs and spend our tax money wisely. But her record as Jim Doyles Commerce secretary tells a different story. Is Walker right about his likely Democratic opponent in the November 2014 election? Did Burke really authorize an aid package for a company that said it had no plans to create jobs here -- after massive layoffs at the firm? The Burke campaign reacted to the ad by saying: Everyone from local officials to the local chamber of commerce to Walker's own administration agrees that this was and is a good deal from an economic development standpoint. The grant contained strong protections for taxpayers if job creation goals were not met or infrastructure was not developed for economic development. Lets dig into what happened. The ad focuses on a major move by Doyle and Burke in the spring of the 2006 election year. In March 2006, they announced a $12.5 million forgivable loan funded through federal community block grant funds, the largest such award in Commerce Department history. It was to support development of 500 acres acquired in Kenosha County by global pharmaceutical maker Abbott Laboratories Inc. Abbott, a major employer of Wisconsin residents based just 15 miles south of Kenosha County, had purchased parcels of land on the Wisconsin side since June 2005 for possible expansion. Doyle and Burke sought to augment that purchase with another 40 acres paid for with the $12.5 million state award. They and local officials wanted to get the land in order to block plans for a truck stop they thought could impede development in the area. Judging by the comments of Doyle and Burke at the time -- she had full confidence 2,400 jobs would result; he welcomed the company to Wisconsin -- youd have thought Abbott had already announced its expansion in early 2006. But theJournal Sentinel reported Wednesdaythat not only did no jobs materialize, federal officials in 2013 demanded the money back. Eight years after the 2006 deal, Abbott has not developed the Kenosha County land. Abbott showed interest Did it have no plans to create jobs, as the Walker ad claims? In one sense, Abbott clearly had shown an interest in possible expansion in Wisconsin, as evidenced by the land purchases made with its own funds. The possibility was real enough for local officials in Kenosha County to actively work on working on paving the way for the firm. The company paid out $35 million for those parcels. But that solid interest fell short of an actual plan to build and start hiring. (The company, we should note, also signed a development agreement with the Village of Pleasant Prairie to develop that land. But that was a year after Burkes agency made the award). The company didnt stand alongside state officials when Doyle announced the loan in 2006. And officials said precious little about their intentions at that time. Heres a look back: Chicago Tribune story, Feb. 14, 2006: Abbott has acquired approximately 500 acres of land in Pleasant Prairie, Wis., in anticipation of future growth and expansion, a company spokesman said. No specific plans are in place at this time for development of the property. Milwaukee Journal Sentinel story, March 3, 2006: Abbott spokesman Jonathan Hamilton said the Wisconsin site is for future growth, without any specific plans at this time. Commerce Department newsletter, April 2006: Abbott has purchased this land in Wisconsin in anticipation of future growth and expansion, said Dale Johnson, the companys divisional vice president for State Government Affairs. We are pleased to have worked with the Governor, his staff, the Village of Pleasant Prairie and the Kenosha Area Business Alliance. Those comments made clear the company was preparing for possible expansion in Wisconsin, but had no specific plan at the moment. Feds object One media story, in the Chicago Tribune in February 2006, speculated that Abbotts Wisconsin land buys might be leverage for the company on various issues it had before Illinois lawmakers. With the uncertain timetable in mind, the Commerce Departments aid deal was long term. If in 10 years, at least 2,400 jobs were created by Abbott in Wisconsin, the loan -- actually made to the village of Pleasant Prairie, which passed the funds to Abbott -- would not have to be repaid. In theory, that means there is still time to make the expansion happen with help from the loan. But the US Housing and Urban Development office in Milwaukee demanded the $12.3 million back in 2013 saying the development project was ineligible for the block grant dollars the state had used. The reasons the federal agency cited in its decision are relevant to judging whether Abbott stated any plans to create jobs in Wisconsin. A letter from HUD to the state in August 2013 concluded that the Commerce Department had no written commitment from Abbott to develop the property or create jobs. State officials agreed to that deal at the time. The federal agency declared that Commerce participated in a speculative land banking venture without ensuring that the funded activity would be eligible. Even years later, the specific proposed use of the acquired land has not yet been identified, HUDs Sernorma Mitchell wrote to state Department of Administration Secretary Mike Huebsch. Those comments from HUD help Walkers case. Finally, the Walker ad also mentions layoffs, citing Chicago newspaper stories. Media in Illinois reported that Abbott cut at least that many jobs in Illinois in 2005 and early 2006. Our rating Walkers ad said: As Jim Doyles Commerce secretary, Mary Burke spent $12.5 million dollars to buy a vacant lot for a company that said it had no plans to create jobs in Wisconsin and had laid off 800 workers. Theres a hint of mischief in the ads language in that it can be heard to mean that Burke was so incompetent she gave money to a firm with zero interest in a Wisconsin operation. That idea is off base. But as we say at PolitiFact, words matter, and the ads claim closely mirrors what company officials said at the time of the award. And HUD officials found that even seven years later, no specific use for the land was proposed. We rate Walkers claim Mostly True.

FMD_test_319

Is Taco Bell Roy Moore's Main Financial Backer?

11/29/2017

In November 2017, calls for a boycott of Taco Bell spread on Facebook, claiming that the fast food chain was the financing the Senate run of embattled Alabama politician Roy Moore: Roy Moore One group post read: group post After finding out that Taco Bell's a major supporter for Roy Moore, I Googled their corporate office contact info and created a screenshot of it. Feel free to call, fax, tweet and email them that you're going to boycott their restaurants until they withdraw their support for this pedophile. A 27 November 2017 Daily Beast article reported that newly accessed records had revealed that one of Moore's donors is a businessman named Peter Nicholas. According to reports, an unknown number of Taco Bell franchises are among Nicholas' ventures: article Newly released documents show Illinois businessman Richard Uihlein is the moneyman behind a group seeking to send Moore to the Senate The chief financier of a leading pro-Roy Moore super PAC is a deep-pocketed Republican businessman who dropped eight figures on 2016 races alone and is looking to continue propping up the partys most conservative candidates. Illinois businessman Richard Uihlein provided $100,000 to the group, Proven Conservatives PAC, since September, according to a new filing with the Federal Election Commission, making him by far the groups top donor. That money, which hadnt been previously disclosed, has financed a host of ads boosting Moores candidacy in the face of widespread sexual assault and harassment allegations. The group has also run ads attacking Moores primary opponent, Sen. Luther Strange (R-AL), and his Democratic general election rival Doug Jones. Proven Conservative PAC officially formed in late August, as the Alabama Senate primary contest heated up. The only major financial support it had previously reported came from a company owned by the family of Alabama timber executive Guice Slawson. In addition to Uihlein, Proven Conservative received money in September from Peter Nicholas, a Florida-based businessman whose chain of Taco Bell franchises has also donated to the campaign of Omar Navarro, a quixotic Republican challenger to California Democrat Rep. Maxine Waters. Taco Bell is under the ownership of parent company Yum! Brands, which does donate to political candidates but which does not appear to have donated to Moore's campaign: Yum! Brands donated Nicholas is not the owner of either Taco Bell or Yum! Brands; according to reports, he only owns Taco Bell franchises in Florida. How many and which franchises is not immediately apparent, but the majority of Taco Bells are neither owned nor operated by Nicholas. Calls for a boycott or an appeal to the chain's corporate offices appear to be misguided. franchises Markay, Lachlan. "Roy Moore Super PAC Financier Finally Revealed." The Daily Beast. 27 November 2017.

FMD_test_320

Did Trump Propose SSI Changes That Could End Disability Benefits for Thousands?

12/18/2019

In December 2019, readers asked us about reports claiming that the administration of U.S. President Donald Trump had proposed changes to the way Social Security disability payments are made, which could cause thousands, even hundreds of thousands, to lose their benefits. On Dec. 12, the Philadelphia Inquirer and Chicago Tribune posted an article with the headline "Trump Administration Proposes Social Security Rule Changes That Could Cut Off Thousands of Disabled Recipients." The article reported: "The Trump administration is proposing changes to Social Security that could terminate disability payments to hundreds of thousands of Americans, particularly older people and children. The new rule would change aspects of disability reviews—the methods by which the Social Security Administration determines whether a person continues to qualify for benefits. Few recipients are aware of the proposal, which is open for public comment through January." The left-leaning website Common Dreams published an article with the headline "'A National Disgrace': Trump Proposes Social Security Change That Could End Disability Benefits for Hundreds of Thousands." That story reported: "Activists are working to raise public awareness and outrage over a little-noticed Trump administration proposal that could strip life-saving disability benefits from hundreds of thousands of people by further complicating the way the Social Security Administration determines who is eligible for payments." On the face of it, the changes proposed by the Trump administration would not directly or immediately strip disability benefits from thousands of would-be recipients; rather, the changes would introduce more (and more frequent) eligibility reviews for those who wish to receive them. However, some critics have argued that these increased bureaucratic requirements would overburden some would-be recipients, particularly the most vulnerable, and would ultimately (albeit indirectly) result in thousands losing disability benefits. The Social Security Administration distributes disability benefits in two principal ways: Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI), which typically provides benefits to people based on their previous Social Security tax contributions and work history, and is paid out of the Social Security insurance fund; and Supplemental Security Income (SSI), which typically provides benefits to people based on their disability status and inability to work, and is paid out of general tax coffers. In order to prevent potential abuse and waste in the system, the Social Security Administration conducts "continuing disability reviews," essentially investigating whether each recipient still has a disabling condition, and if so, which kind. Those reviews take place more or less frequently, depending on the nature of each individual's disability, which is broken into three "medical diary categories." In November, the Social Security Administration published its proposals to make several changes to the review system. The most significant proposal was to add a fourth medical diary category, "Medical Improvement Likely." Recipients placed in that category would undergo a review every two years. According to a document accompanying the proposals, the decision to introduce the fourth category was made, in part, because the administration saw a pattern whereby some in the "Medical Improvement Expected" category were being prematurely subjected to re-evaluation, after six to 18 months, before a medical improvement had the chance to take hold, and some in the "Medical Improvement Possible" category had successfully treated their impairment comfortably within the three-year review interval. The introduction of the new category would therefore mean the bureaucratic burden on some recipients would actually be lessened, since they would be subject to review less frequently, though it would also mean others would be subject to more frequent reviews. On the whole, the administration has estimated that, between 2020 and 2029, the new category would tend to require more frequent reviews for those currently in the "Medical Improvement Possible" category, rather than less frequent reviews for those currently in the "Medical Improvement Expected" category. The administration expects the introduction of the "Medical Improvement Likely" category to lead to an 18 percent increase in the total number of reviews undertaken over the next decade. This would lead to an increased upfront cost in administering the disability benefits programs and an increased aggregate bureaucratic burden on recipients (even if some individual recipients would actually undergo reviews less frequently). Greater scrutiny of individual cases and enhanced enforcement of eligibility criteria results in some recipients no longer being deemed eligible and no longer receiving either SSDI or SSI, which saves money for the Social Security insurance fund and the Treasury, respectively. For the 2015 fiscal year, for example, the Social Security Administration calculated a 19.9:1 return on investment rate for disability benefits enforcement—meaning that for every $1 spent on performing reviews, the government would save $19.90 on disability benefits that would otherwise have been paid, over the course of a lifetime, to recipients who are now deemed ineligible. To be specific, the administration estimated that the $717 million spent on reviews in 2015 would ultimately save $14.3 billion in lifetime disability benefit payments. The introduction of the Trump administration's proposals is highly likely to ultimately lead to thousands of disability benefits recipients no longer receiving those benefits, both because some will be overburdened by the bureaucratic demands of more frequent reviews and because some recipients whose medical status no longer meets the eligibility criteria will have that ineligibility discovered sooner. A considerable measure of truth, therefore, exists in the reports published by the Philadelphia Inquirer and Common Dreams. However, those articles failed to mention an important component of the administration's proposals: they would not change how a recipient's eligibility is determined, only how often that determination takes place. As the proposal stated: "We are not changing the Medical Improvement Review Standard that we use to determine whether a person continues to meet the disability requirements of the Act." This means that, while the proposed increase in the number and frequency of reviews was highly likely to ultimately cause thousands to lose their benefits, that loss of benefits would not be arbitrary or based on the application of a new and different standard for determining whether someone's health has improved. The standards and criteria for assessing whether an improvement has taken place would remain the same as currently exist, and only the frequency of those reviews would change. In other words, some recipients would be subject to more frequent reviews, but if those more frequent reviews result in a finding that the recipient still has a qualifying disability or impairment—based on the same criteria as currently apply—the recipient would continue to receive disability benefits. It could be that, as some critics have argued, the proposal represents an elegant way for the administration to save money by removing thousands from the recipient rolls without having to change eligibility criteria—the latter a move that would be more likely to cause public outrage or political opposition. However, on its face at least, the proposal involves enhanced enforcement of existing eligibility standards and criteria. That's an important distinction and a significant omission from news articles that reported, with some justification, that the Trump administration had proposed changes to Social Security disability benefits that would cause thousands to be stripped of those benefits.

FMD_test_321

We have become an energy exporter for the first time ever just recently.

08/23/2017

In a 75-minute rally speech that revisited his response to the Charlottesville, Va., unrest and scolded the national media, President Donald Trump slid in a note of pride about the United States balance of trade in energy. We're going to do an infrastructure bill, Trump said. We will build gleaming new roads, bridges, highways, railways, waterways, all across our beautiful land. Our greatest creations, our most incredible buildings, our most beautiful works of art are just waiting to be brought to life. American hands will build this future. American energy will power this future. We have become an energy exporter for the first time ever just recently. Was he correct to say that the United States has become an energy exporter for the first time ever just recently? Short answer: No. But to get to the short answer, you have to wade through several possible interpretations of what Trump meant. (The White House did not clarify his meaning for us.) One way to read Trumps statement is to take it literally -- that the United States only recently began to export energy. This is flat wrong. We have been exporting coal, natural gas, electricity, refined products and energy technologies for a very long time, said Paul Sullivan, a professor at National Defense University and an adjunct professor at Georgetown University who specializes in energy security issues. We were once, during the time of JD Rockefeller, the world's near monopoly on kerosene. Liquefied natural gas exports from Alaska to Japan have been around for a long time. Piped gas to Mexico and Canada are normal events. We have a massive electricity trade with Canada. Trump might have meant that the United States had only recently become anetexporter of energy -- meaning the total of all U.S. energy exports recently overtook the total of all U.S. energy imports. This is less wrong, but still not accurate. This has been falling, but we are still a huge net energy importer, said Jason Bordoff, who directs Columbia Universitys Center on Global Energy Policy. In its most recent projections, the federal Energy Information Administrationconcludedthat the United States would become a net energy exporteraround 2026, depending on the course of future patterns of global supply, demand and pricing. Whats clear is that the United States has not yet become a net exporter of energy, as Trumps past-tense remark indicated. If that day comes in 2026 -- and it may or may not -- that would be two years after Trump finishes a possible second term. Perhaps rather than energy, Trump meant to say crude oil. If this is what Trump meant, the statement would still be problematic. It wouldnt be the first time ever. And the relevant change was signed under his predecessor, President Barack Obama. On Dec. 18, 2015, the United Statesenacted legislationto repeal a ban on most crude-oil exports that had been in place since the energy-crisis days of 1975. (Exports of refined petroleum were not blocked by the law, just crude.) Heres a chart showing U.S. crude-oil exports going back to the 1980s. (The years between 1975 and 2015 show some export activity because trade with some countries, such as Canada, was exempt from the law.) The rapid rise in crude-oil exports near the end of the chart reflects the lifting of the export-restriction law. Its possible to substitute any number of energy subcategories into Trumps remark to see whether they make the statement more accurate. Some do, some dont. The United States has been a net coal exporter for many years. It has been a net exporter of refined petroleum products sincearound 2011. So neither of those would make Trump correct. Natural gas is a more promising option. The United States is not yet a net exporter of natural gas, but the difference between imports and exports has narrowed for nine consecutive years,according to EIA, falling to its smallest gap ever in 2016. And the agencyprojectsthat the United States will become a net exporter of natural gas once the 2017 numbers are tallied up. Energy experts say that this is a significant development, though one that Trump can take little credit for. It has been a trend that was activated by the U.S. shale boom and made possible by the Obama administration's policy on liquefied natural gas exports, said Anna Mikulska, a fellow with Rice Universitys Center for Energy Studies. Ironically, Bordoff added, a different Trump policy goal --reviewing Obama-era increases in fuel-efficiency standards for vehicles-- could make it harder for the United States to become a net exporter of energy, the very thing he applauded in Phoenix. Trumps stated intention to ease fuel economy standards actually undermines the goal of becoming a net energy exporter, because it means the U.S. will be consuming more oil than we would otherwise, he said. The EIA projections assume the planned increases in fuel economy go into effect, so the EIA projection of when we become a net exporter of energy would be pushed further out if we weaken fuel economy standards. Trump said that we have become an energy exporter for the first time ever just recently. This statement is problematic regardless of how you interpret his statement -- gross energy exports, net energy exports, gross crude-oil exports, and net natural gas exports. The closest he would come to being accurate is if he were referring to net natural gas exports, but even there, it hasnt happened yet, contrary to what his past-tense statement indicates. We rate the statement False.

FMD_test_322

Was Deutsche Bank a source of funding for Auschwitz, Trump, Jeffrey Epstein, and ISIS?

11/13/2020

On Nov. 11, 2020, Bloomberg reported that strategists at Deutsche Bank, one of the largest financial institutions in the world, recommended levying a tax against people who plan to continue working from home, arguing that "remote workers should pay a tax for the privilege. At least on Twitter, this was a poorly received take. One particularly viral response alleged that the bank "funded Auschwitz, Donald Trump, Jeffrey Epstein and ISIS." reported response As we show below, the tweet is a largely accurate recounting of history, though the assertion that the bank funded ISIS overstates what is publicly known at this time. In 1999, during negotiations to merge with the New York-based Bankers Trust, the Germany-based Deutsche Bank disclosed that it had helped finance the construction of the Nazi death camp Auschwitz. As reported by Reuters at the time, Deutsche Bank's historian, Manfred Pohl, described the bank's loans to companies involved in multiple aspects of Auschwitz, including loans for construction of the camp and its incineration units, as well as to a company involved in the production of the deadly Zyklon-B gas, which the Nazis used to murder millions: reported Manfred Pohl, head of Deutsche Banks historical institute, said newly uncovered documents showed the bank had links with firms that built the camp in Poland. It also had credit links to one company that made incineration units and funded another whose subsidiary made the Zyklon-B gas used in the camp. On examination of credit records, we determined that branches . had credit links to local companies which were active at the construction site . in Auschwitz, Pohl said at a media briefing in Frankfurt. Pohl told reporters that the existence of these loans would have been known to high-ranking managers of the bank. "It is clear that this was known as high up at the main office in Katowice. It is not certain whether it was known in Berlin," Pohl said, though he added these loans would have had to be approved in Berlin to go ahead. Deutsche Bank has had a relationship with U.S. President Donald Trump since 1998. As reported in The New York Times, "Over the course of two decades, the bank lent him more than $2 billion so much that by the time he was elected, Deutsche Bank was by far his biggest creditor." Speaking to Reuters in November 2020, one bank official said that the Trump Organization currently has around $340 million in outstanding debt from the bank: reported Reuters Deutsche Bank has about $340 million in loans outstanding to the Trump Organization, the presidents umbrella group that is currently overseen by his two sons, according to filings made by Trump to the U.S. Office of Government Ethics in July and a senior source within the bank. The three loans, which are against Trump properties and start coming due in two years, are current on payments and personally guaranteed by the president, according to two bank officials. According to that Reuters report, the bank is looking to distance itself from the president moving forward. Their relationship with Trump "cemented Deutsche Banks reputation as a reckless institution willing to do business with clients nobody else would touch," they wrote. "It has made the company a magnet for prosecutors, regulators and lawmakers hoping to penetrate the presidents opaque financial affairs." Regardless, Trump's history with Deutsche Bank is factual and well known. Reuters According to a 2019 report by the New York State Department of Financial Services, "the relationship between Deutsche Bank and Mr. Epstein officially began on August 19, 2013" and eventually involved his opening and funding "more than 40 accounts at the Bank." 2019 report Controversially, they entered into business with Epstein after his 2008 arrest for the solicitation of a minor and after other media revelations about Epstein's alleged trafficking of underage women for sex. Some of these Deutsche Bank accounts were involved in suspicious transactions including, according to The New York Times, "suspiciously large cash withdrawals and 120 wire transfers totaling $2.65 million to women with Eastern European surnames and people who had been publicly identified as Mr. Epsteins co-conspirators." according In July 2020, Deutsche Bank agreed to pay $150 million to the New York State Department of Financial Services "to settle allegations that it maintained weak internal controls, including processing hundreds of transactions for Jeffrey Epstein despite the billionaires troubled history." The bank has since apologized for its association with Epstein. apologized In the banking world, Suspicious Activity Reports (SARs) are notifications made by financial institutions to the United States government about potentially suspicious or illegal activity. A transaction labeled suspicious in these reports does not necessarily indicate illegal activity, however. SARs issued about transactions involving Deutsche Bank have been used to link them to ISIS in multiple investigations. made In December 2017, BuzzFeed News reported on SARs showing that Deutsche Bank had been engaged in business with a corrupt Cyprus bank named FBME that "served as a major conduit to terrorism, organized crime, and chemical weapons." The SARs revealed that "Deutsche processed hundreds of millions of dollars of suspicious transactions for FBME clients including a Kremlin-linked network of Russian slush funds funneling money to financiers of the Syrian regime and a businessman trading oil with ISIS." The reports do not indicate, however, that Deutsche Bank knowingly participated in illegal activity. reported In September 2020, the existence of an even larger trove of SARs obtained by BuzzFeed News and shared with the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists (ICIJ) was announced. The collaboration a project named the FinCEN files led to hundreds of stories in newsrooms across the world. One story, published by Arab Reporters for Investigative Journalism (ARIJ), identified further transactions that could point to a potential involvement of Deutsche Bank in the movement of funds to, from, and within ISIS held territory. FinCEN files story The files, ARIJ said, "reveal suspicious money transfers of at least $4 billion flagged by Deutsche Banks US branches and Bank of America to a number of Iraqi banks between June 15, 2014 and June 30, 2015." Though the files do not indicate which bank branches were used, they reported, "the transactions were sent and received during the height of the Islamic States reign and its control over several Iraqi bank branches." The report notes that "many of the banks in northern Iraq were in areas of IS [Islamic State] influence, and such transfers could be the proceeds of the illicit oil and gas trade that the organisation largely relied on in its areas of control." said While suggestive of an at least unwitting role for Deutsche Bank in ISIS related finances, these reports are not strong enough evidence to support the statement that Deutsche Bank "funds" ISIS. Because there is some truth to the ISIS claim, and because the other assertions are true, we rank the overall claim made in the viral tweet as "true."

FMD_test_323

Does Prince Harry Say His Father Traumatized Him By Playing 'Got Your Nose'?

01/16/2023

On Jan. 14, 2023, media personality Megyn Kelly posted a meme to her Twitter account about Prince Harry and King Charles III that was originally created as a joke, but some onlookers appeared to take it seriously. posted Prince Harry and King Charles III (Screenshot, @megynkelly Twitter page) The tweet contained an image of Harry and a fake quote about his father, Charles, supposedly from his memoir, "Spare," which published in January 2023. "When I was a child my father grabbed my nose then pulled away with his thumb between his fingers saying 'I've got you're [sic] nose' I thought I had been badly disfigured, the torment I suffered haunts me to this day," the fake quote says. Author Sherry Morris appeared to take the tweet at face value, and the meme appeared in Snopes' inbox of tips from readers for fact-checking: appeared to take the tweet Snopes' inbox of tips "My dad did that. It was funny. I understood he didn't really have my nose. Good grief I hope his father didn't ask him to pull his finger," Morris tweeted. A couple of things point to the quote being fake and not having come from a published book, namely the misspelling of "your" and the bad punctuation. The image also contains a watermark that says "Belfast Mafia," which is a Facebook account that posts satirical and humorous memes. The account first shared the meme on Jan. 10. Facebook account shared the meme on Jan. 10 It wasn't the only meme of its kind by Belfast Mafia. Using the same image of Harry, the page made asimilarpiece of satirewith a fake quote about him supposedly being traumatized by his older brother William reaching behind him and tapping him on the shoulder. similar [See also on Snopes:Did the BBC Describe Prince Harry's Book as 'Weirdest Book' Written by a Royal?] Did the BBC Describe Prince Harry's Book as 'Weirdest Book' Written by a Royal? Palma, Bethania. "Did the BBC Describe Prince Harry's Book as 'Weirdest Book' Written by a Royal?" Snopes, 13 Jan. 2023, https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/did-the-bbc-describe-prince-harrys-book-as-weirdest-book-written-by-a-royal/. "Prince Harry's Spare Becomes Fastest-Selling Non-Fiction Book Ever." Guinness World Records, 13 Jan. 2023, https://www.guinnessworldrecords.com/news/2023/1/prince-harrys-spare-becomes-fastest-selling-non-fiction-book-ever-732915.

FMD_test_324

Did Officials in Georgia Stop a Bus Filled with Black Seniors Going to Vote?

10/19/2018

Officials in Jefferson County, Georgia, faced allegations of racially-motivated voter suppression in October 2018 in response to an incident in which a voter registration group was ordered to return a group of African-American seniors to a county-run senior center, after those seniors boarded a bus to cast ballots during early voting for the November elections. The liberal web site ThinkProgress reported of the incident that: reported Seniors in rural Georgia were dancing in the street, preparing to board Black Voters Matters bus to cast their ballots Monday, the first day of the states early voting period. But the county administrator ordered the senior center to take the 40 or so elderly African Americans off the bus an act organizers described as live voter suppression. In a Facebook video about the incident, which took place on 15 October, the group's co-founders LaTosha Brown and Cliff Albright characterized the county's decision as racially-motivated voter suppression, with Albright saying: Somebody called the County Commission to complain because they saw all these black folks get on this big black bus -- it's the blackest bus in America -- somebody drove past, saw that, got nervous, got mad, called the County Commission's office, which then called the center. And the bottom line was, all the folks who had just got on the bus -- and the bus was full, this is a 50-passenger bus full of folks -- had to come off the bus. There's not a candidate on this bus, there's not a party symbol on this bus, but I'm going to tell you what is on this bus -- a whole bunch of black fists in the air with the word "power" underneath it. That's what scared them and made them say "Those folks have to come off that bus." However, Jefferson County administrator Adam Brett insisted that the event constituted "political activity," something that the county purportedly does not allow on county property or at county-sponsored events. Jefferson County Democrats Chair Diane Evans was on the bus in question and helped organize the visit to the senior center in the first place, as revealed in email correspondence published by Augusta television station WJBF. WJBF Furthermore, Brett said he had not "vetted" Black Voters Matter, and that allowing the senior citizens to leave with an unfamiliar outside group could have been a "liability" for the county, which operates the senior center in Louisville and also organizes its own chartered buses for seniors to get to polling stations. said In a statement sent to us, Brett wrote: The Jefferson County Board of Commissioners has a practice of not allowing political activities during normal business hours on County property or at County sponsored activities. On October 15th, the Senior Center staff declined to allow a third party and unknown bus operator to pick County residents on County property for political purposes. The Senior Center staff routinely arrange Jefferson County Public Transit to transport senior citizens to vote. In an email, Albright rejected Brett's "liability" argument, calling it "paternalistic" and pointing out that the Louisville senior center is an activities center, not a residential center: Seniors can come [and] go when they please and with whomever they choose to leave with. If they want to leave with a family member, an Uber driver, or an organization they trust, that is their own choice. These are grown adults who decided who they wanted to leave with, and despite Mr. Bretts paternalistic need to feel comfortable with that decision, he has no control over those choices, nor liability [for them]. We asked Brett what the legal basis was for his order (carried out by staff at the senior center) not to "allow" the seniors to travel to the polling station with Black Voters Matter and requested that he clarify Jefferson County's legal authority and liabilities relating to people who use the senior center. We did not receive a response to those questions. Albright told us that staff at the senior center had given advance permission for Black Voters Matter to visit the center and hold an event there, but not for them to escort seniors to polling stations. However, he maintained this was because the group had not initially planned to take the bus trip, which he said the seniors themselves had asked for, spontaneously: The seniors requested to ride the bus to go vote after they saw it and were excited. The center director approved/supported the request, which is why the seniors even got on the bus. It was not until the county administrator called the center director that it became a problem. Albright also questioned the sincerity of Brett's invocation of county policy on "political activities," pointing out that Jody Hice, a Republican member of the U.S. House of Representatives, is scheduled to host an event at the senior center on 27 October. (Albright emphasized that he thought the event in question was very worthy and should be allowed to take place at the center, but he saw it as an example of a double standard.) scheduled In fact, on the same day that the seniors were prevented from travelling with Black Voters Matter to a polling station, the Jefferson County Board of Commissioners actually promoted Congressman Hice's event at the senior center on their Facebook page, in a post that was taken word-for-word from Hice's earlier press release: press release We asked Brett to explain why the county had forbidden an event in which a bus carrying a local Democratic party official -- but no elected politician or candidate -- was to escort seniors to a polling station away from the center itself, but allowed a sitting Republican Congressman, who is actively campaigning for re-election, to host an event in the center itself. We also asked why the Board of Commissioners had promoted that event. We did not receive a response to those questions. re-election In a separate Facebook post, the Board of Commissioners explained that the bus trip had been forbidden because it "was led by the President of the Jefferson County Democratic Party [Diane Evans] and as such was considered a political event." However, the Black Voters Matter's visit had been organized with the assistance of Evans, and yet it was still allowed to take place. post We asked Brett why the Black Voters Matter visit was allowed to go ahead despite the involvement of Evans, but the bus trip was not, and asked whether he had considered requesting that Evans disembark the bus (given that her involvement was purportedly the source of the county's objections) rather than ordering the seniors to return to the center. Again, we did not receive a response to these questions. Conclusion It is true that on 15 October 2018, staff at the Jefferson County senior center in Louisville enacted the instructions of County Administrator Adam Brett by insisting that a group of seniors return to the center after they voluntarily boarded a bus operated on behalf of Black Voters Matter, a voter registration group. The leaders of that group characterized the incident as racially-motivated voter suppression, but Brett insisted otherwise, stating that the reasons for his order were twofold: the involvement of Jefferson County Democrats Chair Diane Evans meant that the bus trip constituted "political activity," something the county could not allow, and county officials had not vetted Black Voters Matter or the bus operator, creating a potential liability for the county which Brett was unwilling to assume. However, it must be acknowledged that significant problems exist with the coherence of the twofold rationale outlined by Brett. First, it is not clear that Jefferson County actually has any legal liability for anything that happens to those who use the center once they have left the center. Likewise, it's not clear that Brett had any legal authority to "not allow" seniors to travel to the polling station or Black Voters Matter to escort them there. Second, the consistency with which Jefferson County enforces their prohibition on "political activities" at the senior center is questionable. On the one hand, Brett forbade the bus trip to the polling station on this basis due to the involvement of a local Democratic official, even though the bus trip would have taken the seniors away from the senior center, and even though the county allowed a visit to the senior center which had been organized with the help of that same Democratic official. But Jefferson County's Board of Commissioners also sanctioned a forthcoming event to be hosted by Jody Hice, a sitting Republican Congressman and active election candidate, which is scheduled to take place in the center itself, and the Board of Commissioners has promoted that event on Facebook in a post taken word-for-word from Hice's earlier press release. Lerner, Kira.& nbsp; "'This Is Live Voter Suppression': Black Voters Matter Blocked grom Taking Seniors to Vote." ThinkProgress. 15 October 2018. DuBose, Renetta. "Jefferson County: 'It Was Miscommunication, Not Voter Suppression.'" WJBF-TV. 17 October 2018. Hice, Jody. "Press Release -- Hice to Host Helping Our Heroes Veterans' Event." U.S. Representative Jody Hice. 10 October 2018. The New York Times. "Georgia Primary Election Results: 10th House District." 29 May 2018. Correction [22 October 2018]: In some instances, this article previously referred to the Chairperson of the Jefferson County Democrats as Diane Davis. She is Diane Evans.

FMD_test_325

Judge David Kithil's opinion on the Affordable Care Act

12/02/2009

Claim: Letter from Judge David Kithil provides accurate line item criticisms of "Obamacare" health care reform legislation. Examples: [Collected via e-mail, November 2009] I have reviewed selected sections of the bill and find it unbelievable that our Congress, led by Speaker Nancy Pelosi, could come up with a bill loaded with so many wrong-headed elements. We do need to reform the health insurance system in America in order to make coverage affordable and available to everyone. But, how many of us believe our federal government can manage a new program any better than the bankrupt Medicare program or the underfunded Social Security program? Both Republicans and Democrats are equally responsible for the financial mess of those two programs. I am opposed to HB 3200 for a number of reasons. To start with, it is estimated that a federal bureaucracy of more than 150,000 new employees will be required to administer HB3200. That is an unacceptable expansion of a government that is already too intrusive in our lives. If we are going to hire 150,000 new employees, let's put them to work protecting our borders, fighting the massive drug problem and putting more law enforcement/firefighters out there." Other problems I have with this bill include: Page 50/section 152: The bill will provide insurance to all non-U.S. residents, even if they are here illegally. Page 58 and 59: The government will have real-time access to an individual's bank account and will have the authority to make electronic fund transfers from those accounts. Page 65/section 164: The plan will be subsidized (by the government) for all union members, union retirees and for community organizations (such as the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now - ACORN). Page 203/line 14-15: The tax imposed under this section will not be treated as a tax. (How could anybody in their right mind come up with that?) Page 241 and 253: Doctors will all be paid the same regardless of specialty, and the government will set all doctors' fees. Page 272. section 1145: Cancer hospital will ration care according to the patient's age. Page 317 and 321: The government will impose a prohibition on hospital expansion; however, communities may petition for an exception. Page 425, line 4-12: The government mandates advance-care planning consultations. Those on Social Security will be required to attend an "end-of-life planning" seminar every five years. Page 429, line 13-25: The government will specify which doctors can write an end-of-life order. Finally, it is specifically stated this bill will not apply to members of Congress. Members of Congress are already exempt from the Social Security system and have a well-funded private plan that covers their retirement needs. If they were on our Social Security plan, I believe they would find a very quick "fix" to make the plan financially sound for the future." Honorable David Kithil Marble Falls, Texas. Origins: A number of similar pieces presenting lists of line item criticisms of a pending health care reform bill (H.R. 3200) began circulating on the Internet in mid-2009, and they continue to circulate widely three years later as arguments to oppose the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA), commonly known as "Obamacare." The versions of this item that continue to be spread via e-mail forwards and online postings are wrong in nearly every particular, however: Although this list is commonly attributed as originating with a letter sent to Senator Evan Bayh of Indiana by Dr. Stephen E. Fraser, an Indianapolis anesthesiologist, or as a letter sent to the River Cities Tribune by David Kithil, a former county judge in Marble Falls, Texas, it is actually the work of Peter Fleckenstein, who issued Peter Fleckenstein the list as a series of Tweets and posted it to his blog in July 2009. The bill referenced in this list, America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 (H.R. 3200), was never passed by Congress. A completely different bill, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (H.R. 3590), became the basis for what is now known as "Obamacare." Many of the entries in the list are therefore irrelevant and outdated, as they address aspects of health care reform legislation that were never enacted by Congress (particularly the "public option" for a government insurance plan). H.R. 3200 H.R. 3590 Virtually every statement included in this list is exaggerated, misleading, inaccurate, or outright erroneous, as detailed below: The bill will provide insurance to all non-U.S. residents, even if they are here illegally. This is false. The PPACA, as enacted, doesn't "provide insurance" to anyone it institutes some regulations on the insurance industry to make medical insurance more broadly available and affordable to Americans, and it requires that Americans enroll in PPACA-qualified medical plans or pay a penalty, but everyone is still responsible for obtaining (and paying for) their own insurance coverage. Moreover, the section of the unpassed HB 3200 bill referenced in the above statement is 152. PROHIBITING DISCRIMINATION IN HEALTH CARE, which simply states that "[e]xcept as otherwise explicitly permitted by this Act and by subsequent regulations consistent with this Act, all health care and related services (including insurance coverage and public health activities) covered by this Act shall be provided without regard to personal characteristics extraneous to the provision of high quality health care or related services." It doesn't explicity grant or authorize government funds for providing illegal immigrants with health care or health insurance, and another section of the bill specifically states that "Nothing in this subtitle shall allow Federal payments for affordability credits on behalf of individuals who are not lawfully present in the United States." The government will have real-time access to an individual's bank account and will have the authority to make electronic fund transfers from those accounts. This is false. The section of HB 3200 referenced here does nothing more than attempt to provide a framework for simplifying the use of electronic payments for health services, emulating the way that many consumers currently use to make a variety of other payments (e.g., utilities, mortgages, credit card balances). The bill simply calls for the secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS) to set standards for electronic administrative transactions that would "enable electronic funds transfers, in order to allow automated reconciliation with the related health care payment and remittance advice." Nothing in this section grants the government "real-time access to an individual's bank account" or the "authority to make electronic fund transfers from those accounts." The bill doesn't even require that consumers use an electronic payment system it simply seeks to make that an option for those who want to use it. The plan will be subsidized (by the government) for all union members, union retirees and for community organizations (such as the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now - ACORN). This statement is misleading, as the section of HB 3200 referenced here is SEC. 164. REINSURANCE PROGRAM FOR RETIREES, which addresses "retirees and ... spouses, surviving spouses and dependents of such retirees" who are covered by "employment-based [health benefit] plans." It does not specifically provide for subsidizing health insurance for "all union members, union retirees and community organizations"; it sets up a new federal reinsurance plan for any retirees and their spouses who are covered by any employer plan, not just those who are covered under plans run by unions or community groups. The reinsurance would be available to any "group health benefits plan that ... is maintained by one or more employers, former employers or employee associations." The tax imposed under this section will not be treated as a tax. (How could anybody in their right mind come up with that?) This statement misleadingly tries to make HB 3200 sound ridiculous by deliberately eliding the end of the statement it quotes. What the bill actually says is that"The tax imposed under this section shall not be treated as tax imposed by this chapter for purposes of determining the amount of any credit under this chapter or for purposes of section 55." Section 55 is a reference to the Alternative Minimum Tax, and the purpose of this portion of the bill is to mitigate the effects that new health care-related taxes would have on persons making over $350,000 a year. Doctors will all be paid the same regardless of specialty, and the government will set all doctors' fees. This is false. The section of the bill referenced here is an updating of the physician fee schedule for Medicare services, which neither states that "all doctors will be paid the same regardless of specialty" nor that the "government will set all doctors' fees." All this section does is slightly revise the formula used for determining how much doctors are reimbursed for providing Medicare services, depending upon which of two categories those services fall under. Cancer hospital will ration care according to the patient's age. This is false. The section referenced here is one which does nothing more than call for a study to determine whether certain classes of hospitals incur higher costs than other hospitals for the cancer-related care they deliver, with the aim of providing "an appropriate adjustment [in payments] "to reflect those higher costs." This section in no way "rations care" provided by "cancer hospitals" based on a patient's age (or any other factor); it simply seeks to pay some hospitals more to compensate for their higher costs in treating cancer patients. The government will impose a prohibition on hospital expansion; however, communities may petition for an exception. This is mostly false. As noted by FactCheck, forbids hospital expansion "only for rural, doctor-owned hospitals that have been given a waiver from the general prohibition on self-referral. It does not apply to hospitals in general. The bill provides for exceptions to even this limited expansion ban." The government mandates advance-care planning consultations. Those on Social Security will be required to attend an "end-of-life planning" seminar every five years. This is false. This statement references a much-distorted portion of the bill that would allow for Medicare to cover voluntary counseling sessions for seniors with their doctors to discuss aspects of end-of-life care such as hospice care, DNR orders, life-sustaining treatments, living wills, and the like (a form of counseling not previously covered by Medicare). Nothing about such counseling sessions would be mandatory, for Social Security recipients or anyone else. The government will specify which doctors can write an end-of-life order. This is false. The bill does not "specify which doctors can write an end-of-life order." It merely defines an "end-of-life order" (i.e., an order for life-sustaining treatment) as a document "signed and dated by a physician [that] effectively communicates the individual's preferences regarding life sustaining treatment." It is specifically stated this bill will not apply to members of Congress. This is false. HB 3200 did not contain a provision stating that it would "not apply to members of Congress." The bill likely would have had little or no effect on members of Congress because they belong to a class of federal worker who have the benefit of choosing from a variety of subsidized insurance plans offered through the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program, but the same requirements for obtaining and having health insurance would have applied to them just as much to other citizens. The version of the PPACA that was actually passed did indeed require lawmakers to give up the insurance coverage previously provided to them through the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program and instead purchase health insurance through the online exchanges that the law created. Variations: A later version of this piece was prefaced with the false claim that the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act limits the amount of Medicare coverage provided to those over the age of 75 or 76. This claim is covered in a separate article on this site: separate PLEASE PASS THIS OUTRAGE TO EVERYONE ON YOUR LIST!!! THIS should be readby everyone, especially important to those over 75.......If you areyounger, then it applies to your parents. Your hospital Medicare admittance has just change under Obama Care. Youmust be admitted by your primary Physician in order for Medicare to payfor it! If you are admitted by an emergency room doctor it is treated asoutpatient care where hospital costs are not covered. This is only the tipof the iceberg for Obama Care. Just wait to see what happens in 2013 &2014! Age 76 Today, I went to the Dr. for my monthly B12 shot that I have beengetting for a number of years. The nurse came and got me, got out theneedle filled and ready to go then looked at the computer and got veryquiet and asked if I was prepared to pay for it. I said no that myinsurance takes care of it. She said, that Medicare had turned it down and went to talk to my Dr.about it. 15 minutes later she came back and said, she was sorry but theyhad tried everything they could but Medicare is beginning to turn manythings away for seniors because of the projected Obama Care coming in. Shewas brushing at tears and said, "Someday they too will get old", I am sovery sorry!! Please for the sake of many good people ... be informed please.YOU ARE NOT GOING TO LIKE THIS. Last updated: 11 March 2014

FMD_test_326

Is COVID-19 Being Spread Through Gas Pumps?

03/22/2020

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. In March 2020, during the COVID-19 pandemic, social media users began sharing warnings about the virus allegedly "spreading quickly from gas pumps." Such warnings cautioned readers to use gloves or paper towels while pumping gas and to discard them immediately afterward. One particular version of this warning attributed the advice to "Galway Hospital" in Ireland. In early August 2021, Snopes readers sent our team a new iteration of the claim with slightly different language that seemed to have been updated in response to the then-rampant Delta variant: "The hospital sent a message this morning that the Covid-19/delta mutant virus seems to be spreading rapidly through gasoline pumps, asking everyone to wear gloves or use paper towels when refueling and handling—please share. Please send it to everyone in your contact list. Don't keep this information to yourself. Make it available to all your family and friends." As with many coronavirus-related pieces of advice, this is somewhat of a mixed bag. We're not aware of any credible reports of COVID-19 being spread via gas pump handles, which would likely be difficult to determine as the specific source of any particular infection. It is true that surface contact is one of the means of transmission of the novel coronavirus, and since gas pumps are objects that are typically handled by many different people throughout the day—often without being regularly cleaned between uses, especially in areas where self-service is the norm—they are a potential route for the virus to spread from person to person. The CDC issued new guidance for employees at transit stations in June 2021 in response to growing concerns about SARS-CoV-2 variants. The virus mainly spreads from person to person through respiratory droplets emitted when a person coughs, sneezes, or talks. It can also be spread by touching a surface that has the virus on it and then touching the face, mouth, nose, or eyes. In May 2020, the CDC shared an instructional Facebook post to inform consumers on how to safely pump gas. In the post, the agency recommended using disinfecting wipes on handles and buttons before touching them, using hand sanitizer with at least 60% alcohol after pumping and paying, and washing hands for at least 20 seconds with soap and water upon arriving at the destination. Like door handles, grocery carts, and ATMs, many people touch gas pumps throughout the day. The chance of COVID-19 exposure at the gas pump is low, especially if CDC-recommended practices are followed, wrote the American Petroleum Institute (API) in a one-page statement. Research conducted by a collaboration of scientific institutions, including the National Institutes of Health and Princeton University, found that the virus can survive up to three days on some surfaces. But as API pointed out, several events would need to happen for the virus to spread from a pump to a person. First, a person with COVID-19, with or without symptoms, would have to emit respiratory droplets containing the virus within six feet of a pump or touch it with contaminated hands. The virus would then need to survive long enough for a non-COVID-19 individual to touch the surface in a way that the virus would be transferred to their hands. Lastly, the healthy individual would then have to touch their eyes, nose, or mouth. While it is entirely possible to encounter SARS-CoV-2 by touching a gas pump, surface-to-surface transmission is not thought to be the primary means of spreading the virus. At this time, we are not aware of any studies that support the claim that the virus can be transmitted via contact with a gas pump, wrote API. However, the level of risk associated with contracting the virus from a gas pump is no different than the risk associated with touching other common surfaces like grocery store carts or door handles. But how much risk pumping gas poses relative to other ordinary day-to-day activities is difficult to determine. Consumer Reports, for example, offered advice in 2020 that was consistent with what was expressed in some social media warnings: "For many, the occasional trip to the gas station is inevitable, as is touching the pump handle and payment keypad. Pump handles and credit card keypads, which are high-touch areas, could have the virus present, which experts say can stay alive for hours or even days on hard surfaces. There are a few things you can do that will help you stay safe when you have to pump gas." Consider carrying some disposable nitrile or latex gloves in your car to use when gripping the pump handle. Short of that, you can try to use paper towels that are sometimes available at the pump or have some with you to cover your hands when you grip the handle. Invert the gloves and throw them away, along with any paper towels you might have used. Use hand sanitizer to ensure your hands are clean after you're done and before you get back into your car. In response to the 2020 social media posts, the Irish Petroleum Industry Association told TheJournal.ie the following: "Our members are implementing enhanced hygiene protocols in our service station shops. In line with HSE [Health and Safety Executive] advice, our workers regularly wash and sanitize their hands and the areas customers interact with, such as fuel nozzles, credit card PIN pads, door handles, and food areas. We are aware of messages being shared on social media and wanted to inform customers that pump handles are no more or less prone to the spread of infection than any other hard surface and to outline the significant steps we are taking to combat the spread of COVID-19 and keep our valued customers safe." Gas pumps could be considered somewhat more of a concern because consumers typically touch other surfaces—such as the door handles and interiors of their vehicles—immediately afterward, potentially creating another pathway of contamination for themselves or others. However, gas pumps are just one of many objects that multiple people commonly handle in a similar fashion throughout the day, including ATMs, payment processing systems, shopping cart handles, and currency, all of which pose varying degrees of risk. Preston, Benjamin. "How to Protect Yourself Against Coronavirus When Pumping Gas." Consumer Reports. 21 March 2020. Grey, Jess. "How to Clean and Disinfect Yourself, Your Home, and Your Stuff." Wired. 19 March 2020. National Institutes of Health. "New Coronavirus Stable for Hours on Surfaces." 17 March 2020. The Journal.ie. "Debunked: No, 'Galway Hospital' Hasn't Circulated a Message Telling People to Wear Gloves at Petrol Pumps." 20 March 2020. Update [Aug. 5, 2021]: This article was updated to include a new iteration of the claim that circulated in response to the Delta variant, as well as to include new guidance issued by the CDC.

FMD_test_327

Did Trey Gowdy Praise '2000 Mules'?

05/12/2022

In May 2022, a fake quote was attributed to former congressman Trey Gowdy in an attempt to hype the film "2000 Mules" on social media: This is not a genuine quote from Gowdy. It doesn't appear on Gowdy's social media feeds, nor does it appear in any genuine news articles about "2000 Mules" or Gowdy. Gowdy confirmed to The Associated Press that this quote is fake and that he had never seen or even heard of the film: Both assertions are completely false. Never said it. Didnt attend. Never heard of the movie much less seen the movie. So, its false at every level. confirmed to The Associated Press "2000 Mules" is a documentary released in May 2022 by Dinesh D'Souza, a right-wing political commentator who received a pardon from former U.S. President Donald Trump after pleading guilty to violating campaign finance laws in 2014. The film attempts to further the discredited premise that the 2020 election was marred by widespread voter fraud. pardon from former U.S. President Donald Trump A number of news organizations looked into the movie's claims and found them to be sorely lacking. The Washington Post said the film offered the "least convincing election-fraud theory yet." The Associated Press wrote that there were "gaping holes" in the film's claims, and the Denver Post wrote that the film used "faulty assumptions, anonymous accounts and improper analysis of cellphone location data." Washington Post said the film Associated Press wrote Denver Post wrote The movie has received little to no attention from mainstream conservative media outlets. mainstream conservative media outlets Analysis | 2000 Mules Offers the Least Convincing Election-Fraud Theory Yet. Washington Post. www.washingtonpost.com, https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/05/11/2000-mules-offers-least-convincing-election-fraud-theory-yet/. Accessed 12 May 2022. PolitiFact - The Faulty Premise of the 2,000 Mules Trailer about Voting by Mail in the 2020 Election. Politifact, https://www.politifact.com/article/2022/may/04/faulty-premise-2000-mules-trailer-about-voting-mai/. Accessed 12 May 2022. Press, Ali Swenson |. The Associated. Fact-Checking 2000 Mules, the Movie Alleging Ballot Fraud. The Denver Post, 8 May 2022, https://www.denverpost.com/2022/05/08/2000-mules-fact-check/. Staten, Adam. Dinesh DSouza Slams Tucker Carlson, Newsmax over New Documentary Coverage. Newsweek, 9 May 2022, https://www.newsweek.com/dinesh-dsouza-slams-tucker-carlson-newsmax-over-new-documentary-coverage-1704863.

FMD_test_328

Did President Trump Say “Everybody Would Be Very Poor” If He Were Impeached?

08/30/2018

On 23 August 2018, amid news of the plea deal involving Trump's personal attorney Michael Cohen and the conviction of former Trump campaign manager Paul Manafort on eight counts of financial crimes, President Trump sat down with Fox and Friends' Ainsley Earhardt for an interview. The topic of impeachment was broached by the President himself, who ruminated, "I don't know how you can impeach somebody who's done a great job." His follow-up to that remark quickly became the subject of online memes. Indeed, President Trump suggested that removing him from office would have catastrophic financial ramifications for the U.S. financial markets and for all Americans, as the country's economy could not survive being stripped of his "thinking." That same day, CNBC reported that the market "had little reaction so far to Trump's renewed legal troubles," adding that "traders say the market ... expects Trump to avoid impeachment unless the special counsel investigation can tie the president directly to collusion with Russia to sway the 2016 election," reported Melloy, John. "Trump Says the Stock Market Would Crash If He Were Impeached: 'Everybody Would Be Very Poor'." CNBC. 23 August 2018.

FMD_test_329

Russian Forces to Provide Security at U.S. Events

07/02/2013

Claim: Russian forces will be providing security at large events in the U.S. Examples: [Collected via e-mail, July 2013] I have been told that some sort of deal between the Obama administration and the Russian govt. would allow Russian military forces to act as security, on American soil, during large, special events (such as Super Bowl) or in the case of national emergencies. Any truth here? I already know how the Constitution treats such things. Now days, it doesn't seem to matter tho. Has FEMA struck an agreement with Russia that will provide for the Russian Military to provide crowd control at U.S. events on American Soil? This was reported as true in a post I saw on FB and reported that these soldiers would be able to fire on and kill Americans on U.S. soil. Origins: On 26 June 2013, Russia announced an agreement between the United States Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and the Russian Emergency Situations Ministry to share information and observation opportunities with first responders and emergency managers from each other's countries during joint rescue operations: announced The Russian Emergency Situations Ministry and the USA Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) are going to exchange experts during joint rescue operations in major disasters. This is provided by a protocol of the fourth meeting of the U.S.-Russia Bilateral Presidential Commission Working Group on Emergency Situations and seventeenth meeting of Joint U.S.-Russia Cooperation Committee on Emergency Situations, which took place in Washington on 25 June. The document provides for expert cooperation in disaster response operations and to study the latest practices. In addition, the parties approved of U.S.-Russian cooperation in this field in 2013-2014, which envisages exchange of experience including in monitoring and forecasting emergency situations, training of rescuers, development of mine-rescuing and provision of security at mass events. At the end of the meeting the parties expressed their satisfaction with the level of cooperation between the Russian Federation and the United States in the area of emergency prevention and response and agreed to develop it in order to respond efficiently to all kinds of disasters. The conspiracy site Infowars then spun this announcement into a claim that Russian military forces would be providing security for large events in the United States such as the Super Bowl and presidential inaugurations: Infowars As part of a deal signed last week in Washington DC between the Russian Emergency Situations Ministry and FEMA, Russian officials will provide "security at mass events" in the United States, a scenario that wont sit well with Americans wary of foreign assets operating on US soil. According to a press release by the Ministry of the Russian Federation for Civil Defense and Emergencies, US and Russian officials met on June 25 at the 17th Joint U.S.-Russia Cooperation Committee on Emergency Situations. In addition to agreeing with FEMA to "exchange experts during joint rescue operations in major disasters," the Russian Emergency Situations Ministry will also be providing "security at mass events" in the United States. This suggests that events designated as "National Special Security Events" by the Department of Homeland Security, which include the Super Bowl, international summits such as the G8 and presidential inaugurations, will now rely partly on Russian authorities to provide security. However, the Infowars article was an alarmist, far-fetched interpretation of the original announcement, which said nothing about Russia's providing security for events taking place within the U.S. The Russian Emergency Situations Ministry announcement merely noted that "provision of security at mass events" was one of the areas of interest which the two countries hoped to study and learn about from each other as part of their joint agreement. FEMA and the Russian news agency RIA Novosti quickly debunked Infowars' unsupported assumption, stating plainly that the U.S. and Russia would not be deploying security guards or military forces in each other's countries: The top US emergency response agency moved to quell a flurry of Internet-driven speculation that Russian security teams could be deployed at large public events in the United States, saying the two countries will not swap security guards or soldiers under a long-running partnership agreement. There will be "no exchange of security or military personnel" under a recently renewed partnership between the US Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and Russias Emergency Situations Ministry, a FEMA spokesman told RIA Novosti. "The agreement continues information-sharing meetings and observation opportunities with first responders and emergency managers," the spokesman said. Picking up on an Emergency Situations Ministry statement declaring that partnership agreement "envisages the exchange of experience" in "the provision of security at mass events," numerous websites suspicious of the US governments encroachment on its citizens' rights suggested the deal means Russian security guards could be deployed at major public gatherings. The libertarian website Infowars.com, run by radio host and conspiracy theorist Alex Jones, proposed these events could include US presidential inaugurations and the Super Bowl. The FEMA spokesman said that while the US agency will not exchange security or military personnel with its Russian counterpart, the two sides "agreed to an exchange of emergency management experts to share best practices a continuation of a 17 year partnership." Last updated: 2 July 2013

FMD_test_330

Is the 'Inventor of Autocorrect Died' Sign Real?

07/08/2022

In July 2022, a user of Snopes' Facebook tip group asked us if a viral photograph of a sign reading "The inventor of autocorrect has died the funnel will be held tomato" was real or if it had been digitally edited. Snopes' Facebook tip group The skepticism surrounding this sign is certainly understandable. After all, we've covered dozens of other photos featuring digitally altered verbiage on signs. covered dozens other photos featuring digitally altered verbiage signs This picture shows a sign in the parking lot of a National Vacuum store in Gainesville, Florida. Here's a screenshot from Google Streeview that shows the sign at a similar angle. National Vacuum store in Gainesville, Florida This store regularly uses its sign to display humorous messages. Using Google Street View, we were able to find several other sign displays outside this store stretching back to 2007. While we didn't find an image of the "founder of autocorrect" sign, we did find a number of similar idioms, such as "It's Spring! We're so excited we wet our plants," "talk is cheap until you hire a lawyer," and "I can tell people are judgmental just by looking at them." We reached out to National Vacuum for comment and they confirmed that the message "the inventor of autocorrect has died. The funnel will be held tomato" had previously been displayed on their sign. A spokesperson said: "Yes, we have used this sign message in the past." Who invented autocorrect? Did they die? Will the funnel be held tomato? The history of autocorrect can be traced back to the early 1990s, when Microsoft implemented a new feature in their word processing program, Word 6.0. There have been numerous improvements and iterations of this idea since then, so there isn't really a single "inventor" of the feature. According to Wired, the "closest thing [autocorrect] has to an individual creator" would be Dean Hachamovitch, who worked on the feature for Microsoft in 1993. According to Wired When Hachamovitch first joined Microsoft, he was given a job on the Word team. This was back in the early '90s. Word processing was at a crossroads, split into factions. On one side were the people who wanted adornments and frillsimproved desktop publishing, color separation, and the like. On the other side was the functionality gang, with whom Hachamovitch threw in his lot. This camp simply wanted to help people get out of their own way. As Hachamovitch saw it, the main thing that people do on a word processor is typeand typing, in his estimation, is a matter of a little bit of creativity and a whole lot of scutwork. He could improve the typing experience by delivering us from scut. His aim was to make our typing sleek and invisible, smooth as speaking from a teleprompter. Ken Kocienda also deserves partial credit for inventing autocorrect, as he developed the feature for the original iPhone. developed the feature for the original iPhone As of this writing, Hachamovitch and Kocienda are both still with us. Engber, Daniel. Who Made That Autocorrect? The New York Times, 6 June 2014. NYTimes.com, https://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/08/magazine/who-made-that-autocorrect.html. Lewis-Kraus, Gideon. The Fasinatng Fascinating History of Autocorrect. Wired. www.wired.com, https://www.wired.com/2014/07/history-of-autocorrect/. Accessed 8 July 2022. Stern, Joanna. Autocorrect Explained: Why Your IPhone Adds Annoying Typos While Fixing Others. Wall Street Journal, 27 Apr. 2022. www.wsj.com, https://www.wsj.com/articles/autocorrect-explained-why-your-iphone-adds-annoying-typos-while-fixing-others-11651051891. Update [July 12, 2022]: Status changed to "True" based on new information.

FMD_test_331

Pelosis new coronavirus bill allows illegals to receive billions in relief funds in past, current, and future payments.

05/18/2020

House Democrats are advocating legislation that would send Americans a new round of checks to help with financial problems caused by the coronavirus pandemic. A Facebook post says that under their proposal, immigrants in the country illegally also stand to benefit, getting billions of dollars. Pelosis new coronavirus bill allows illegals to receive billions in relief funds in past, current, and future payments, said text over a photo of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi holding a gavel, with a crowd of people, purportedly immigrants, in the background. The caption on the May 12Facebook postsaidthe payments would not just be a one-time check, they would give them past, current any future payments of YOUR money as 33 million Americans are unemployed. The post is from We Build The Wall, Inc., a group that's raising money to build sections of barriers along the U.S.-Mexico border. The post was flagged as part of Facebooks efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about ourpartnership with Facebook.) Pelosi does support a bill that would allow immigrants who are in the country illegally and who pay taxes to get coronavirus emergency aid from the federal government. But the Facebook post needs clarification and additional information. The Health and Economic Recovery Omnibus Emergency Solutions Act, or theHEROES Act, was introduced May 12 and passed the House May 15,208-199, with only one Republican vote. Among thekey provisionsof the roughly $3 trillion bill, it gives nearly $1 trillion to state and local governments, creates a $200 billion hazard-pay fund for essential workers, and provides $75 billion to support coronavirus testing, contact tracing and patient isolation. The bill also offers a new round of direct payments to families $1,200 per person and up to $6,000 per household. The payments would go out to people who filed tax returns for 2018 or 2019 (and to some who didnt), with the total amount based on income. For instance, a single person who earned less than $75,000 would get $1,200; those who earned $75,000 or more would receive less. The proposal seeks to augment the financial assistance that started mid-April when one-time checks were sent under theCoronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act, or CARES Act. Under the CARES Act, however, U.S. citizens and lawful permanent residents were ineligible for a check if they filed a joint tax return with a spouse who used anIndividual Taxpayer Identification Number, or ITIN. ITINs are issued by the IRS to people who dont have a Social Security number, including immigrants in the country illegally, so they can use it to pay federal income taxes. (Some international students and researchers and their spouses also use ITINs.) The IRS in 2014saidITIN filers pay over $9 billion in annual payroll taxes. RELATED:Claim about stimulus check eligibility for Americans married to immigrants missing context Pelosi and other House Democrats havesaidthat mixed-status families should not have been left out of the CARES Act. So the proposed HEROES Act includes them in its aid package, and retroactively makes ITIN filers eligible for the CARES Act payment as well. The left-leaning Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy, using IRS data,estimatedthat this provision would benefit more than 4.3 million adults and 3.5 million children in households of ITIN filers or of mixed immigration status, paying them a total $16.4 billion ($7 billion under the CARES Act and $9.4 billion under the HEROES Act). The beneficiary figures include ITIN filers as well as their spouses and children who are U.S. citizens or lawful permanent residents. Meg Wiehe, deputy executive director of the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy, said it was difficult to discern from the IRS data exactly how many prospective beneficiaries are immigrants in the U.S. illegally. Julia Gelatt, senior policy analyst at the Migration Policy Institute, said a lot of U.S. citizens and lawful permanent residents can get support through unemployment insurance, stimulus payments, food stamps and other public benefits. ITINs are used for federal tax reporting, but they do not provide legal immigration status, and immigrants in the country illegally are generallyineligiblefor federal public benefits, such as food stamps. The goal of the HEROES Act, as it relates to unauthorized immigrants and their family members, is to help people who are struggling financially and who have no access to other financial support, Gelatt said. The HEROES Act financial assistance isnt exclusive to ITIN filers; U.S. citizens and green-card holders who file taxes using a Social Security number would also benefit, with the same aid amounts and income thresholds. The payments to all eligible people are estimated to costmore than $400 billion. A Facebook post said, Pelosis new coronavirus bill allows illegals to receive billions in relief funds in past, current, and future payments. The HEROES Act, a proposal backed by Pelosi, would allow immigrants who are in the country illegally and who pay taxes to receive federal relief funds during the coronavirus pandemic. Immigrants who pay taxes using an ITIN would be eligible for an aid payment under the HEROES Act, and retroactively under the CARES Act, which corresponds to the current and past payments cited in the post. Its unclear what is meant by future payment. We contacted We Build the Wall for comment, but did not hear back. A tax policy group estimated that if the HEROES Act became law as written, about $16.4 billion would go to households of ITIN filers or of mixed status. Beneficiaries would include U.S. citizens and lawful permanent residents who live in a household with an ITIN filer. The post is accurate but needs clarification or additional information. We rate it Mostly True.

FMD_test_332

"Is Marlboro distributing free cartons of cigarettes on Facebook?"

10/23/2015

In October 2015, links began circulating on Facebook promising users a free carton of Marlboro cigarettes to celebrate the brand's 100th anniversary. The embedded links involved a variety of URLs, some of which included entirely unrelated scam-bait terms like "iTunes" and "Apple." Users who clicked through to claim their purported free carton of Marlboros were routed to a page reading, "Marlboro is Giving FREE Carton of Cigarettes to Celebrate 100th Anniversary (150 Cartons Remaining)," which cloned the style of Facebook-based content but was hosted on a non-Facebook URL. As noted, the URLs visible in the posts didn't point to any credible domains or any sites linked to Altria, the brand's parent company. Marlboro didn't appear to maintain any social media accounts, and the brand's official website was locked to registered users only. While no official refutations were issued, it seemed safe to assume that cigarette brands largely refrained from participating on Facebook or creating promotions that could land them afoul of strict tobacco advertising laws. By now, most social media users are familiar with survey scams; Kohl's, Costco, Home Depot, Lowe's, Kroger, Best Buy, Macy's, Olive Garden, Publix, Target, and Walmart are among the retailers used as bait by scammers seeking personal information and valuable page likes from Facebook users. A July 2014 article from the Better Business Bureau illustrated how individuals might spot and avoid bad actors utilizing the reputations of brands on social media: Don't believe what you see. It's easy to steal the colors, logos, and headers of an established organization. Scammers can also make links look like they lead to legitimate websites and emails appear to come from a different sender. Legitimate businesses do not ask for credit card numbers or banking information on customer surveys. If they do ask for personal information, like an address or email, be sure there's a link to their privacy policy. When in doubt, do a quick web search. If the survey is a scam, you may find alerts or complaints from other consumers. The organization's real website may have further information. Watch out for a reward that's too good to be true. If the survey is real, you may be entered in a drawing to win a gift card or receive a small discount off your next purchase. Few businesses can afford to give away $50 gift cards for completing a few questions. While Marlboro occasionally sends coupons to registered customers, tobacco advertising and promotion are heavily restricted, including a prohibition on free samples, and are highly unlikely to ever occur on social media in the manner posited above.

FMD_test_333

Does a rise in Arctic and Greenland ice levels suggest that global warming is not as certain as previously thought?

10/04/2017

On 1 October 2017, pseudoscientific alternative health website NaturalNews.com, which is geared primarily toward supplement enthusiasts with a discerning taste for deep state conspiracy theories, posted an article ("Dont Look Now, But Arctic Sea Ice Mass Has Grown Almost 40% Since 2012") that attempts to cast doubt on the scientific veracity of global warming by first presenting the following grotesque caricature of a straw man argument: article straw man One of the most popular pieces of "evidence" that climate alarmists just love to bring up to prove the global warming narrative is the "all the ice is melting in the Arctic and the polar bears are dying" line. Weve all seen the documentaries where a polar bear is desperately clinging to a tiny piece of ice and you just know hes going to die soon. They article then presents two observations that make the generally factual point that there has been relatively more sea ice in the Arctic and glacial ice on Greenland in 2017 than there have been at specific times in the recent past: The latest figures from the National Snow and Ice Data Center, located at the University of Colorado, show that sea ice extent has increased by 40 percent since 2012. [...] [The Danish Polar Portal reports that]: If we rank the annual surface mass balance since 1981 from low to high, the lowest on record was 2011-2012 (38 Gt) and this year is the 5th highest out of the 37 year record. Danish Polar Portal To be clear, the primary data scientists use to document global warming are records of Earth's temperature over time, not doomed polar bear imagery. Zeke Hausfather, a research scientist for the independent, nongovernmental Berkeley Earth research group told us in an e-mail that, in this area, pretty much "all groups who provide estimates" of global temperature unequivocally point to nearly uninterrupted temperature rises since the 1970s, as shown in this comparison of various estimates produced by the climate and energy policy website Carbon Brief: Zeke Hausfather produced "People interested in global warming are best-served looking at actual global temperatures," Hausfather said. While this temperature trend is uncontroversial and clear, the climate system as a whole is a complex beast with numerous entangled parts. The basic approach to writing a blog post that "debunks" the concept of global warming is to highlight without explanation various parts of that system at a single point in time. NaturalNews.com is no exception to that basic strategy here. Arctic Sea Ice Natural News cites a climate change denial blog called ClimateDepot.com as evidence of the claim that sea ice has grown 40 percent since 2012. In reality, the claim made by this website was more specific and less useful. In a post dated 18 September 2017, Climate Depot stated: stated Arctic sea ice extent is up 40% from this date five years ago. "Sea ice extent" is one of many different metrics used to characterize the presence of sea ice, and is generally defined as "the area of ocean [based on pixels in satellite imagery] where at least 15 percent of the surface is frozen". On the day of 17 September 2017, sea ice extent was indeed higher than it was on 17 September 2012: defined This does not mean, however, that sea ice has grown almost 40 percent since 2012, nor does it mean that the overall trend in arctic sea ice is toward growth it hasn't and it isn't. The issue here is that sea ice extent is quite variable from year to year, and thus looking at two discrete points is a fairly useless exercise without the full context. "We don't expect it to monotonically decrease every year," Hausfather told us. This chart (using data from the National Snow and Ice Data Center) shows September sea ice extent compared against the same average used in the maps cited by Climate Depot, showing both this aforementioned variability but also an overall trend of reduced ice extent. Note that the year 2012 was no random year to select for comparison; it is actually the record lowest year in terms of Arctic sea ice extent making anything compared to it necessarily higher: from The overall trend of declining sea ice is even clearer when you look at a different measure: sea ice volume (presented by the Polar Science Center, below). Not only do such records show a clear negative trend, they also show just how anomalous 2012 was as a data point: Polar Science Center In reality, 2017 was the eighth lowest year on record for Arctic sea ice extent since satellite measurements began in 1978. But in no world but the pseudo-scientific fringe internet would the concept of global warming rely on every single year breaking the previous year's record for sea ice minimum. eighth Tom Karl, the former director of NOAAs National Centers for Environmental Information, told us that 2017's sea ice extent was still much lower than the 1980-2010 average (by two standard deviations), and that, despite claims to the contrary, "one can't look at a trend over 5 years and say much about the impact of global warming as other factors are also important on these short time scales." director Glacial Ice on Greenland The NaturalNews.com approach for glacial ice on Greenland was similarly lacking scale and context. The main source for these arguments was a completely legitimate end-of-year report put out by the Danish Polar Portal, a website run by the Danish Meteorological Institute. In that report, the organization makes this factual statement: report Heavy snow and rain in winter with a relatively short and intermittent summer melt season have left the Greenland ice sheet with more ice than has been usual over the last twenty years in fact we have to go back to the 1980s and 90s to see a year similar to this one in terms of snow fall and ice melt. This statement, and the figures presented by NaturalNews.com, are referring to a metric known as Surface Mass Balance (SMB), which Polar Portal describes: describes Each year glaciers gain ice from snow and freezing rain and lose ice by melt that runs off. Adding these together gives the surface mass budget (SMB) in Greenland, the ice sheet typically gains mass from around September to May and loses more mass than it gains in the ablation [melting] season of June, July and August. Importantly, however, this measurement only presents half the picture in terms of how much mass is being lost from year to year from Greenland's glaciers. That's because it does not include the rather significant portion of ice that breaks or calves off into the ocean to melt elsewhere. On average this accounts for about 500 Gt [gigatons] of further ice loss. This, as stated in the Polar Portal post, nearly matches the estimated gain in SMB reported by Natural News, effectively canceling it out. In a post on Carbon Brief, analysts with the Danish Meteorological Society put this years measurement in context: post While the Greenland ice sheet has seen a neutral, or small positive, change in ice for this year, it should be noted that Greenland has lost approximately 3,600bn tonnes of ice since 2002. Like the record of Arctic sea ice earlier, when put in the context of the entire trend of Greenland's ice mass over time (presented by Polar Portal below), 2017's measurement does nothing to change larger and completely unambiguous trends of overall melting: Polar Portal Further, in the case of Greenland's ice sheet, there is not much of a mystery surrounding the lackluster amount of melting this year; a massive storm the remnants of Hurricane Nicole parked itself atop the continent, dumping a large amount of snow on the ice-covered continent: Hurricane Nicole dumping Heavy rain and snow in October in especially eastern Greenland gave record totals of precipitation in the main east coast town of Tasiilaq as the remnants of former hurricane Nicole passed by and, much as with Harvey in Houston this year, got lodged over eastern Greenland for some days. However, after Nicoles extreme precipitation, the rest of the winter was actually pretty average in terms of the amount of snow that fell. Because neither the higher-than-2012 arctic sea ice from 17 September 2017 nor the neutral amount of ice loss in Greenland in 2017 do anything to disrupt the overall trends of decreasing ice, and because climatological science does not require (nor does it expect) ice or temperature records to be broken every single year, we rank the claim that these observations are reasons to doubt the tenets of climate change as false. Watson, Tracey. "Dont Look Now, but Arctic Sea Ice Mass Has Grown Almost 40% Since 2012." Natural News. 1 October 2017. Mottram, Ruth, et al. "Guest Post: How the Greenland Ice Sheet Fared in 2017." Carbon Brief. 1 September 2017. Polar Portal. "End of the SMB Season Summary 2017." 12 September 2017. Morano, Marc. "Massive Arctic Ice Gain (Up 40%) Since Low Point of 2012. Climate Depot. 19 September 2012. Hausfather, Zeke. "State of the Climate: Warm Temperatures and Low Sea Ice Mark First Half of 2017." Carbon Brief. 21 July 2017. National Snow and Ice Data Center. "Arctic Sea Ice at Minimum Extent." 19 September 2017. Polar Science Center. "PIOMAS Arctic Sea Ice Volume Reanalysis." Accessed 4 October 2017. NASA. "End-of-Summer Arctic Sea Ice Extent Is Eighth Lowest on Record." 19 September 2017. NASA. "NASA Sees Tropical Storm Nicole Going Extra-Tropical." 18 October 2016.

FMD_test_334

Was the NYC Veterans Day Parade in 1995 rescued by Donald Trump?

11/13/2019

A story from 1995 resurfaced around Veterans Day 2019, reporting that then-private citizen and real estate mogul Donald Trump had "saved" the Veterans Day parade that year in New York City when organizers ran out of money. On Nov. 6, 2019, for example, the Daily Caller News Foundation website published a story bearing the headline, "The 1995 NYC Veterans Day Parade Had $1.21 In The Bank. Then Donald Trump Stepped In." A meme circulating on Facebook similarly described Trump's intervention:This claim apparently originated with Trump himself, or at least it was touted on his campaign website in the lead-up to the 2016 presidential election. The website at the time stated: headline campaign website Mr. Trump has long been a devoted supporter of veteran causes. In 1995, the fiftieth anniversary of World War II, only 100 spectators watched New York Citys Veteran Day Parade. It was an insult to all veterans. Approached by Mayor Rudy Giuliani and the chief of New York Citys FBI office, Mr. Trump agreed to lead as Grand Marshall a second parade later that year. Mr. Trump made a $1 million matching donation to finance the Nations Day Parade. On Saturday, November 11th, over 1.4 million watched as Mr. Trump marched down Fifth Avenue with more than 25,000 veterans, some dressed in their vintage uniforms. A month later, Mr. Trump was honored in the Pentagon during a lunch with the Secretary of Defense and the entire Joint Chiefs of Staff. First off, Trump's website contained some confusing pieces of misinformation: The Veterans Day parade in New York City went by the name the "Nation's Parade." The poorly attended parade "with only 100 spectators" occurred in 1994, not 1995 (The New York Times reported police did not give a crowd estimate). Only one Veteran's Day parade took place in the city in 1995 the Nation's Parade on Nov. 11. That event was slated by the U.S. Defense Department as representing "the official close of the 50th anniversary of World War II." reported We contacted the United War Veterans of New York (UWNY), which organized the Nation's Parade in 1995, to ask about claims that Trump's intervention saved the event from cancellation, and we were referred by spokesman Pat Smith to a Nov. 10, 1995, New York Times article about the event. Smith told us that Trump did make a financial contribution toward the parade, but also said UWNY is a small, volunteer-staffed group that doesn't keep records that could answer questions in detail about an event that occurred more than two decades ago. article The 1995 Times article reported that Trump did make a financial contribution, but that he tried to make it in exchange for being named the parade's grand marshal even though he is not a veteran. The Times reported Trump gave $200,000, not $1 million: By mid-August, organizers had a bank account of exactly $1.21. A request to airlines to donate blankets for aging veterans was turned down because logos might not be visible on television. Then Donald Trump, a nonveteran, agreed to throw in $200,000 as well as raise money from his friends, in exchange for being named grand marshal. Since then, money has come in, though not enough to meet the original budget, which was reduced from $2.9 million to $2.4 million. Fireworks were just one of many cuts. In May 2016, CNN spoke to Vincent McGowan, the president emeritus of UWNY who organized the parade in 1995. McGowan said that Trump's contribution was "somewhere between $325,000 and $375,000," but McGowan also said Trump's donation did save the event. McGowan also said Trump was never the grand marshal because that honor was only given to military veterans. CNN In a follow-up story, the Times in 1995 reported that organizers had agreed to make Trump the parade's grand marshal, a move that had angered some veterans, while others expressed appreciation for his "crucial" financial assistance: reported Also in the reviewing stand was the developer Donald Trump, who provided the only note of controversy in an otherwise positive day. Many veterans were angry that organizers had agreed to name Mr. Trump, who is not a veteran, as grand marshal in exchange for his contribution of $200,000 and help in raising additional funds. Another story, dated Nov. 11, 1995, from the news service UPI, reported that Trump contributed $200,000 and raised another $300,000 for the parade, which was viewed by parade Director Tom Fox as having been key: UPI Police estimated 500,000 people attended the largest military parade ever held in New York. Organizers, who placed the turnout at closer to a million, said the parade would not have been a success if it hadn't been for real estate developer Donald Trump, who contributed $200,000 and raised another $300,000. "Donald Trump saved the parade," said parade director Tom Fox, himself a Vietnam veteran. "We had asked for donations from 200 corporations, and none of them came through," he said. "This donation is the single most important thing I've ever done," said a beaming Trump. "This is more important than all of my buildings and my casinos. This is my way of saying thank you to all the men and women in the armed services who have made it possible for me to become a success. Without them freedom and liberty would be gone." In sum, we are rating this claim "True" because two individuals involved with the planning of the 1995 parade stated on two separate occasions that Trump's efforts and donation did indeed enable the event to take place. Still unclear are the origins of other sources of funding. Martin, Douglas."Veterans Day Parade Tries for a Comeback." The New York Times.10 November 1995. Fitzpatrick, David and Curt Devine."Trump Will Give $1 Million to Marine Charity, but There Are Other Discrepancies." CNN.25 May 2016. McFadden, Robert D. "On Parade To the Beat of History." The New York Times.12 November 1995. UPI."More Than 500,000 Watch Nation's Parade." 11 November 1995.

FMD_test_335

"Did someone send a uterus to the Supreme Court? A viral TikTok rumor explores the possibility."

06/30/2022

In June 2022, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a ruling that overturned the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision, ending 50 years of constitutionally protected abortion rights. While many people took to the streets to protest the ruling, others used social media to share fantasy scenarios of protesting by other means. On TikTok, for example, some users fantasized about mailing their uterus to the Supreme Court as an act of protest. While the video described a potential future action ("I need to mail" vs. "I mailed"), other TikTok users shared videos claiming that someone had indeed followed through with this action. Although several TikTok users asserted that someone literally sent their uterus to the Supreme Court, there is no actual evidence that this occurred. Protests against the Supreme Court in the wake of the Roe v. Wade ruling garnered significant coverage from mainstream media outlets. If someone truly had one of their organs removed, placed it in a box, and sent it to the Supreme Court, there would certainly be news coverage of the incident. However, no credible news outlets have reported any such events. While there are numerous videos on TikTok making this claim, none contain images of the alleged package or the identity of the supposed sender. In fact, most of the TikTok videos we viewed involve imagining what it would be like for an employee of the Supreme Court to open such a package. The notion that someone mailed their uterus to the Supreme Court is part of a larger trend on TikTok, where users claim that extreme actions were taken to protest the abortion ruling. For instance, another series of videos claimed (without evidence) that several Supreme Court justices had their credit card numbers leaked. Social media users also claimed (without evidence) that the IP addresses of the justices had been leaked.

FMD_test_336

Alabama Mother's Terrifying Experience with the Affordable Care Act

01/02/2014

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

FMD_test_337

Was an excess of $90 billion paid by U.S. taxpayers under Trump's tax legislation?

06/11/2019

On 4 June 2019, Yahoo! Finance reported that as a result of the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA) enacted by the Trump administration, "the IRS pulled in an additional $93 billion for 2018 from taxpayers on individual income taxes than it did for 2017." With the tax law being a hot partisan topic, many readers who saw the headline online asked us whether it was true. In that article, Yahoo! Finance stated that the IRS collected $1.97 trillion in gross collections (the amount before refunds) for 2018, compared to roughly $1.87 trillion for 2017. Refunds did increase this year, but not by much; the IRS refunded about $398 billion to taxpayers for 2018, while for 2017, it was roughly $386 billion. After refunds, the IRS collected about $93 billion more from individual American taxpayers than it did in 2017. Interestingly, that number is close to the tax break amount that corporations received from the TCJA in 2018. Last year, big businesses paid $91 billion less in taxes than they had in 2017, prior to the new law's passage. The numbers reported by Yahoo! Finance are accurate, cited from figures published by the IRS in its 2018 Data Book. Collections data for fiscal years 2017 and 2018 can be viewed in the following table, while 2017 refund data can be downloaded by clicking here: Data Book here. However, it's still too early to tease out the long-term effects of the new tax law from 2018 data, according to Matthew Gardner, senior fellow and corporate tax expert at the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy (ITEP), a non-partisan nonprofit organization that researches tax policy. Republicans had wanted to tell the story about new tax cuts fueling economic growth that would offset lost revenue, while Democrats had been eager to frame the new law as a gift to the country's wealthiest individuals and large corporations at the expense of average Americans. As Yahoo! Finance reporter Kristin Myer pointed out on the news outlet's show "The First Trade," it appeared that taxpayers had "filled the gap" left by corporate tax cuts in 2018. "I would absolutely agree that if you look at the tax bill as written, unambiguously this is a shift away from taxing corporations toward taxing individuals," Gardner said. Gardner is a critic of the TCJA because it cut the corporate tax rate from 35 percent to 21 percent without fixing loopholes that corporations have long exploited. "We needed corporate tax reform, and we didn't get it. We just got corporate tax cuts," Gardner told us. However, irregularities that occurred in both fiscal years 2017 and 2018 can paint a misleading picture of the long-term impact of the TCJA. Among other reasons, 2017 tax filings were artificially depressed because the IRS granted filing extensions to victims of natural disasters such as Hurricane Harvey in Texas. Conversely, filings were up in 2018 when those delayed tax returns were finally submitted. Furthermore, the law went into effect on 1 January 2018, meaning it wasn't in force for the entirety of the fiscal year, which starts in October. "I wouldn't take these fiscal year 18 data very seriously as an indicator of what the tax cuts are doing in any sense," Gardner said. "No one should expect to fully see those effects emerge in the 2018 fiscal year. We have to wait until next year to really get a look at the impact on collections." Politicians on both sides of the aisle were anxious to see how the new law would affect tax refunds because, as Bloomberg reported, "Getting a tax refund is a springtime tradition that Americans love as much as Easter candy." As Yahoo! observed, "In the end, many Americans saw modest increases in their paychecks throughout the year, but didn't notice. Instead, as people filed, many bemoaned getting smaller-than-anticipated refunds or even being hit with a 'surprise' tax bill." Democratic lawmakers seized on the lower refunds, with Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-New York) stating, according to Yahoo!, that "Many Americans depend on their tax refund to pay bills and make ends meet, but this tax season, working families will see smaller than expected returns and surprise tax bills -- because the Trump administration used smoke and mirrors in a shallow attempt to exaggerate the impact of their tax law on middle-class families for political reasons."

FMD_test_338

Was a banknote featuring Karl Marx issued in Germany?

03/20/2018

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

FMD_test_339

Sweaters for Penguins

05/25/2001

Claim: Crafters have been asked to knit sweaters for oil-soaked penguins. Example: [Collected via Facebook, March 2014] Origins: When an ocean-going tanker goes down at sea, loosing crude oil into the ocean, the immediate and long-term effects on the environment are often catastrophic. Equally as dangerous is the illegal practice of passing ships' dumping fuel oil into the water rather than properly disposing of it in port. In the case of the "little penguins" (previously known as "fairy penguins") who live on Phillip Island near Melbourne, Australia, such accidents and illegal activities have threatened the entire population of penguins. Cleaning the animals by hand with warm water and a mild detergent then returning them to their natural habitat has been found to be an effective means of dealing with the danger posed by oil spills, but there's a snag in the plan: Often the little penguins are far too ill to be bathed right away, and the scrubbing can be quite stressful. One solution proffered several years ago was to slip the oil-coated birds into wool sweaters to prevent them from preening themselves and possibly swallowing toxic petroleum-based oil as they regained needed strength, and to keep them warm until their bodies were once again producing the natural oils (removed by the cleaning) necessary to their insulation. But where would get such penguin attire? Appeals were made to the knitting public to place their time, skill, and leftover yarn into the service of animals in need. A New Year's Day 2000 spill of 260 gallons of fuel oil off the southern tip of Australia prompted an appeal that resulted in piles of sweaters ("jumpers," in Australia) being sent to aid the damaged little birds, many crafted by the capable hands of American knitters. To be better prepared for the next such environmental crisis, in 2001, the Tasmanian Conservation Trust and State Library ran the knit-for-a-penguin campaign. They hoped to build a stockpile of 100 sweaters. They got more than they bargained for. The original result was an oversubscription of this entreaty for aid, with the appeal threatening to escalate into a "Sorcerer's Apprentice" situation. One thousand sweaters were quickly received, with more arriving all the time. The organizers originally wanted to conclude this part of its Oil Spill Response Program, but then rethought that action, deciding to ask the knitting public for an additional two thousand penguin sweaters. However, despite those good intentions, other wildlife officials have stated in connection with similar efforts that knitting garments for penguins accomplishes little (other than fulfilling an instinctive human need to help), as penguins don't really benefit from wearing vests and sweaters, and many items crafted for that purpose have simply accumulated in unused piles: Hundreds, perhaps even thousands, of sweaters have been lovingly knitted and donated to help the little blue penguins coated with oil stay warm but the outfits won't be used. The countless hours spent by people selecting colours, designing patterns and knitting the costumes has only resulted in idle piles of the woollen outfits, unused and unlikely to be used. A Maritime New Zealand spokesman for the oiled wildlife centre in Tauranga said they had received a box of the handmade sweaters and that should be more than enough. "The vets have expressed appreciation [but] they haven't used any," he said. "They haven't been required and I just don't know that they will be used at all." A keeper at Auckland Zoo said the idea of making the little birds wear the jerseys might cause them extra stress. She said the cleaning process strips the birds of their natural oil and can make them cold but the facilities at the centre were set up to cater for this. "They are getting washed and rinsed and then they go into a warmed tent under heat lamps." Miss Clark said she had never seen a vest on a penguin and she wondered how much the birds would appreciate the costuming. "Putting something like that on a penguin, it's probably only going to stress it out even more than they already are. These are wild penguins, they haven't had any interaction with humans. There's already enough stress on a bird without trying to put a sweater on it," she said. Maree Buscke of Skeinz.com, which helped to organise the knitting scrum, said the sweaters were a way for people to help, even if they weren't going to be used. She was still receiving sweaters from knitters, she said, plus turning down more offers to help. The blog of the International Bird Rescue organization similarly states that sweaters "are not considered a useful tool for the rehabilitation of oiled birds, primarily penguins": International Bird Rescue To help the birds stay warm and limit the amount of preening, we only have to do one thing house birds in a warm, ventilated area. When birds are warm, they reduce their preening because they're comfortable. When they're cold, they're stimulated to preen in an attempt to correct the loss of body heat. Our research and experience over the course of hundreds of spills has shown us that when we keep them warm while they are still oiled, birds do well. There's also another hazard to the sweater concept: Any handling or wearing of anything foreign to them contributes to the penguins' stress. Reducing stress is our biggest challenge in an oil spill. Sweaters can be cumbersome, and require a secure fit to ensure that the bird will not become entangled. When birds are kept in warm rooms without sweaters, their stress is reduced, because they do not need to be monitored or handled. In the Treasure oil spill in 2000 in Cape Town, South Africa, International Bird Rescue worked with the International Fund for Animal Welfare (IFAW) and the South African Foundation for the Conservation of Coastal Birds (SANCCOB) to rehabilitate over 20,000 oiled African Penguins; we successfully released 95% of them. In every oil spill where we have cared for penguins, International Bird Rescue has had at least an 80% release rate, and none of these birds wore sweaters. Our colleagues from around the world agree that penguin sweaters are adorable and offer an avenue for concerned people to contribute, but they are not considered a useful tool for the rehabilitation of oiled birds, primarily penguins. In 2014 another Internet-circulated call went out for volunteers to knit jumpers for penguins in case of an oil spill emergency, a plea said to have been issued at the behest of the Australia-based Penguin Foundation. But while that organization notes on its web site they do use penguin pullovers, they "do not urgently require little penguin jumpers for rehabilitation" and they already "have a good supply of these [jumpers]": Penguin Foundation web site We have a good stockpile of jumpers suitable for rehabilitation purposes which we also distribute to other wildlife rescue centres where need be. Little penguin jumpers are also used as an educational tool to teach students and others about the devastating effects marine and coastal pollution has on marine wildlife and the environment. Please know that we do not urgently require little penguin jumpers for rehabilitation, we have a good supply of these which we use on any rescued oiled penguins and in the event of an oil spill, these jumpers are also sent to other wildlife rescue centres if required. Concerned animal lovers may still offer their time and effort to craft garments for penguins nonetheless, but it's highly unlikely they will ever be worn by any of those birds instead they'll probably be sold to raise funds for ongoing conservation efforts, and volunteers who want to help might do better to simply donate money directly to wildlife organizations that help protect penguins rather than expending their time and effort at making clothing for those critters: Q. What'll happen if I knit a penguin sweater? A. Odds are it'll be used to dress a toy, not a real penguin. When charities got inundated with sweaters last time, several started using the extra sweaters as fundraisers they use them on stuffed toy penguins, and the sales of those benefit the charity. That's what's happening here. The money raised helps wildlife conservation. The Penguin Foundation also uses the sweaters in its educational programs. Q. Bottom line: Should I knit a penguin sweater or not? A. Your call. There's no wrong answer. It's an easy project, it'll definitely help penguins and it's a fun way to introduce children and rookie knitters to the joys of charity knitting. So if you really want to knit a penguin sweater, go to it but bear in mind that the cost of shipping it/them to Australia won't be cheap, and if you want to help the birds, you might just want to donate funds directly to the Penguin Foundation. Barbara "fashion plated" Mikkelson Additional information: Caring for Sick and Injured Little Penguins (Penguin Foundation) Last updated: 11 February 2015 Brown, Simon Leo. "Knitters Wanted for Penguin Pullovers." ABC Melbourne. 6 March 2014. Frederick, Chuck. "North Shore Women Knit Sweaters for Birds." Duluth News Tribune. 7 June 2000. Mooney, Mary. "Penguin Sweaters: Separating Fact from Fiction." The Oregonian. 6 March 2014. AAP Newsfeed. "TAS: Penguin Jumper Glut." 17 May 2001. Associated Press. "Guild Knits Sweaters for Miniature Penguins." [Dubuque] Telegraph Herald. 11 April 2000 (p. A1). The Age. "Penguins Get Knits." 18 May 2001. Omaha World-Herald. "Knitter Helps Save Penguins." 9 February 2001 (p. 17).

FMD_test_340

Did Nostradamus Predict Charles Would Abdicate, Leave Harry the Throne?

09/15/2022

In the wake of the passing of Queen Elizabeth II on September 8, 2022, various hoaxes and misinformation circulated online. These included a misleading claim that the supposed source of many prophecies, Nostradamus, foresaw the year Elizabeth would die and that her heir, King Charles III, would abdicate, leaving an unexpected royal on the throne. Nostradamus is the commonly used name of Michel de Nostredame, a 16th-century Frenchman best known in the modern era for being referenced during global news events, with enthusiasts claiming he predicted them with uncanny accuracy. For example, Nostradamus was falsely credited with predicting the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks in the U.S. and the 2003 Columbia space shuttle disaster. In the case of misinformation spreading in September 2022, some claimed he accurately predicted the year in which Elizabeth would die and that he foresaw the crowning of Prince Harry as king. Neither is true, as we will explain. "A shocking new interpretation of the prophecies of Nostradamus says that King Charles's reign could be very short, with the bombshell suggestion that Prince Harry could take the throne," reported the U.K. tabloid The Daily Star. Meanwhile, many shared on social media a screenshot from the 2005 book, "Nostradamus: The Complete Prophecies for the Future," by British author Mario Reading. We point to the words "new interpretation" in the Daily Star's article because it's the operative phrase. The source of the rumor is simply Reading's interpretation of material written by Nostradamus, as seen in the screenshot from his book above. Nostradamus made no predictions specific to British royalty in 2022. The idea that Harry, the second son of then-Prince Charles and Princess Diana, would leapfrog over his older brother William and become king can be seen at the bottom of the page in the image above. The reason it drew so much attention was that Reading, who died in 2017, appears to have accurately speculated about what year Elizabeth would die. The preamble is that Queen Elizabeth II will die, circa 2022, at the age of around ninety-six, five years short of her mother's lifespan, Reading wrote. But Reading also erroneously predicted, based on Nostradamus's writings, that when Charles took the throne, the Commonwealth—an international association made up of nations like Canada and Jamaica, most of which were once under British rule—would no longer exist. That is not the case. Reading went on to interpret Nostradamus as predicting that when Charles took the throne, the pressure on him, together with his advanced age and opposition from some Brits who were angered by his 1996 divorce from Diana, would be overwhelming. This would lead him to vacate his role. Reading claimed Nostradamus "makes it very clear" that the man to replace Charles will be an unexpected one. Reading guesses that this means William won't take the throne, for whatever reason, and that the next in line would be Harry. This was all speculation, however. Reading included the writing of Nostradamus (called a quatrain) at the top of his chapter. But Nostradamus's writing is vague and makes no mention of a specific country or ruler. Because the actual writing of Nostradamus is vague, we cannot say he predicted the circumstances around Elizabeth's death, and we can hardly say he foresaw events that haven't yet happened (and may well never happen). At the very best, we can say that British author Mario Reading accurately guessed the year that Queen Elizabeth II would die. A note of context: Europe's kings and queens during the life of Nostradamus were contextually very different from the U.K.'s modern royals. If King Charles III "abdicates," it wouldn't exactly spark a bloody power grab, as illustrated by the gory HBO series "Game of Thrones," which is loosely based on medieval power struggles. Modern-day royalty in the U.K. is more of a formality than an actual seat of power. It would be an intrigue, no doubt, but would probably have little consequence in the daily lives of U.K. citizens.

FMD_test_341

Is this a picture of Bill Clinton with Jeffrey Epstein?

07/22/2019

On July 10, 2019, we examined a claim that Google was "scrubbing" its search results of any pictures showing President Bill Clinton together with convicted sex offender and billionaire financier Jeffrey Epstein. While this rumor was false (Google's search results were not notably different from those of Yahoo, DuckDuckGo, Yandex, or Bing), we were left with one unanswered question: Are there any photos of Epstein and Clinton? After all, Clinton flew on Epstein's private plane, a convicted sex offender who was arrested again in July 2019 on new charges related to child sex prostitution. The two were also both present at a "small dinner party" in 1995 hosted by Revlon mogul Ron Perelman to raise funds for the Democratic National Convention. It seems reasonable to believe that someone at some point took a photograph of these two well-known public figures together. On July 22, 2019, Josh Rosner, the managing director of independent research consultancy Graham Fisher & Co, alerted us to his tweet containing a photograph of Epstein and Clinton that was published in a 2003 issue of Vanity Fair: Josh Rosner published, "Disturbing! The #press wiped all pictures of @BillClinton & #JeffreyEpstein from the #internet. Even @VanityFair, which published this image in '03 from their #sex(?) trip to Brunei, scrubbed it." Again, no evidence exists that this image was "wiped" from the Internet. In fact, this image is available online in Vanity Fair's digital archive (subscription required). This photograph was published in a March 2003 article by Vicky Ward entitled, "The Talented Mr. Epstein." The photograph's caption reads: "Epstein with President Clinton in Brunei, 2002." One possible explanation for why this photograph doesn't appear in search engines is that Vanity Fair didn't publish it as a standalone image. Rather, it is embedded in a digital copy of the March 2003 edition of the magazine. While we're not in the business of offering predictions, we would bet that this image will start finding its way into Google Images and other image-based search engines in the near future, especially if more outlets pick up and publish stories including this image. Clinton is mentioned three other times in the Vanity Fair story; each iteration is reproduced below (emphasis ours): "Lately, Jeffrey Epstein's high-flying style has been drawing oohs and aahs: the bachelor financier lives in New York's largest private residence, claims to take only billionaires as clients, and flies celebrities including Bill Clinton and Kevin Spacey on his Boeing 727. But pierce his air of mystery and the picture changes. Vicky Ward explores Epstein's investment career, his ties to retail magnate Leslie Wexner, and his complicated past. In addition to the town house, Epstein lives in what is reputed to be the largest private dwelling in New Mexico, on an $18 million, 7,500-acre ranch which he named 'Zorro.' 'It makes the town house look like a shack,' Epstein has said. He also owns Little St. James, a 70-acre island in the U.S. Virgin Islands, where the main house is currently being renovated by Edward Tuttle, a designer of the Aman resorts. There is also a $6.8 million house in Palm Beach, Florida, and a fleet of aircraft: a Gulfstream IV, a helicopter, and a Boeing 727, replete with trading room, on which Epstein recently flew President Clinton, actors Chris Tucker and Kevin Spacey, supermarket magnate Ron Burkle, Lew Wasserman's grandson, Casey Wasserman, and a few others, on a mission to explore the problems of AIDS and economic development in Africa. Epstein is known about town as a man who loves women—lots of them, mostly young. Model types have been heard saying they are full of gratitude to Epstein for flying them around, and he is a familiar face to many of the Victoria's Secret girls. One young woman recalls being summoned by Ghislaine Maxwell to a concert at Epstein's town house, where the women seemed to outnumber the men by far. 'These were not women you'd see at Upper East Side dinners,' the woman recalls. 'Many seemed foreign and dressed a little bizarrely.' This same guest also attended a cocktail party thrown by Maxwell that Prince Andrew attended, which was filled, she says, with young Russian models. 'Some of the guests were horrified,' the woman says. 'He's reckless,' says a former business associate, 'and he's gotten more so. Money does that to you. He's breaking the oath he made to himself—that he would never do anything that would expose him in the media. Right now, in the wake of the publicity following his trip with Clinton, he must be in a very difficult place.' In 2002, around the time that this photograph was taken, Clinton told New York Magazine via a spokesperson that, 'Jeffrey is both a highly successful financier and a committed philanthropist with a keen sense of global markets and an in-depth knowledge of twenty-first-century science. I especially appreciated his insights and generosity during the recent trip to Africa to work on democratization, empowering the poor, citizen service, and combating H.I.V./AIDS.' Clinton once had a relationship with Epstein and even took multiple trips on his private plane. However, the former president said that he hasn't had contact with Epstein for a decade and knows nothing about the crimes the latter has been accused or convicted of. Clinton, of course, isn't the only high-profile politician connected to Epstein. U.S. President Donald Trump has also been photographed with Epstein.

FMD_test_342

Gwyneth Paltrow Tried to Survive a Week on Food Stamps and She Died

06/08/2015

On 8 June 2015, the satirical website Clickhole published an article reporting that actress Gwyneth Paltrow had starved to death after trying to live off food stamps for one week. Yep, the star of Shakespeare In Love and Iron Man attempted to feed herself on just $29 for an entire week to demonstrate how desperate things are for the nation’s working poor. After spending her entire budget on barely enough food to create two healthy, well-balanced meals and a couple of snacks, Paltrow slowly starved over the next four days. Clickhole published their satirical article a few months after Paltrow announced that she wanted to "raise awareness and money for the Food Bank for New York City by trying to live on $29 for the week." While it's true that the actress had a difficult time living on the same grocery budget as low-income families utilizing the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), commonly known as "food stamps," Paltrow did not "starve to death" as a result. Clickhole, an offshoot of The Onion, is a satirical website that parodies "clickbait" sites such as Upworthy and BuzzFeed. Last updated: 8 June 2015.

FMD_test_343

Did 'Liberals' Set Up a GoFundMe Campaign for Murder Suspect Cristhian Rivera?

08/24/2018

In August 2018, police in Iowa charged 24-year-old Cristhian Rivera with the murder of Mollie Tibbetts, a 20-year-old college student who had gone missing while jogging more than a month earlier. charged The investigation into the disappearance of Tibbetts had been closely followed on a national level for weeks, but the arrest of Rivera, who authorities say is an undocumented immigrant from Mexico, prompted some commentators -- led by President Donald Trump -- to bring her death into the realm of politics. In a short video posted to Twitter, Trump used the murder of Tibbetts to advance his immigration policies, including the long-touted construction of a wall along the U.S. border with Mexico: pic.twitter.com/wYCNmkkaNR pic.twitter.com/wYCNmkkaNR Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) August 22, 2018 August 22, 2018 The politicization of Tibbetts' death continued in the days following the arrest of Rivera, whom authorities in Iowa say led them to her remains and has confessed to the murder. On 23 August, the right-wing junk news Facebook page "Uncle Sam's Misguided Children" posted a widely-shared meme which claimed that "liberals" had started a GoFundMe campaign to collectively raise $5,000,000 for Rivera's bail. It contained what was presented as a screenshot from the GoFundMe website, along with the introductory message: "Liberals raising the bail money for a murder [sic] just #WalkAway." meme "Uncle Sam's Misguided Children" added: "Is this for real? Are Democrats raising money for this [piece of shit]?" #WalkAway is an online campaign which purports to represent individuals who have left the Democratic party, supposedly in dismay at left-wing policies and vehement criticism or disparagement of President Donald Trump. A Twitter tracking tool called Hamilton68, which is run by the Alliance for Securing Democracy, has found that Russian bot networks have boosted the spread of the #WalkAway hashtag. campaign Russian bot networks The meme was also promoted in several widely-shared tweets, including one posted by the self-described "investigative journalist" Laura Loomer, who has a track record of fabricating and perpetuating conspiracy theories: tweets track record Soooooooo@jihadwatchRS cant have a @gofundme for his journalism, but #MollieTibbettss illegal immigrant murderer can? ? @jihadwatchRS @gofundme #MollieTibbetts We need a very powerful lawyer of group of lawyers to sue these tech companies for violation of public accommodation laws. This is absolutely absurd. pic.twitter.com/dnEOoQcGNv pic.twitter.com/dnEOoQcGNv Laura Loomer (@LauraLoomer) August 23, 2018 August 23, 2018 The meme's central claim is false. Nobody (liberal or otherwise) has set up a GoFundMe campaign to raise Rivera's bail (which is, in fact, $5,000,000.) The meme features some sloppy image editing, for example the jarring difference in font between "$117,504" and "of 5,000,000 to make bail." bail It also contains mistakes. On the actual GoFundMe website, the feature which shows how much money a campaign has raised always follows the same format: "$9,999 of $99,999 goal," as shown in the example below: In the GoFundMe mobile app, the same feature is slightly different, always following the format "$9,999 raised of $99,999 goal." Neither the website or app display this meter with a description of the campaign (such as "to make bail") affixed to the end, and they always include dollar signs before every amount (which is not the case in the fake "Cristhian Rivera" meme.) format As well being crudely doctored, the "Uncle Sam's Misguided Children" meme does not follow either of these formats, which establishes that it is a fake. No campaign relating to Cristhian Rivera's bail existed on GoFundMe as of 24 August 2018, as a quick search of the website shows. (Neither did any such campaign exist under "Christian Rivera," as the suspect's name is sometimes misspelled, or "Cristhian Bahena Rivera," his full name.) Furthermore, no such campaign had ever existed. search exist Bahena When a campaign is removed from GoFundMe, it remains discoverable on search engines. For example, in August 2018 GoFundMe deleted a potentially fraudulent campaign purporting to raise funds for medical care for a Trump supporter supposedly attacked with a brick in Arizona. Performing a Google search for the title of the campaign ("Darrell's medical bills") still yields a residual URL for that campaign: campaign "Uncle Sam's Misguided Children" is a hyperpartisan Facebook page which frequently posts misleading or fake content and memes, some of which we have debunked previously. debunked A separate campaign relating to Rivera (but not mentioning his bail) was launched on 22 August. It, too, used his mugshot but it was titled "Iowa billboard" and aimed to purchase a billboard which would show Rivera's photograph along with the slogan "Vote Democrat: No border. No wall. Just death for you all." campaign Foley, Ryan. "Authorities: Iowa Student Killed by Mexican in US Illegally." The Associated Press. 22 August 2018. Palma, Bethania. "Did the #WalkAway Campaign Use Stock Photographs for People It Claimed Left the Democratic Party?" Snopes.com. 25 July 2018. O., Caroline. "Pro-Trump and Russian-Linked Twitter Accounts Are Posing as Ex-Democrats In New Astroturfed Movement." ArcDigital. 5 July 2018. Palma, Bethania. "Conspiracy Theories Immediately Appear After Santa Fe School Shooting." Snopes.com. 18 May 2018. KNXV Phoenix. "Video -- Valley GoFundMe Page Taken Down." KNXV/MSN. 23 August 2018.

FMD_test_344

Caroline Kennedy on Barack Obama

08/08/2012

Claim: Caroline Kennedy said that she can't stand President Obama's voice and that he's a liar. Example: [Collected via e-mail, August 2012] Just saw on Facebook a photo of Caroline Kennedy quoting that she just can't stand to listen to President Obama's voice and that he is a liar. True? Origins: The quote attributed to Caroline Kennedy (daughter of President John F. Kennedy) referenced above originated with Edward Klein's 2012 book The Amateur: Barack Obama in the White House. It appeared in the following passage, which talked about Caroline Kennedy who had been a strong supporter of Barack Obama during the 2008 presidential campaign becoming disenchanted with the Obamas for making "catty" remarks about her family and for not being more liberal in political policy-making: "Through these [spies that the Kennedy family has in the Obama administration] and other people, Caroline heard back that there was a lot of nasty shit being said about the Kennedys by the president and Michelle," [a] family member [said]. "There were catty remarks about how badly the Kennedy women dressed, and how their houses were shabby and threadbare. Caroline got the impression that most of this negativity was coming from Michelle, who didn't want the Kennedys to be part of the administration for fear that they would have too much influence over the president." "Gradually, Caroline began to change her tune and side with Bobby and Kathleen [Kennedy Townsend] against the Obamas. Unlike Jackie, who was completely apolitical, Caroline is a liberal with a capital L. When Obama didn't raise taxes to balance the budget, Caroline marked him down. In her eyes, he's a mess because he doesn't follow the liberal bible on politics. More important, Caroline discovered that the Obamas didn't give a damn about her support. For instance, she was not invited to the state dinners at the White House hosted by the Obamas, or to the president's forty-ninth birth celebration in Chicago. "It really annoyed Caroline when comparisons were made by the media between Michelle [Obama] and Jackie [Kennedy]. Caroline had a word for such comparisons; she called them 'odious.' She really got annoyed. And when she began to fall out of love with the Obamas, love was replaced by outright scorn. Now she says things about Obama like, 'I can't stand to hear his voice any more. He's a liar and worse.'" However verifying exactly what Caroline Kennedy might have said is difficult because the quote offered in this passage is second-hand rather than direct (i.e., it's someone else talking about what she said, not a direct statement from Caroline Kennedy herself) and because the source of the statement is anonymous (beyond the description of his or her being a "member of the Kennedy clan"). Caroline Kennedy herself has neither confirmed nor denied that she made the remarks attributed to her, but even after their publication she has continued to publicly express support for the Obamas, such as issuing a message to wish President Obama a Happy Father's Day, campaigning in New Hampshire for the President's re-election, and making plans to attend the Democratic National Convention. message campaigning attend Last updated: 19 August 2012

FMD_test_345

Ford is moving all of their small-car production to Mexico.

10/23/2016

One of Donald Trump's signature issues in his 2016 presidential bid has been stopping the outflow of American jobs to other countries. During a visit to Delaware, Ohio, he cited a recent example of a major American company moving some of its work out of the United States. "Companies like Carrier are firing their workers and moving to Mexico," Trump said. "Ford is moving all of their small-car production to Mexico." When I'm president, if a company wants to fire its workers and leave for Mexico or other countries, then we will charge them a 35 percent tax when they want to ship their products back into the United States. Is it really true that Ford is moving all of their small-car production to Mexico? Let's take a closer look. On Sept. 14, 2016, Ford CEO Mark Fields announced at an event with Wall Street analysts that the company would migrate all of its small-car production to Mexico and out of the United States over the next two to three years, according to Reuters. Ford had already announced that it would be investing $1.6 billion in Mexico for small-car production starting in 2018. During contract talks in 2015, Ford confirmed that it would move Focus and C-Max production out of its Wayne, Mich., plant in 2018. The United Auto Workers Union said at the time that Ford planned to build the next Focus in Mexico, Reuters reported. The Focus and the C-Max are considered small cars. The company cited declining interest among U.S. consumers for smaller cars and growing sales for bigger vehicles in an era of low gasoline prices. It also cited Mexican labor costs that are about 40 percent lower than those in the United States. "That's what it takes to compete in that (small car) segment," Fields told CNN. So Trump is right that the company is moving all small-car production in North America to Mexico. However, he overlooked a salient point—that both the company and the United Auto Workers do not expect any jobs to be lost at the Wayne plant. Instead of building small cars, the Wayne facility will transition to producing SUVs and pickup trucks that are more popular in the United States. "Our U.S. workforce at that plant will be making those new vehicles," said Ford spokeswoman Christin Tinsworth Baker. In the past five years, Ford has invested $12 billion in U.S. plants and created nearly 28,000 U.S. jobs, Baker said. In all, the company has 85,000 U.S. employees. In a September interview with Fox News, Trump mischaracterized the changes at Ford, saying the company planned to fire all its employees in the United States and move to Mexico. The company aggressively countered that allegation. In an interview with CNN, Fields was asked whether the company would cut any U.S. jobs as part of the relocation of work to Mexico. He said, "Absolutely not. Zero. Not one job will be lost. Most of our investment is here in the U.S. And that's the way it will continue to be." In his speech in Ohio, however, Trump stuck closer to the facts. Our ruling: Trump said that Ford is moving all of their small-car production to Mexico. That's correct as far as it goes, but framing it that way ignores an important qualifier—that no U.S. jobs will be lost in the transition. The company says that workers at the Ford plant in question will instead make SUVs and pickups. We rate the statement Mostly True.

FMD_test_346

Probation for Child Rape Vs. Prison for Stealing Ribs?

12/13/2017

Racial disparity in sentencing has long been a subject of controversy in the United States, and a meme posted to Facebook in November 2017 appeared to capture a particularly egregious example. On 20 November 2017, the Army Anonymous page posted a graphic showing two mugshots of two different men one white, one black with the following text: posted A billionaire raped his own 3-year-old daughter got probation.A homeless man stole $35 rack of ribs was sentenced to 50 years in prison. While the two crimes in these examples are very different, statistics show that there exists a marked discrepancy in the sentences given to white and black people, even if they're convicted of the same or similar crimes. The Sentencing Project, a non-profit group that campaigns for fairness and equality in the criminal justice system, outlines how these racial disparities work: outlines Once arrested, people of color are also likely to be charged more harshly than whites; once charged, they are more likely to be convicted; and once convicted, they are more likely to face stiff sentences all after accounting for relevant legal differences such as crime severity and criminal history. The type of crimes that black people are more commonly convicted of are also crimes that are more likely to carry harsher sentences, the group explains. And while the basic facts outlined in this meme are mostly accurate and follow a deeply unfortunate trend, it's worth giving some context for both cases. The man shown on the left of the meme is Robert H. Richards, the wealthy great-grandson of Irenee du Pont, and an heir to the Du Pont chemical fortune. In February 2009, Delaware Superior Court judge Jan Jurden gave Richards an eight-year sentence for raping his three-year-old daughter. Richards had initially been charged with second degree rape but later pleaded guilty to fourth degree rape, of which he was convicted. Richards Judge Jurden suspended the eight-year jail sentence, imposing probation on Richards and ordering him to perform 50 hours of community service, avoid all contact with children under the age of 16, and undergo sex offender treatment and mental health evaluations. In her sentence order, Jurden noted that Richards had "significant treatment needs" and "would not fare well in [a] Level 5 setting" (i.e. jail.) sentence order The News Journal in Delaware reported in 2014 that Richards' ex-wife had accused him of also sexually abusing their son, when the boy was 19 months old. Tracy Richards' lawsuit against her ex-husband was settled out of court. reported The man shown on the right of the meme is Willie Smith Ward. In May 2013, a jury in Waco, Texas convicted him of robbery after he stole a rack of ribs from a grocery store, two years earlier. A clerk at the grocery store had told the court Ward threatened him and told him he had a knife in his possession. convicted We found no record of Ward having an address at the time of the robbery in 2011, or his conviction two years later, but we also did not find find evidence that he was homeless. According to the Waco Tribune, Ward had five previous felony convictions including burglary, aggravated assault and attempted robbery, and four previous misdemeanor convictions. Under Texas' "habitual offender" law, the jury took Ward's criminal history into account, and enhanced the sentence for his robbery conviction to 50 years. Waco Tribune habitual offender According to prison records, Ward was denied parole in January 2017, and is still incarcerated at the William G. McConnell Unit state prison in Beeville, Texas. His next parole hearing is set for January 2019. records denied Ward is scheduled for release in September 2061, by which time he would be 91 years old. Conlon, Kevin; Gallman, Stephanie. "Du Pont Heir Convicted of Raping Daughter Spared Prison." CNN. 2 April 2014. Delaware Superior Court. "State of Delaware v. Robert H. Richards - Sentence Order." Delaware Superior Court. 6 February 2009. Barrish, Cris. "Du Pont Heir, Ex-Wife Settle Child Sex Abuse Suit." The News Journal (Wilmington). 27 June 2014. CBS News Crimesider. "Willie Smith Ward, Texas Man, Gets 50 Years in Prison for Stealing Rack of Ribs." CBS News Crimesider. 3 June 2013. Witherspoon, Tommy. "Theft of Ribs Gets Five-Time Felon 50 Years in Prison." Waco Tribune. 30 May 2013. Locke, Shannon. "Understanding the Texas Habitual Offender Law." The Locke Law Group. 19 April 2017. Ghandnoosh, Nazgol. "Black Lives Matter: Eliminating Racial Inequity in the Criminal Justice System." The Sentencing Project. 3 February 2015.

FMD_test_347

The (Russian) ruble is already going down.

03/02/2014

American and European leaders find themselves scrambling to respond to Russias deployment of troops in the Crimean Peninsula of Ukraine. With military action on no ones wish-list, diplomacy and economic sanctions are the only moves effectively in play. Secretary of State John Kerry said on CBSFace the Nationthat he had been on the phone with his counterparts among the G-8 nations. Every single one of them are prepared to go to the hilt in order to isolate Russia with respect to this invasion, Kerry said. Theyre prepared to put sanctions in place, theyre prepared to isolate Russia economically, the ruble is already going down. Russia has major economic challenges. This fact-check zeros in on the value of the Russian ruble. It has declined but partly because thats what the Russians wanted. A big drop In the early part of 2013, the ruble was worth 3.3 U.S. cents. Today, its value has tumbled by 15 percent, to 2.8 cents. A little less than half of that fall came in January as the situation in Ukraine deteriorated. Heres the picture over the past year, taken from the currency exchange serviceXE.com: There is no question that the violence and political turmoil in Ukraine took a toll on the ruble. Russian banks have about $28 billion in loans in the country. Before the Russian troops moved in, investors were already worried. Last week,two of the largest banks in Russiasaid they would suspend any new lending in Ukraine. But the rubles decline has deeper roots. In 2010, the Russian Central Bank announced it wanted to get out of the business of setting the rubles value on the international market. It had in mind a gradual glide path for the currencys fall, andin October, it gave the ruble even more leewayto drop further. The countrys economy grew less than 2 percent last year, and it has struggled to keep inflation in check. The ruble got pretty over-valued in the big energy boom from 2001-08, said Mark Adomanis, a management consultant and contributor to Forbes. That hurt Russian manufacturing and letting the ruble fall potentially could help. With a weaker ruble Russian goods become more competitive on international markets, Adomanis said. That said, a free fall is not what the Russian Central Bank has in mind. In January,the bank signaled that it would stepin to prop up the ruble. But the overall policy remains the same. Our ruling Kerry said the ruble is going down, and it is. The Russian currency has lost about 15 percent of its value against the dollar since early 2013. It is not all because of the situation in Ukraine, however, a fact that viewers may not have picked up on by hearing Kerry's statement. The currencys decline is also part of Russian policy to reduce inflation and make domestic manufacturers more competitive. Theres a little more going on here than Kerrys statement would suggest. We rate his claim Mostly True.

FMD_test_348

Has Trump suggested modifications to SSI that might result in the termination of disability benefits for numerous individuals?

12/18/2019

In December 2019, readers asked us about reports claiming that the administration of U.S. President Donald Trump had proposed changes to the way Social Security disability payments are made, which could cause thousands, even hundreds of thousands, to lose their benefits. On Dec. 12, the Philadelphia Inquirer and Chicago Tribune posted an article with the headline "Trump Administration Proposes Social Security Rule Changes That Could Cut Off Thousands of Disabled Recipients." The article reported: "The Trump administration is proposing changes to Social Security that could terminate disability payments to hundreds of thousands of Americans, particularly older people and children. The new rule would change aspects of disability reviews—the methods by which the Social Security Administration determines whether a person continues to qualify for benefits. Few recipients are aware of the proposal, which is open for public comment through January." The left-leaning website Common Dreams published an article with the headline "'A National Disgrace': Trump Proposes Social Security Change That Could End Disability Benefits for Hundreds of Thousands." That story reported: "Activists are working to raise public awareness and outrage over a little-noticed Trump administration proposal that could strip life-saving disability benefits from hundreds of thousands of people by further complicating the way the Social Security Administration determines who is eligible for payments." On the face of it, the changes proposed by the Trump administration would not directly or immediately strip disability benefits from thousands of would-be recipients; rather, the changes would introduce more (and more frequent) eligibility reviews for those who wish to receive them. However, some critics have argued that these increased bureaucratic requirements would overburden some would-be recipients, particularly the most vulnerable, and would ultimately (albeit indirectly) result in thousands losing disability benefits. The Social Security Administration distributes disability benefits in two principal ways: Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI), which typically provides benefits to people based on their previous Social Security tax contributions and work history, and is paid out of the Social Security insurance fund; and Supplemental Security Income (SSI), which typically provides benefits to people based on their disability status and inability to work, and is paid out of general tax coffers. In order to prevent potential abuse and waste in the system, the Social Security Administration conducts "continuing disability reviews," essentially investigating whether each recipient still has a disabling condition, and if so, which kind. Those reviews take place more or less frequently, depending on the nature of each individual's disability, which is broken into three "medical diary categories." In November, the Social Security Administration published its proposals to make several changes to the review system. The most significant proposal was to add a fourth medical diary category, "Medical Improvement Likely." Recipients placed in that category would undergo a review every two years. According to a document accompanying the proposals, the decision to introduce the fourth category was made, in part, because the administration saw a pattern whereby some in the "Medical Improvement Expected" category were being prematurely subjected to re-evaluation, after six to 18 months, before a medical improvement had the chance to take hold, and some in the "Medical Improvement Possible" category had successfully treated their impairment comfortably within the three-year review interval. The introduction of the new category would therefore mean the bureaucratic burden on some recipients would actually be lessened, since they would be subject to review less frequently, though it would also mean others would be subject to more frequent reviews. On the whole, the administration has estimated that, between 2020 and 2029, the new category would tend to require more frequent reviews for those currently in the "Medical Improvement Possible" category, rather than less frequent reviews for those currently in the "Medical Improvement Expected" category. The administration expects the introduction of the "Medical Improvement Likely" category to lead to an 18 percent increase in the total number of reviews undertaken over the next decade. This would lead to an increased upfront cost in administering the disability benefits programs and an increased aggregate bureaucratic burden on recipients (even if some individual recipients would actually undergo reviews less frequently). Greater scrutiny of individual cases and enhanced enforcement of eligibility criteria results in some recipients no longer being deemed eligible and no longer receiving either SSDI or SSI, which saves money for the Social Security insurance fund and the Treasury, respectively. For the 2015 fiscal year, for example, the Social Security Administration calculated a 19.9:1 return on investment rate for disability benefits enforcement—meaning that for every $1 spent on performing reviews, the government would save $19.90 on disability benefits that would otherwise have been paid, over the course of a lifetime, to recipients who are now deemed ineligible. To be specific, the administration estimated that the $717 million spent on reviews in 2015 would ultimately save $14.3 billion in lifetime disability benefit payments. The introduction of the Trump administration's proposals is highly likely to ultimately lead to thousands of disability benefits recipients no longer receiving those benefits, both because some will be overburdened by the bureaucratic demands of more frequent reviews and because some recipients whose medical status no longer meets the eligibility criteria will have that ineligibility discovered sooner. A considerable measure of truth, therefore, exists in the reports published by the Philadelphia Inquirer and Common Dreams. However, those articles failed to mention an important component of the administration's proposals: they would not change how a recipient's eligibility is determined, only how often that determination takes place. As the proposal stated: "We are not changing the Medical Improvement Review Standard that we use to determine whether a person continues to meet the disability requirements of the Act." This means that while the proposed increase in the number and frequency of reviews was highly likely to ultimately cause thousands to lose their benefits, that loss of benefits would not be arbitrary or based on the application of a new and different standard for determining whether someone's health has improved. The standards and criteria for assessing whether an improvement has taken place would remain the same as currently exist, and only the frequency of those reviews would change. In other words, some recipients would be subject to more frequent reviews, but if those more frequent reviews result in a finding that the recipient still has a qualifying disability or impairment—based on the same criteria as currently apply—the recipient would continue to receive disability benefits. It could be that, as some critics have argued, the proposal represents an elegant way for the administration to save money by removing thousands from the recipient rolls without having to change eligibility criteria—the latter a move that would be more likely to cause public outrage or political opposition. However, on its face at least, the proposal involves enhanced enforcement of existing eligibility standards and criteria. That's an important distinction and a significant omission from news articles that reported, with some justification, that the Trump administration had proposed changes to Social Security disability benefits that would cause thousands to be stripped of those benefits.

FMD_test_349

Did WSJ Op-Ed by Biden in '92 Claim He Wanted to 'Destroy National Sovereignty'?

09/08/2021

As the Taliban took over Afghanistan, U.S. President Joe Biden pulled American troops out in August 2021, with the last military plane departing at the end of the month, marking the end of a two-decade-long presence in the country. pulled Biden has faced plenty of criticism for the rushed departure particularly from right-wing voices, and the internet pulled out an old article he wrote for The Wall Street Journal (WSJ), titled "How I Learned to Love the New World Order, to bolster arguments against him. According to numerous posts like this one, the essay was arguing for the destruction of national sovereignty and the establishment of a one world government. one Some claimed that because of the headline, Biden supported a New World Order, which advocates for one world government. This stems from the New World Order (NWO) conspiracy theory, which claims that a secret group of global elites is seeking to establish an all-powerful, authoritarian, one-world government. New World Order The essay was indeed published by The Wall Street Journal on April 23, 1992. We found a copy in the archives of the New York Public Library. The full version can be seen below: New York Public Librar Biden wrote the essay in response to a Wall Street Journal editorial that claimed he was in favor of neo-isolationism. To be clear, in Biden's essay, he was not talking about the NWO conspiracy theory. He argued that the Pentagons strategy of making America a Globocop would render it a hollow superpower. The highlights made in the blog post above about his essay do not support the argument that Biden wants to destroy national sovereignty. In the article Biden argues for Americans to pull back on military intervention and build up economic might: Bristling with weapons, we would continue our economic decline, while rising industrial and financial giants in Europe and Asia viewed our military pretensions with indifference or contempt. The essay also addresses Americas role as a Globocop, arguing that Power also emanates from [...] the economic leverage to wield diplomatic clout, and not from the barrel of a gun. Biden argues in favor of multilateral military action by breathing life into the U.N. Charter. He envisions "a permanent commitment of forces, for use by the Security Council. That means a presumption of collective action but with a U.S. veto. He concluded: We must get lean militarily, revitalize American economic strength, and exercise a diplomatic leadership that puts new muscle into institutions of collective security. The blog post makes another claim: that Biden wrote the WSJ article many years before writing the Patriot Act, a counterterrorism bill that increased surveillance capabilities by U.S. law enforcement after 9/11. This is partially true, because Biden did support the Patriot Act and claimed he was responsible for authoring earlier versions of counterterrorism legislation that featured prominently in it. Biden introduced and authored the Omnibus Counterterrorism Act of 1995, which he argued provided one source of inspiration for the 2001 Patriot Act. counterterrorism claimed In October 2001, he said in a Senate speech supporting the Patriot Act: It allows law enforcement to keep up with the modern technology these terrorists are using. The bill contains several provisions which are identical or nearly identical to those I previously proposed. Senate speech The Patriot Act was criticized by civil rights advocates and the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) who said it turned regular citizens into suspects, and resulted in a loss of privacy. While civil rights experts have criticized his support for the law, that criticism does not suggest that Biden is trying to build a one world government. American Civil Liberties Union While the WSJ did publish this essay by Biden, the article did not make the arguments that critical blog posts on social media are claiming. As such, we rate this claim as False. Sources: Afghanistan: Last US Military Flight Departs Ending Americas Longest War. BBC News, 31 Aug. 2021. www.bbc.com, https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-58390085. Accessed 8 Sept. 2021. "How I Learned to Love the New World Order." Wall Street Journal (1923-), Apr 23, 1992, pp. 1. ProQuest, https://ezproxy.nypl.org/login?url=https://www-proquest-com.i.ezproxy.nypl.org/historical-newspapers/how-i-learned-love-new-world-order/docview/135656899/se-2?accountid=35635. Accessed 8 Sept. 2021. Hsu, Hua. 50 Years of Conspiracy Theories - New World Order -- New York Magazine - Nymag. New York Magazine, https://nymag.com/news/features/conspiracy-theories/new-world-order/. Accessed 8 Sept. 2021. Senate Approves USA PATRIOT Anti-Terrorism Legislation. https://sgp.fas.org/congress/2001/s102501.html. Accessed 8 Sept. 2021. Surveillance Under the Patriot Act. American Civil Liberties Union, https://www.aclu.org/issues/national-security/privacy-and-surveillance/surveillance-under-patriot-act. Accessed 8 Sept. 2021. Ungurean, Geri. JOE BIDEN Proclaimed How He Learned to Love the NEW WORLD ORDER in a Wall Street Piece from 1992: Article Is Clearly Shown in This WP Piece. Absolute Truth from the Word of God, 30 Aug. 2021, https://grandmageri422.me/2021/08/30/joe-biden-how-i-learned-to-love-the-new-world-order/. Accessed 8 Sept. 2021.

FMD_test_350

Do Oreo Cookies Have a Hidden Meaning?

01/04/2017

We do not know who first paused to ponder the ornate design of an Oreo cookie before eating it, but the decorative embossed pattern is considered integral to the Oreo experience and has inspired praise from such highfalutin sources as American architectural critic Paul Goldberger, who enthused on the occasion of its 75th birthday that the cookie's form "leaps across stylistic boundaries" to epitomize modernism: enthused The way in which the two chocolate wafers appear to float, held together only by a recessed inner layer of cream filling, seems to epitomize the modernist esthetic, while the richly decorated chocolate wafers are a celebration of the role of ornament. So, like a building that mixes sleek glass and gargoyles, this cookie does nothing less than transcend the gulf separating modernism and traditionalism. The ornamental pattern of the wafer itself, however, is the Oreo's visual signature. Stamped out by brass rollers passing over sheets of chocolate dough, the pattern consists of a series of four-leaf clovers around the word ''OREO,'' which is set within the traditional trademark of Nabisco, its manufacturer that trademark being a horizontal oval with what looks like a television antenna extending up from it. Around the clovers, a broken line forms a broken circle. Beyond that, the outer edge of the cookie is slightly ridged, serving both as a visual frame for the ornamental center and as a means of grasping the cookie with comparative ease. While the cookie-in-itself may not be difficult to grasp, some find that the meaning of its elaborate embossed design nonetheless remains elusive. There is no official explanation of what the ring of four-leaf flowers, the segmented line with intermittent dots encircling it, the television antenna-like structure atop the name "OREO," or the 90 evenly-spaced pillars adorning its outer rim are supposed to stand for (if anything). And despite there being no good reason to assume the pattern is anything other than decorative, there are those for whom the Oreo cookie's design represents a deep, dark mystery to be plumbed. Do the symbols communicate a hidden message? mystery An interesting theory summarized in a 2014 Reddit post links the "symbology" of the Oreo to the medieval Knights Templar and the fraternal order of Freemasonry, two organizations often implicated in grand-scale conspiracy theories: post Knights Templar Freemasonry The symbol around the word Oreo on the center of the cookie was designed from the Knights Templar Cross of Lorraine, which is a symbol of quality. The "flowers" on the Oreo were rendered using the Knights Templar Cross Patte. The dots, flowers and dashes represent the 3 degrees of Ancient Craft Freemasonry. The arranging of the dots around the cookie were strategically placed to form the 5 Pointed Star; the symbol of the Order of the Eastern Star. All of these symbols are still used throughout the Masonic bodies, including the Eastern Star, Knights Templar and the Scottish Rite. Think it's just a coincidence? The inventor, who rapidly climbed from the mail room to design executive and was responsible for today's look of the Oreo, was a Freemason. There's a lot to unpack there, but we'll forego the factual claims for a moment to address the burning question on the lips of anyone unaccustomed to swimming in the murky waters of conspiracism: So what? If, in fact, the Oreo's designer was a Freemason, so what? If, in fact, there are esoteric symbols on the cookies, so what? If the presence of those symbols isn't coincidental, what are we supposed to make of that? What's the point of putting them on a cookie? To be frank, there are probably no rational answers to those questions, nor is it likely that all conspiracy theorists would offer up the same ones. These are folks who claim to find similar symbolism everywhere, including in classical art, popular media, religious texts, corporate logos, and on ordinary currency. They regard such symbols as emblems of a secretive, all-powerful organization call it Freemasonry, the Order of Solomon's Temple (aka the Knights Templar), the Illuminati, or the New World Order that has conspired behind the scenes to rule every nation on the planet, like puppet-masters, for centuries. Beyond absolute world domination, it's unclear what the secret society's underlying raison d'tre is supposed to be. Some say it's religious (a Jewish or Catholic conspiracy), others say it's occult or Satanic (e.g., a conspiracy to install the Antichrist), others say it's political (e.g., Communism), and still others promote the notion that an evil race of humanoid reptiles is behind it all. So, why, if it's such a super-secret conspiracy, are graphic symbols of this organization to be found everywhere, including on cookies? The various reasons ventured by conspiracy theorists include the following: As you ponder the above, also consider this: Oreos are the largest-selling packaged cookie in the entire world, with $2.9 billion in sales annually in more than 100 different countries. Mondelez International, the parent company of Nabisco, which manufactures Oreos, reports that more than 40 billion of the cookies are baked and consumed every year. Whether it's for the purpose of mind control, covert communication, or mass Satanic conversion, their consumer reach is beyond compare. Indeed, if world domination is one's goal, it's hard to escape the conclusion that Oreos are, in fact, indispensable for that purpose. sales Unless, of course, the "symbolism" with which they're embossed is, and always has been, nothing more than a decorative pattern. It's time to take a closer look. The practice of molding or stamping decorative imagery on cookies (or biscuits, as they are also called) is quite old. In its simplest form, a method called "docking," the dough is perforated with small holes to prevent it from puffing during baking. At its most complex, the technique entails "embossing" the surfaces of baked goods with intricate designs for aesthetic or ceremonial purposes. Innovations brought about during the industrial revolution ensured a future in which cookies would be mass-produced by the billions: designs The turn of the 19th century saw the birth of the industrial biscuit, and, with it, the marriage of these two morphologies docking and decorating into an automated production line. In the late 1890s, two cousins, both called Thomas Vicars, designed the first embossing and cutting machine, capable of punching holes, stamping decorations, and cutting out up to 80 biscuits per minute from a moving sheet of dough. The dies were necessarily hand carved until engraving machines were introduced in the early 1900s... But the true golden age of biscuit engineering did not dawn until the invention of the rotary molder in the late 1920s. first embossing and cutting machine This technology, albeit updated with variable speed controls, advanced non-stick coatings, and quality sensors, is still used to make Oreos and most other thick embossed biscuits today. The cookie dough is forced into negative molds, which imprint patterns, brand names, and docker holes. A scraping knife ("D" in the diagram above) scrapes off any excess dough to give a flat bottom, and the formed biscuits peel away onto a conveyor belt to be baked. In 1908, one of the new industrial-scale baked goods companies created to profit from these rapidly improving production capabilities, Sunshine Biscuits, introduced a product called Hydrox, a creme-filled chocolate sandwich cookie with an embossed design on the top and bottom. It was a sensation, and four years later inspired Sunshine's biggest competitor, the National Biscuit Company (Nabisco), to launch a knock-off: the Oreo (many assume that the Oreo came first and Hydrox was a copycat, but the reverse was true). reverse The first thing to know about the Oreo's design, then, is that it was modeled after that of another product, Hydrox, which also had an embossed pattern on its face. pattern The second thing to know is that the design evolved over time. The pattern we're familiar with today was implemented in 1952, and is a more complex version of the two designs that came before. "Interestingly, when the Oreo was first introduced by Nabisco in 1912," writes Nicola Twilley in The Atlantic, "it used a much more organic wreath for its emboss, later augmented with two pairs of turtledoves in a 1924 redesign." writes The third thing to know is that we've established the identity of the person who came up with the current design, a longtime Nabisco engineer named William A. Turnier, and although no one ever had a chance to interview him and inquire as to the meaning of the various elements in the pattern, his son has been quite forthcoming about his father's thinking. Remember the rumor quoted above about the Oreo's designer being a Freemason? Not so, says Bill Turnier of his father, who he claims scoffed when people asked serious questions about the design: forthcoming "I read something on the Internet about some speculation about Masonic designs, et cetera," Bill Turnier told me. "But my father was not a Mason. His father was, but he had no big enthusiasm for it. Some of this Masonic stuff, I can't imagine the people who get into that and the numerological significance." Nonetheless, cookie enthusiasts and numerologists often called his father. "Someone wanted to know the significance of there being 90 notches around the edge," Bill Turnier says. "I think there's 90, and my dad's like, 'I don't know, is that how many there are? I bet I put my compass down and kicked every fourth degree.'" Bill Turnier recalls that his father also fielded complaints about the four-leafed flower. "Somebody called him up when he was 65 and said there were no flowers with four petals on them. My dad couldn't care." (There are, for the record, plenty of flowers, including the Western Wallflower and varieties of primroses, which bear four petals.) Turnier's ring of four-petaled flowers was a stylized update of the "more organic" floral patterns used on earlier versions of the cookie. Claiming the shape is actually a version of the "Knights Templar Cross Patte" does not make it so. Nor does a similarity between the "antenna" shape over the name "OREO" and the traditional Cross of Lorraine (which has also been identified with the Knights Templar in historical imagery) force one to conclude that it had a conspiratorial origin. The oval and cross in the center of the pattern is actually a variant of the Nabisco logo, which, according to the web site of the Bernhardt Fudyma Design Group, has been in use since 1900: Cross Cross logo since At the end of the 19th century, the newly formed National Biscuit Company took its first step toward the creation of what would become one of the world's most recognized logos. Adolphus Green, the baking giant's first chairman, took charge of developing an entirely new brand-name cracker to be sold in a package specially designed to preserve its crispness. A symbol for this product, and the company itself, was needed for use on the package and in advertising. Mr. Green found a simple design an oval crowned by a double-barreled cross while looking through his collection of rare books. During the 15th century this design was used as a pressmark by the society of Printers in Venice. Prior to that, in the early Christian era, the mark symbolized the triumph of the spiritual over the worldly. Framed in the octagonal shape of the new 'Uneeda Buiscuit' and filled with the word 'In-er Seal' (the name given to the unique wax-paper-lined package), it became the company's first official trademark in 1900. During the next five decades, the oval enclosed various combinations of the company's initials, the Uneeda brand name and, finally, the current acronym 'Nabisco'. While the notion that the world's top-selling cookie is somehow a vehicle for powerful secret entities to exercise world domination makes for an exciting story, such evidence as there is suggests that, like so many other staples of modern life, the only real motive behind its invention was the desire to manufacture a good product and sell it at a profit. Sometimes (as Sigmund Freud ought to have said, but didn't), a cookie is just a cookie. Goldberger, Paul. "Oreo, at 75, the World's Favorite Cookie; Machine Imagery, Homey Decoration." The New York Times. 4 June 1988. Gruber, Hermann. "Masonry (Freemasonry)." The Catholic Encyclopedia. New York: Robert Appleton Company, 1910. Lukas, Paul. "Oreos to Hydrox: Resistance Is Futile." Fortune. 15 March 1999. Moeller, C. "The Knights Templars." The Catholic Encyclopedia. Vol. 14. New York: Robert Appleton Company, 1912. Twilley, Nicola. "Who Invented the Oreo? The Unsung Heroes of Cookie Design." The Atlantic. 13 June 2011. Wallace, Emily. "The Story of William A. Turnier, the Man Who Designed the Oreo Cookie." Indy Week. 24 August 2011. BFDG. "Thinking About Brands in Transition." Undated. Mondelez International. "A Global Taste of the World's Favorite Cookie." 2016. RetroLand. "Hydrox." 2011.

FMD_test_351

Has No Presidential Candidate 'Won Both Ohio and Florida and Lost'?

12/09/2020

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. In December 2020, as states certified their election results and confirmed that Democratic candidate Joe Biden had won the U.S. presidential election, President Donald Trump continued to push baseless claims that the election was "rigged," "stolen," or marred by widespread voter fraud. On Dec. 9, Trump furthered this false narrative by claiming on social media that his election loss was an historic oddity due to voter fraud. This claim is factually inaccurate. Precedent exists for a candidate losing an election while winning both Florida and Ohio. In 1960, Republican candidate Richard Nixon received more votes than his Democratic opponent, John F. Kennedy, in both Ohio and Florida, but still ended up losing the election. Nixon only managed to secure a total of 219 electoral college votes, while Kennedy won the election with 303 electoral college votes. Winning in both Ohio and Florida may increase a person's chances of winning a presidential election, but it is in no way required to do so. In order to secure the presidency, a candidate must win 270 electoral college votes. Like Nixon, Trump won both Florida and Ohio during the 2020 election, but he fell short of the 270 electoral college votes required to secure the presidency. Trump's electoral college results were slightly better than Nixon's at 232 electoral college votes, but they simply weren't enough compared to Biden's 306.

FMD_test_352

Is it true that Biden's Climate Plan proposes reducing red meat consumption by 90%?

04/25/2021

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

FMD_test_353

FEMA Failer

07/21/2015

FACT CHECK: Has FEMA warned Americans that a catastrophic natural disaster will devastate the Pacific Northwest in 2015? Claim: FEMA confirmed that a massive natural disaster will level the Pacific Northwest in 2015. Example: [Collected via Twitter and e-mail, July 2015] There is convincing footage that a huge earthquake is set to hit the Pacific Northwest soon and that FEMA is preparing for it. Many of the details were supposedly printed in the New Yorker magazine. US emergency agency (FEMA) prepare for mega-quake in Pacific Northwest, estimated to kill at least 13,000 people... https://t.co/xf8VGZ8s6T https://t.co/xf8VGZ8s6T PacificGuardians (@FatuTauafiafi) July 18, 2015 July 18, 2015 FEMA AttendeeWarnsOfComingEvent Bank Holiday, Social Unrest And Martial Law! Scientist Warn https://t.co/VKoglRrAkJ pic.twitter.com/7RqAJizi17 https://t.co/VKoglRrAkJ pic.twitter.com/7RqAJizi17 Tamra (@emortal_the) July 18, 2015 July 18, 2015 FEMA Meeting Attendee Warns Of Coming "Event" - Bank Scientists Warn Of "Worst Natural Disaster In History Of Nation" https://t.co/Nx0u7zKQPY https://t.co/Nx0u7zKQPY ICU (@constancevaugh1) July 19, 2015 July 19, 2015 Origins: During the summer of 2015, doomsday prophecies seemed to become relatively fashionable; in addition to the ongoing conspiracy jambalaya of Jade Helm 15, rumors of a giant comet also captivated the purveyors and viewers of caterwauling YouTube videos. (Martial law and FEMA death camps were rumored to be invariable components of your apocalypse of choice.) Jade Helm 15 giant comet Martial law FEMA death camps invariable Many (ostensibly unrelated) things fueled the multiple, ambient conspiracies; among them was a 20 July 2015 piece in The New Yorker titled "The Really Big One," subtitled "An earthquake will destroy a sizable portion of the coastal Northwest[, the] question is when." That article focused on the Cascadia subduction zone, a convergent plate boundary spanning Vancouver Island to Northern California, and one of its most frequently quoted portions stated: piece Just north of the San Andreas, however, lies another fault line. Known as the Cascadia subduction zone, it runs for seven hundred miles off the coast of the Pacific Northwest, beginning near Cape Mendocino, California, continuing along Oregon and Washington, and terminating around Vancouver Island, Canada. When the next very big earthquake hits, the northwest edge of the continent, from California to Canada and the continental shelf to the Cascades, will drop by as much as six feet and rebound thirty to a hundred feet to the westlosing, within minutes, all the elevation and compression it has gained over centuries. Some of that shift will take place beneath the ocean, displacing a colossal quantity of seawater. The water will surge upward into a huge hill, then promptly collapse. One side will rush west, toward Japan. The other side will rush east, in a seven-hundred-mile liquid wall that will reach the Northwest coast, on average, fifteen minutes after the earthquake begins. By the time the shaking has ceased and the tsunami has receded, the region will be unrecognizable. Kenneth Murphy, who directs FEMAs Region X, the division responsible for Oregon, Washington, Idaho, and Alaska, says, Our operating assumption is that everything west of Interstate 5 will be toast. Inarguably, the prognostications were grim and the tone suggested a sooner-rather-than-later timeline: In fact, the science is robust, and one of the chief scientists behind it is Chris Goldfinger. Thanks to work done by him and his colleagues, we now know that the odds of the big Cascadia earthquake happening in the next fifty years are roughly one in three. The odds of the very big one are roughly one in ten. Even those numbers do not fully reflect the dangeror, more to the point, how unprepared the Pacific Northwest is to face it. The truly worrisome figures in this story are these: Thirty years ago, no one knew that the Cascadia subduction zone had ever produced a major earthquake. Forty-five years ago, no one even knew it existed. Naturally, the article's alarming claims moved swiftly across social media sites and blogs (particularly those with a primary interest in apocalyptic scenarios and looming martial law). On 18 July 2015 the unreliable web site All News PipeLine published an article titled "FEMA Meeting Attendee Warns Of Coming 'Event' - Bank Holiday, Social Unrest And Martial Law! Scientists Warn Of 'Worst Natural Disaster In History Of Nation,'" followed by an article (published to the website of Facebook page "Operation Jade Helm and Beyond") titled "FEMA Warns Of Mega Natural Disaster Expected To Hit The U.S. Northwest!!! Martial Law Not Far Behind..." article website Facebook page The latter article primarily rewrote the former, but added that "FEMA has outlined some of what they expect to happen here" and that "[t]his is expected to happen in the next 6 months or so in the Pacific Northwest." All News PipeLine's article linked to the website of conspiracy theorist Steve Quayle. In a 17 July 2015 "alert," Quayle seized upon interest in The New Yorker's predictions and built upon it with a claim that he received additional information from an unknown source linked to FEMA: Steve Quayle I have a long time friend, who is in law enforcement in one of the Jade Helm states. He is totally logical and factual (sheeple) while I think more out of the box. I have tried to help him see whats going on, but he always calls me a nutjob with too much time on my hands. I just got a phone call from him, he has been attending FEMA Training, and he is now having a meltdown after what they learned. The FEMA team revealed: -There is going to be an "Event" within the next 6 months. -The nature of the "Event" is believed to be a Natural Disaster, such as a Solar Flare, but could be something else. As the excerpted portion illustrates, Quayle purportedly spoke to a "friend who is in law enforcement" (that we'll presume exists for the purposes of this discussion) and not anyone directly affiliated with FEMA. Moreover, the "event" his friend described is either a natural disaster or not a natural disaster (and in no way necessarily linked to the July 2015 article published in The New Yorker). From there, other websites conflated the article about the Cascadia subduction zone and a vague claim from a fellow who hawks conspiracy and doomsday stories for a living. Quayle's claim didn't even hint at then-ongoing discussion of a possible future earthquake affecting the Pacific Northwest, it simply also referenced a natural disaster (or something else entirely). It's true that the subject of a West Coast faultline was featured in an article in The New Yorker, and it's even true that FEMA Region X Kenneth Murphy surmised that in the event of such a calamity much of the Pacific Northwest "would be toast." However, Murphy's comments were clearly not made on the basis of information pertaining to the certainty of any such looming disaster, and are akin to observing that if a tree fell on your car it would likely sustain serious damage. In the complete context of Murphy's remarks, he clearly referenced a "what if" scenario and not a current situation for which FEMA was actively preparing. FEMA has not issued any warnings about seismic activity or any other natural dangers that line up with the claims in the linked articles. And while geologist Chris Goldfinger discussed the possibility of a "mega-quake" in a July 2015 article, neither Goldfinger nor any other entity stated with certainty that such an event would occur in 2015 or any other point in the near future. In fact, research (on which Goldfinger worked) completed in 2012 determined that there is a "40 percent chance of a major earthquake in the [affected] region during the next 50 years." Chris Goldfinger Last updated: 21July 2015 Originally published: 21July 2015

FMD_test_354

Did Fox News address the topic of the 'War on Christmas' while other networks reported on Michael Cohen's admissions of guilt?

08/22/2018

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

FMD_test_355

Does Lyft Provide Free Rides to Job Interviews?

02/12/2021

In February 2021, social media users enthusiastically shared a tweet that outlined a program purportedly run by the ride-hailing company Lyft, which allows users to avail themselves of a free ride to a job interview if they need it. The tweet, attributed to Twitter user @ThaOriginalKaee, read as follows: "So Lyft has a new program that will pick you up and take you to a job interview for free, and if you get hired, they will give you up to three weeks of free rides until you get paid. There have been times in my life this would have been a game changer. If you need help, here's help." That Twitter account has since been suspended, but the tweet was authentic, based on several screenshots showing various "retweet" and "like" counts. The tweet was also originally published in October 2019. For reasons that are not clear, it enjoyed a resurgence in popularity in January and February 2021, as illustrated by the following screenshot, which shows just a selection of Facebook posts from the first two months of the year. The post was largely accurate. Lyft does indeed run an initiative called the "Jobs Access Program" that gives some users the opportunity to get free rides to job interviews and training, and if they become employed, free transportation to and from their new job for the first three weeks. However, the service is not available to everyone. Lyft runs the Jobs Access Program in just 20 cities across the United States and Canada, and it is primarily targeted at individuals who have historically experienced difficulties in gaining employment, such as veterans and persons with disabilities. In February 2021, many social media users shared @ThaOriginalKaee's viral tweet, which described the initiative as "new." However, most screenshots of that tweet had the date cut off, meaning many readers mistakenly understood Lyft's initiative to be a new one. While that was true at the time the tweet was originally published in October 2019, it wasn't "new" in 2021. Lyft launched the Jobs Access Program in October 2019, announcing it had partnered with non-profit groups including United Way, Goodwill, the National Down Syndrome Society, and the USO (United Service Organizations). The news release associated with the launch explained the initiative as follows: "We're excited to announce Lyft's Jobs Access Program, a new initiative that aims to close short-term transportation gaps related to employment access and job training. For the unemployed, reliable transportation to a job interview or to the first few weeks of work can mean the difference between successful, long-term employment and lost opportunities. So we've partnered with several leading national and local organizations dedicated to workforce development in order to deliver free or discounted rides to people making their way through the employment pipeline. Lyft's Jobs Access Program will focus on three key interventions in the employment pipeline that are critical to individual success, and where transportation can play a major role: We are focused on communities that stand to benefit most from short-term transportation support, ranging from veterans to individuals with disabilities." At the time the initiative was launched, Lyft stated that it was available in 35 cities. However, the company's website now lists only 20 cities and states in which the Jobs Access Program is operational. As of February 2021, they are: Atlanta, Austin, Baltimore, Boston, Chicago, Denver, Houston, Los Angeles, Minneapolis, New Jersey, New York, Oakland, Philadelphia, San Diego, San Francisco, Seattle, Tacoma, Toronto, Ottawa, and Washington, D.C. In December 2020, Lyft stated that in the 14 months since it was launched, the Jobs Access Program had facilitated more than 30,000 free rides for individuals. While it wasn't immediately clear what exact criteria and restrictions applied to the way in which United Way, Goodwill, and other charities distribute free ride credits to applicants, the program is clearly designed to prioritize individuals with the most acute need for assistance in accessing transportation in order to enter or re-enter the workforce. There is also an application process, whereby would-be users submit their name, contact details, and some basic information about themselves, and according to Lyft's website, can expect to receive a response within a week. So a program does exist whereby Lyft, in partnership with several non-profit organizations, provides free rides to and from job interviews, training, and for the first three weeks of a beneficiary's new employment. However, the initiative has several limitations: it's restricted to 20 cities in the United States and Canada, targeted to communities and individuals who have historically experienced difficulty in finding employment, and involves a relatively slow application process, meaning a user can't simply open up the Lyft app on their phone and spontaneously demand a free ride to a job interview on an ad hoc basis. Taking these facts into consideration, we are issuing a rating of "true."

FMD_test_356

Is this Santorini Holidays Vacation Giveaway in Greece Legit?

04/16/2019

On 9 April 2019, the "Santorini Holidays" Facebook page posted a set of picturesque images and claimed that any social media user who commented and shared the post would have a chance to win an all-expenses paid vacation to the "Grand Opening Celebration" of this new hotel in Greece: Facebook picturesque The Facebook message reads: "We're going to celebrate our Grand Opening by doing something special for you. We're going to be rewarding someone who has shared then commented by April 16th with a 7 night holiday for 4 people in this 2 Bedroom 5 star hotel. You will have a year to use the holiday. No need to worry about flights & travel, it's all included." This Facebook post contains all of the hallmarks of a like-farming scam, and none of the information (such as the name of the new hotel) that would be included in a genuine giveaway. This genre of scam relies on the promise of a big giveaway (we've previously covered similar scams giving away everything from gift cards, to cars, to cash to airline tickets) in order to generate likes, shares, and comments. This can drive up the value of the page, which can then be sold to a third-party or used to sell advertisements. gift cards cars cash airline tickets You can read more about like-farming scams here. For the moment, let's address some of the red flags that give away the fact that this is a giveaway scam. here For starters, this post provides no basic information about this alleged hotel. Despite reporting that the vacation would take place during the "Grand Opening," this message does not contain the address of the hotel, a phone number, or even the property's name. We looked for a hotel named "Santorini Holidays" on the Greek island but found no matches. When we performed a reverse-image search on the photos, we found they came from a variety of sources, such as stock photography websites, travel blogs, and online booking platforms. These photographs also show a variety of properties. For instance, the image of the oval, blue pool was taken at the Volcano View Villas Hotel and the images of the bathroom interior come from the Chromata, both in Greece. Neither of these hotels is having a "grand opening" this weekend. Volcano View Villas Hotel Chromata, The Facebook page itself is also suspicious. For example, this page claims in its "About" section (left) to have been established in April 2014, but Facebook's Page Transparency blurb (right) states that it was actually created in March 2019: In short, social media users who share and comment on the Santorini Holidays Facebook page's "Grand Opening Celebration" giveaway post should not expect to win an all-inclusive vacation to Greece. GreekTravel.com. "Where to Stay in Santorini." Retrieved 15 April 2019.

FMD_test_357

Are US Truckers Planning a Nationwide Strike Over Thanksgiving?

11/13/2020

In the aftermath of U.S. President-elect Joe Biden's victory in the 2020 election, many individuals spoke up online to support current President Donald Trump, including groups of truckers. Members of the private Facebook group Stop the Tires 2020 called for a nationwide truckers' shutdown to protest, among other things, Biden's environmental policies, which include a transition to renewable energy sources. The group, which had grown to more than 68,000 members since its founding on Nov. 6, 2020, planned a strike for Nov. 11, 2020, Veterans Day, and if that was ineffective, would continue the strike from Nov. 26 to 29, 2020, during the Thanksgiving holidays. According to a post from one of the group's administrators, TikTok videos of individuals stating they were truckers and describing their plans to strike on the aforementioned dates also went viral. Snopes readers asked us if such strikes were indeed taking place and if they would impact the delivery of basic food and necessities. We learned that a number of truckers claimed to have participated in the Veterans Day strike. However, the actual effectiveness of the past strikes, as well as the upcoming ones, is yet to be determined. Before examining the nature and effectiveness of these strikes, we had to determine whether nationwide and industry-wide strikes were even likely for U.S.-based truckers. The answer is complicated. A report from Business Insider looked at laws from the administration of President Jimmy Carter in the late 1970s that resulted in a decline in wages and the eventual decline in union membership in the trucking industry. Deregulation laws were justified because they reportedly saved consumers money, but at the cost of truckers' wages and working conditions. Hourly wages for heavy and trailer-truck drivers have steadily gone down since then. Unions also lost much of their power and membership. A few decades ago, large numbers of truckers were unionized and carried out successful strikes in the '70s. The Teamsters, a labor union that once boasted more than 2 million truckers as members, now has around 75,000 members. With more independent truckers and companies, it is considered extremely challenging to rally that many truckers together, as they have neither the time nor resources. For instance, in April 2019, tens of thousands of truck drivers planned a work stoppage in a much-hyped Black Smoke Matters protest, but ultimately only a small number of people in different locations participated. On Nov. 11, and even after that date had passed, dozens of members of Stop the Tires 2020 posted pictures in the private group claiming they were participating in a strike by refusing to drive. However, there was little evidence that these stoppages had any impact. WWJ Newsradio 950, Detroit's local station, reported on Nov. 11 that so far, the call for a one-day strike seemed to be all talk, as the trucking industry was humming along. Truckers interviewed by the station were not participating but stated that the strikers' concerns made sense and should be taken seriously. Larry Fuentes, the manager of a large logistics company in metro Detroit, told WWJ that his truckers had not joined the strike, but "I can have some understanding of what they're coming for. Their livelihoods are at stake." He added that a strike would devastate the industry. Samuel Ford, a truck driver from Brownstown, Mich., mentioned that he hasn't joined the strike, but the drivers in the strike group have a point. "Truckers are very often overlooked ... But they do have a very significant say-so over how this country is run," he said. Not all truckers are part of these particular anti-Biden strikes. After the election results were announced on Nov. 7, 2020, the American Trucking Associations released a statement congratulating Biden and calling for more infrastructure investment. Other groups that claimed to strike said they were not defending any one political party but wanted to improve their working conditions and wages. Over the summer, truckers also organized to protest decreased freight rates and working conditions during the pandemic. Indeed, before the elections, the truckers running the supply chain for United Natural Foods Inc. (UNFI), which supplies Whole Foods and other grocery stores in New York, New Jersey, and Connecticut, threatened to strike over what they said was UNFI's failure to comply with COVID-19 safety guidelines. The truckers, represented by Teamsters, along with workers at distribution centers in California, claimed the company was not providing workers with adequate protective equipment, including face masks, and disinfecting and cleaning workspaces. However, they reached an agreement with the company by early November. As of this writing, the strikes planned for late November have yet to happen, and their effectiveness is still to be determined. We will keep an eye on the events and post an update once we have more information. UPDATE Nov. 18, 2020: Stop the Tires 2020 creator Jeremy Rewoldt called off the Thanksgiving holiday work stoppage, saying, "Now is not the time." In an appearance on a video blog, he admitted that he had previously made an "emotion-based decision based on a presumed result of the election that hasn't been certified yet." He added that the administrative team had fractured over disagreements around the purpose of their Facebook group, and he posted on the page: "When this group was made, the intentions were to talk and BS amongst a few, if not a couple hundred, people, my friends and others included. What I thought was going to be a few hundred turned into 75K people who I now had to voice for." The group's profile image on Nov. 18 said "Delayed."

FMD_test_358

South Florida ranks No. 1 in the gap between wages and housing.

03/23/2017

South Floridas housing market spans the gamut of tony gated oceanfront mansions for millionaires and some downtrodden neighborhoods. Thats not unusual for a major urban area. But is it worse in South Florida than elsewhere in the nation? Habitat for Humanity painted a stark picture about the cost of housing in South Florida in a press release announcing that President Donald Trumps Secretary of Housing and Urban Development, retiredDr. Ben Carson, will visit the site of a futureaffordable housing developmentin Broward County on March 24. Studies indicate that while Broward County is the most cost-burdened housing market in the nation, South Florida ranks No. 1 in the gap between wages and housing, said the affordable home-building organization that partners with volunteers. We will focus on whether South Florida ranks No. 1 in the gap between wages and housing. The phrasecost-burdenedrefers to households that spend more than 30 percent of their income on housing. People who spend more than 50 percent are considered severely cost-burdened. South Florida housing market Habitat for Humanity cited a few different reports about the lack of affordable housing in South Florida. A keyreportincluded information from the Center for Neighborhood Technology along with the Center for Housing Policy, a division of the National Housing Conference. The 2012 report outlined the struggle for moderate-income families to afford housing in the 25 largest metro areas. Researchers examined data between 2006-10 from the American Community Survey conducted by the U.S. Census Bureau. The report found that housing and transportation costs rose faster than income nationally, although the disparity was greater in some metro areas than others.And South Florida topped that list. In the Miami metro area, 40 percent of income for a moderate-income household was spent on housing, more than any other metro area in the study. (TheMiami metropolitan statistical areawas defined by the federal government at the time as stretching from Miami-Dade County, through Broward and north up to West Palm Beach.) It was followed by the Riverside, Calif., metro area and the Tampa-St. Petersburg-Clearwater metro area. More recent research shows that the Miami metro area continues to lag behind in affordable housing, said Janet Viveiros, acting director of research at the National Housing Conference. Low- and moderate-income households, even those who are working, still face serious challenges in accessing affordable homeownership or renting in the Miami metro area, she said. The organizations Housing Landscape report based on data from 2011-2014 found that 35.8 percent of low- and moderate-income working households in the Miami area spent more than half their income on housing. That was only exceeded -- slightly -- by the Los Angeles-Long Beach-Anaheim, Calif., area, which had 36.4 percent of those households spending that much on housing. (This report covered the 50 largest metro areas.) Astudyby the Harvard Joint Center for Housing Studies in 2015 foundMiamihad the largest share of cost-burdened renters of any major metro in the country. AnNYU Furman Center/CapitalOnereport in 2016 reached a similar conclusion. While metro areas with higher rents also had higher incomes, Miami pops out as a troubling exceptiona high-cost city without high incomes. Anne Ray, a researcher at the University of Floridas Shimberg Center for Housing Studies, said that data continues to show that Miami housing costs are unattainable for low-income people. Rent is very high and the median income is much lower, particularly in Miami-Dade, than other expensive markets, Ray said. Our ruling Habitat for Humanity says, South Florida ranks No. 1 in the gap between wages and housing. Studies have repeatedly shown that South Florida tops the list in the gap between wages and housing. Although there are other metro areas with similarly expensive housing, wages lag behind in South Florida. We rate this claim True.

FMD_test_359

Tomaselli Letter

02/26/2002

I was just reading Yahoo News and the San Antonio Express newspaper. You know what upsets me? People with absolutely nothing to do with their lives complain about how the U.S. is treating the prisoners or "detainees" from Afghanistan. They see a picture on the news or the Internet of someone who is shackled and blindfolded, walking with two armed guards behind razor wire. This picture leads them to believe that these individuals are being treated unfairly. Here is what I see: I see a thin, sickly-looking person who, under severe mental duress from being bombed, was cleaned up, given a haircut to prevent infestation of parasites, and provided with new clothes and shoes. I see a person who is given three nutritious meals per day and a bed to sleep in a tropical climate, not the cold desert floor of Afghanistan, where they would be eating worms, bugs, and goat. I see a person who will be able to receive relief from their pains and illnesses without paying a dime for medical expenses. They will get rest, education, and their mental stress levels will drop tremendously because they have been taken out of a combat area and will not be shot at again. I see these people blindfolded and shackled behind razor wire. I have the intellectual ability to understand why they are in this situation. For those who do not have this ability, let me explain: They are blindfolded to protect our U.S. soldiers from further harm. These individuals cannot plan to destroy something if they cannot see it. They are shackled because they have proven they will easily give up their lives to kill just one American. We are protecting their lives as well as our own. The razor wire serves as a mental deterrent, much like the little alarm company warning signs that many of you have on your homes, even if you do not have an actual alarm system. You would think many times before attempting to cross that razor wire. For those of you thinking about how bad these poor detainees have it under such strict guard, you need to reflect more on other aspects of your life. I was born on September 11, 1966, and every birthday I have from now on will never be a happy one. Why, you ask? Because as I am out somewhere trying to enjoy a nice dinner, someone will have a candle or a ribbon or something, crying about the anniversary of a national tragedy. Then I will think about how insignificant my one little birthday actually is compared to everything else that happened on that day. It boggles my mind that there are people in this world, in leadership positions, heads of companies, who actually think we are doing something wrong when it comes to protecting our nation and our people. These same individuals will be the first to complain about something that happens to them when they are vacationing outside this country. They will ask why the U.S. does not do anything about their misfortune. These are the same people who complain about taxes and how bad their lives are. If you receive this email, please pass it on to everyone in your address book. I am not afraid or ashamed to speak my piece. I am an American; my father fought for this country and was willing to die for it. Dr. Steven Tomaselli Uvalde, Texas United States of America

FMD_test_360

Are US Election Results Required To Be Certified on Election Night?

10/27/2020

Voting in the 2020 U.S. Election may be over, but the misinformation keeps on ticking. Never stop fact-checking. Follow our post-election coverage here. here On Oct. 26, 2020, U.S. President Donald Trump posted a message on Twitter stating that we "must have final [vote] total" of the presidential election on Nov. 3, 2020. This tweet was subsequently flagged by Twitter for spreading content that could damage the integrity of the country's elections: message This is not the first time that Trump has called for the winner of the election to be declared on Nov. 3. On Oct. 27, Trump said: said "It would be very very proper and very nice if a winner were declared on November 3rd, instead of counting ballots for two weeks, which is totally inappropriate and I don't believe that that's by our laws. I don't believe that. So we'll see what happens." The laws of the United States do not say that the winner of a presidential election must be declared or certified on the same night as the election. In fact, the election process in the United States extends for several weeks after the final votes are cast on Nov. 3. Ellen Weintraub, the commissioner of the Federal Election Commission, responded to the president's comments on Twitter, writing: writing An election is not a reality show with a big reveal at the end. All we get on Election Night are projections from TV networks. We *never* have official results on Election Night. Counting ballots all of 'em is the appropriate, proper, and very legal way to determine who won. While Americans may be used to seeing newscasters call the results of a presidential election on election night, states don't typically certify their election results for several days (and in some cases weeks) after the election. When a newscaster "calls" a race on election night, this is actually a "projection" an estimate based on the amount of votes cast so far and not a legally sanctioned election result. projection Here's an excerpt from an article published by Pew Research concerning American's skewed expectations for election night: Pew Research On Nov. 3, millions of Americans will trek to their local polling places to cast their ballots for the next president. That evening, after the polls close, theyll settle down in front of their televisions to watch the returns roll in from across the country. Sometime that night or early the next morning, the networks and wire services will call the race, and Americans will know whether President Donald Trump has won a second term or been ousted by former Vice President Joe Biden. Just about every statement in the previous paragraph is false, misleading or at best lacking important context. Over the years, Americans have gotten used to their election nights coming off like a well-produced game show, with the big reveal coming before bedtime (a few exceptions like the 2000 election notwithstanding). In truth, theyve never been quite as simple or straightforward as they appeared. And this year, which has already upended so much of what Americans took for granted, seems poised to expose some of the wheezy 18th- and 19th-century mechanisms that still shape the way a president is elected in the 21st century. While Nov. 3 marks the end of voting, it is far from the end of the election process. In the following days and weeks (it varies by states), all of the ballots will be counted and certified. This year, the process might take an especially long time due to an expected increase in voter turnout, as well as a surge in mail-in ballots due to the COVID-19 pandemic. expected increase in voter turnout, mail-in ballots Many states continue to receive and count mail-in ballots for several days after election day as long as those ballots were postmarked on or prior to Nov. 3. In Mississippi, for instance, absentee ballots will be accepted "five business days after Election Day if postmarked on or before Election Day." In Illinois, ballots that were postmarked on or before election day will be counted as long as they arrive within 14 days. In other words, we won't know the official total vote count on Nov. 3 because some states won't even be finished receiving ballots by this date. receive and count mail-in ballots for several days And counting ballots is only part of the process. The President of the United States is not elected by the popular vote. Rather, once each state counts and certifies all of its votes, governors prepare a "Certificate of Ascertainment" that lists the state's Electoral College electors. These electors cast their votes for president, which are then counted and certified by Congress. not elected by the popular vote The National Archives and Records Administration (NARA), an independent government agency tasked with preserving historical records, is responsible for transmitting the votes of the Electoral College to Congress. In NARA's guide to the 2020 election, they outline a timeline that stretches from June (when preparations begin) to Nov. 3 (when the election takes place) to mid-November (when governors prepare a "Certificate of Ascertainment" listing the state's electors) to Dec. 14 (when members of the Electoral College cast their votes) to Jan. 6 (when the vote is counted in Congress) to Jan. 20 (when a president is inaugurated). Review NARA's full timeline in this document. document In short, tallying the vote this year is expected to take longer than usual due to increased voter turnout and a surge in mail-in ballots. While it is possible that one candidate will win enough votes on election night that newscasters will be able to say with reasonable certainty who will win the election, these news reports are not the official legal method in which a presidential election is certified. States will spend days (or weeks) counting ballots in the days after the election, governors will then certify those results and list their electors, members of the electoral college will then cast their votes, and then Congress will certify those results. Berman, Russell. "The November Surprise." The Atlantic. 7 October 2020. CNN. "How Does CNN Make Election Projections?." 2008. Desilver, Drew. "Mail-in Voting Became Much More Common in 2020 Primaries as COVID-19 Spread." Pew Research Center. 13 October 2020. Desilver, Drew. "Election Night Marks the End of One Phase of Campaign 2020 and The Start of Another." Pew Research Center. 22 October 2020. United States House of Representatives. "Electoral College Fast Facts." Retrieved 27 October 2020. Robertson, Helena, Kirk, Ashley, and Hulley-Jones, Frank. "Electoral College Explained: How Biden Faces an Uphill Battle in the US Election." The Guardian. 27 October 2020.

FMD_test_361

The Debt Free America Act, also known as H.R. 4646, is legislation aimed at eliminating the 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

FMD_test_362

Does 'ABA' Letter Prove Anyone Making COVID-19 Masks Can Be Sued?

08/04/2020

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 As Ohio Gov. Mike DeWine announced a statewide mask mandate starting July 23, 2020, amidst a rise in COVID-19 cases in the region, online rumors suggested any mask manufacturers, including those selling masks from home, were at risk of facing lawsuits. announced rise Snopes readers alerted us to the circulation of the above-displayed letter purportedly from the Ohio State Bar Association (OSBA), printed on an American Bar Association (ABA) letterhead. Dated July 19, 2020, the letter claimed that under "Ohio Consumer Laws" individuals could bring a lawsuit against establishments selling or manufacturing masks without licenses or warning labels, including those selling out of their homes, especially if wearers got lung damage. The letter, full of grammatical errors and deprived of punctuation, stated: Under Ohio Consumer Laws you can now bring lawsuit against any retail establishment selling or manufacturing Face Masks or Facial Coverings for the purpose virus protection You can now file lawsuits against anyone selling a facial covering that has not been Medically Approved to filter contagious diseases. This includes any Homemade or Factory made mask With the rise in lung damage caused by pleurisy you can Legally sue for Medical Damages and or selling a Medical Device without license Any mask sold without proper warning labeling sewn into the fabric will be considered in violation, you can also file a mislabeled or not FDA approved lawsuit You can also pursue anyone selling face masks out of their homeYou can also bring suit if selling a medical device without licenseYou can also bring suit for Illegal Monetary Sales and failure to disclose income under IRS 254-70994USYou can also now bring suit against any small business that knowingly sells a defective face covering that causes lung damage We believe these lawsuits will be very lucrative moving forward We learned that the letter attribution was fake and its contents were suspect. In a statement on their Facebook page, the OSBA said they did not issue a letter and readers should be wary of its contents: statement We reached out to the OSBA who would not comment on the contents of the letter because as an organization they refrain from giving legal advice. Snopes also reached out to the Ohio attorney generals office about the information in the letter. A representative confirmed that under Ohio law consumers can bring lawsuits against suppliers for unfair and deceptive practices, but much of what constitutes a violation relies on court interpretation. According to the Ohio Revised Code, such deceptive practices include: Ohio Revised Code That the subject of a consumer transaction has sponsorship, approval, performance characteristics, accessories, uses, or benefits that it does not have; That the subject of a consumer transaction is of a particular standard, quality, grade, style, prescription, or model, if it is not [...] It is likely that this applies to any mask manufacturers that make deceptive promises about the quality of their product(s) and the level of protection the product(s) provide. DeWine and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) recommended the use of homemade and non-medical grade masks in addition to practicing social distancing. The CDC stated that surgical masks or respirators are critical supplies that should continue to be reserved for healthcare workers. The Ohio state and federal governments have shared recommendations for do-it-yourself (DIY) or homemade masks without any requirement for a license or warning labels. Consumer protection laws may apply to people selling these homemade masks without affixed labels, but the actual legal implications remain unclear given government recommendations. DeWine Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Ohio The Federal Drug Administration (FDA) regulates masks used for medical purposes only. In April 2020, when health care providers in the U.S. reportedly did not have access to enough personal protective equipment, including masks, the FDA issued an Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) for face masks used by the general public and in health care settings during the COVID-19 public health emergency. In short, this EUA required that face masks should be labeled accurately and their use not be misrepresented. Authorized masks were to meet the following requirements: Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) 1. The product is labeled accurately to describe the product as a face mask and includes a list of the body contacting materials (which does not include any drugs or biologics); 2. The product is labeled accurately so that it does not claim to be intended for use as a surgical mask or to provide liquid barrier protection; 3. The product labeling includes recommendations against use in a clinical setting where the infection risk level through inhalation exposure is high; 4. The product is not labeled in such a manner that would misrepresent the products intended use; for example, the labeling must not state or imply that the product is intended for antimicrobial or antiviral protection or related uses or is for use such as infection prevention or reduction; 5. The product is not labeled as a respiratory protective device, and therefore should not be used for particulate filtration; and 6. The product is not labeled for use in high risk aerosol generating procedures. In sum, although the above-displayed letter was fake, it is possible that consumer protection laws that apply to all kinds of manufacturers would also apply to mask manufacturing, even though its interpretation in situations involving homemade masks is unclear. We thus rate this claim as false. Codes.Ohio.gov. "Chapter 109:4-3 Deceptive Acts or Trade Practices in Connection with Consumer Transactions." Accessed 3 August 2020 FDA.gov. "To: Manufacturers of Face Masks; Health Care Personnel; Hospital Purchasing Departments and Distributors; and Any Other Stakeholders." 24 April 2020. Ingles, Jo. "Coronavirus in Ohio: Ohioans Advised To Wear Homemade Masks in Public." WOSU. 6 April 2020. Morello, Carol. "Coronavirus Cases on the Rise in the Midwest as They Ebb in the Sun Belt." The Washington Post. 28 July 2020. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. "Considerations for Wearing Masks." 16 July 2020. Waldrop, Theresa. "Ohio Governor Orders Statewide Mask Mandate as of Thursday." CNN. 22 July 2020.

FMD_test_363

Canadian middle class incomes are now higher than in the United States. They are working fewer hours for more pay, living longer on average, and facing less income inequality.

05/20/2014

The next presidential election may still be two and a half years away, but the presumptive Democratic frontrunner, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, is all over the news. On May 16, 2014, in a speech at the New America Foundation, a moderate-to-liberal think tank, Clinton compared the United States and Canada on several measures of well-being. Clinton found the United States wanting. Canadian middle class incomes are now higher than in the United States, Clinton said. They are working fewer hours for more pay, enjoying a stronger safety net, living longer on average, and facing less income inequality. Well set aside the claim about the safety net, since thats tricky to measure statistically. But the other claims are ripe for a closer look. So well take them in order. (Clintons camp did not respond to our inquiry.) Canadian middle-class incomes are now higher than in the United States This is the trickiest of the measurements Clinton mentioned, for a couple reasons. First, theres no universally recognized definition of middle class in the available data. Second, theres more than one way to measure the data. Some measurements take a nations economic output as a whole and divide it by the population, whereas others sample individual people or households to find out how much they make, then find the midpoint. Clinton has support fromNew York Timesarticlethat looked at data from the Luxembourg Income Study database, which is based on surveys going back 35 years. The study surveyed people in various countries, asked them what they earned, then used a median to determine the mid-range income level. TheNew York Timesconcluded that median income in Canada pulled into a tie with median United States income in 2010 and has most likely surpassed it since then, due to studies conducted by other groups since 2010 suggest that pay in Canada has risen faster than pay in the United States. On the other hand, if you look at gross domestic product per capita -- the total amount of economic activity divided by population -- the United States tops Canada, and not by a trivial amount. In 2012, GDP per capita in theUnited Stateswas $51,689, compared to $41,559 forCanada, according to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. (These figures, as with all other money figures in this article, have been converted to U.S. dollars, so that they can be compared.) But this method has drawbacks. Because it represents an average across the entire economy, the final results tend to over-represent the income that flows to the wealthy. So its not ideal for measuring the middle class. Munroe Eagles, director of Canadian studies at the State University of New York-Buffalo, and Ross Burkhart, co-director of the Canadian Studies Program at Boise State University, told PolitiFact that using the Luxembourg Income Study is at least as good a measurement for Clintons claim as the other figures, if not better. They are working fewer hours for more pay than Americans OECD data for the average number of hours worked annually per employed person shows that Clinton is correct. In theUnited Statesin 2012, workers spent 1,790 hours per year on the job, compared to 1,710 hours per year inCanada. One could say that Americans are working harder and producing more goods and services, but Clintons point was that Canadians have greater opportunities for leisure, and on that point, the statistics support her point. As for getting more pay, OECD statistics for 2012 show that the average annual wages for workers in Canada were $58,376, compared to $55,048 in the United States. This measures the average wages earned by a full-time, full-year employee. These statistics support Clintons claim. Canadians are living longer OECD data for life expectancy at birth shows that in 2011,Canadianscould expect to live 81 years, while in 2009, the most recent year available,Americanscould expect to live 78.7 years. So Clintons right on this one, too. Theres less income inequality in Canada The primary statistic used for gauging income inequality is the Ginicoefficient. Gini coefficients range from 0, or perfect equality, to 1, or perfect inequality. According to the OECD, the Gini coefficient for Canada in 2010 was .320, compared to .380 in the United States. That means Canada is modestly more equal than the United States is, which is what Clinton had claimed. Overall, the five comparisons Clinton made are reasonable and arent cherry-picked or subject to statistical quirks, Burkhart said. It's fair, in my understanding of the Canadian and U.S. economies, for Ms. Clinton to make the kinds of comparisons that Ms. Clinton has made, Burkhart said. Our ruling Clinton said that Canadian middle class incomes are now higher than in the United States. They are working fewer hours for more pay, living longer on average, and facing less income inequality. Shes indisputably correct on four of these five measures, and the data is more mixed on the fifth. On balance, we rate her claim Mostly True.

FMD_test_364

Candidates for governor routinely disclose their spouses tax returns.

06/26/2014

A new ad by Gov. Rick Scott's campaign has a simple message: Scott and his wife, Ann, have shown Florida their tax returns, so it's only fair that former Gov. Charlie Crist and his wife, Carole, show theirs. In the ad released on June 25, titled "What's He Hiding," Scott's political group, Let's Get To Work, demands that Crist release not only his tax returns but also Carole's. The ad states that the Scotts have released tax returns both in 2010 and for this year's election. However, the ad claims that millionaire Charlie Crist refuses to release his spouse's tax returns. Candidates for governor routinely disclose those returns; Alex Sink and Rick Scott both did so four years ago. Crist has said he won't be releasing his wife's tax returns, arguing that Scott was out of bounds for making the request and should apologize. PolitiFact Florida wondered, however, if spouses truly do routinely disclose their tax returns. Here’s our disclosure: It depends on what you consider routine. The practice of gubernatorial candidates themselves disclosing tax returns goes back a long time, but for this check, we'll go as far back as Reubin Askew, who became governor in 1971 and released several years' worth. Florida elected officials are required by law to file an annual statement showing their assets and liabilities. They are not required to release tax returns, but candidates for governor have traditionally done so. We should note that this generally applies to general election candidates, and not always to primary candidates. For example, Bill McCollum did not release his returns in 2010 while running in the primary against Rick Scott. As for whether spouses disclose their finances, that's an interesting history. Most candidates have filed jointly with their spouses. Jeb Bush and his wife, Columba, released several years' worth of joint returns during Bush's years in office, and Rick and Ann Scott filed jointly. It wasn't until 2002, when Democrat Bill McBride ran against Bush, that the issue of a spouse filing separately arose. McBride's wife, Alex Sink, began to file separately from her husband specifically because he was running for governor, but in 2002, she released two years of tax returns under pressure from the Bush campaign. Sink had retired as president of Bank of America's Florida operations in 2000. McBride, a lawyer who worked at the Tampa firm Holland & Knight for many years, returned the favor in 2010 and released his returns when his wife ran for governor against Rick Scott (McBride died in 2012). Crist was a solo filer when he ran for governor in 2006 because he was single. He didn't marry Carole Crist until 2008. He has stated that they continue to file separately because he was a single guy for a long time. "She's got her own business, and it's her business." Carole Crist is an owner of a family Halloween costume and novelty business, Franco-American Novelty Co., and has created a second company, Goddessey. Crist, a lawyer by trade like McBride, announced the release of three years of tax returns as the ad began airing. The next day, he released returns going back to 2001, with promises to release more, going back to 1991. Candidates releasing their spouses' separate returns has become more of an issue in the last couple of decades as more women become entrepreneurs independently of their spouses. Susan McManus, a University of South Florida political science professor, says the expectation of disclosing separate returns really took off when Walter Mondale chose Geraldine Ferraro as his Democratic running mate during the 1984 presidential campaign. Ferraro faced many questions from political opponents and the media about her husband John Zaccaro's real estate company. They ultimately released the returns, and Ferraro admitted she was an officer in the company, albeit without the authority to sign company checks. In recent years, the same expectation has arisen in presidential campaigns; Sen. John McCain's millionaire wife, Cindy, eventually released two years of individual tax returns during the 2008 presidential campaign amid Democratic pressure. But those are examples from presidential politics. In Florida, the question is whether two instances—by the same couple, McBride and Sink—over the last 12 years constitute spouses' tax returns being released routinely, as Scott alleges. It's only recently that we've seen candidates' spouses filing separate returns. How you feel about it as a voter likely depends on your perspective regarding the race and the candidates, McManus said. The interesting thing in this case is that attitudes about this are changing, she noted. In the future, we're likely to see everyone routinely releasing everything. Our ruling: Scott said candidates for governor routinely disclose spouses' tax returns. It is routine when candidates file joint returns with their spouses. It's only recently that gubernatorial candidates and their spouses have started filing separate tax returns, though. When spouses file separately, there are two instances to consider: first, Alex Sink, and then her husband Bill McBride, disclosed individual returns for their spouses' respective gubernatorial runs in 2002 and 2010. So the trend of spouses who file separately is a new one, but one way or the other, spouses' returns have been released over the years. We rate the statement Mostly True.

FMD_test_365

Did Trump Call USPS 'Most Corrupt and Anti-American Way of Voting'?

08/10/2020

In early August 2020, Snopes readers asked whether the following meme shared across social media accurately quoted U.S. President Donald Trump commenting on the United States Postal Service and voting by mail. This quote appears to be fabricated. Although the meme's text states that Trump made the remark on a talk radio show hosted by Fox News personality Sean Hannity on July 30, 2020, Trump was not a guest on Hannity's AM radio talk show that day. It is true that Trump has repeatedly disparaged mail-in voting, falsely stating that voting by mail leads to rampant election fraud (except in Florida). He even appeared to suggest in a tweet, which prompted widespread backlash, that the November 2020 election should be delayed because the widespread use of mail-in ballots during the ongoing pandemic would compromise the results. Some concern has also been expressed that Trump has reduced the effectiveness of the Postal Service with budget cuts, as The New York Times reported: "Fueled by animus for Jeff Bezos, the founder of Amazon, and surrounded by advisers who have long called for privatizing the post office, Mr. Trump and his appointees have begun taking cost-cutting steps that appear to have led to slower and less reliable delivery." However, we found no evidence that Trump made the remark in the meme displayed above. It wasn't posted to his Twitter account or recorded in any statements transcribed by the White House. And Trump was not a guest on the Hannity show on July 30, 2020, so he didn't make the remark there, as suggested by the meme. These words appear to be someone else's paraphrase of what they assumed Trump was thinking or planning. We therefore rate this claim as false.

FMD_test_366

Manufacturing wages today in America on a per-hour basis are actually a bit lower than average wages in the economy as a whole.

03/30/2014

Former car czar Steven Rattner, who actually hates the nickname he earned overseeing the auto bailout, is pushing back against proclamations of a flourishing American manufacturing industry. Again. Rattner wrote an eye-catching New York Times op-ed in January, calling the industry's post-recession job gains a trickle and arguing that we need to get real about the so-called renaissance, partly because wages for auto workers and manufacturers have dropped far more than those of the average private-sector worker since the end of the recession in June 2009. He revisited some of those points in a March 30, 2014, appearance on ABC's This Week, which took a break from coverage of Russia and the missing Malaysian plane to examine the state of Made in the USA. "We certainly want these kinds of advanced manufacturing jobs. But remember this: manufacturing wages today in America, on a per-hour basis, are actually a bit lower than average wages in the economy as a whole," he said. "And what I mean by that is there are lots of really good high-paying jobs in sectors like education, IT, health care, and service sectors that are not just entry-level jobs; they are really high-paying jobs, and this is our competitive advantage." Manufacturing jobs are typically seen as a source of higher pay for people who don't earn college degrees, and President Barack Obama emphasized them in his State of the Union address. So PunditFact wondered if Rattner is right: Are per-hour wages in manufacturing a little lower than average wages for the rest of the American economy? Rattner pointed to U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics data for average hourly earnings of production and nonsupervisory employees in the private sector, which make up about four-fifths of total private-sector employment. The most recent data for February 2014 shows the average hourly private-sector wage was $20.50. The manufacturing industry average was, as Rattner said, a bit lower at $19.43. Hourly wages are almost $3 higher for employees who produce durable goods, such as cars, phones, and computers, than for those who make nondurable goods, like food, gas, and clothes. Weekly wages tell a different story, with manufacturers earning almost $122 more a week than the total worker average in February. The reason for the discrepancy between hourly and weekly wages is simple: manufacturers work more hours. "Anyone can work more hours and make more money," Rattner said. "But manufacturers also earn more money an hour when you factor in supervisors." BLS data for February show average hourly earnings of $24.31 for all private-sector employees and $24.72 for manufacturing employees—the opposite of what Rattner said. Which dataset is better? The question can incite an economist's quarrel. Dean Baker, a liberal economist and co-director of the Center for Economic Policy Research, took issue with isolating a dataset that excludes supervisors, saying analysts see the distinction as arbitrary and are increasingly using the whole workforce for their research. The manufacturing industry has a lower percentage of production employees (70.1 percent) than the average for the private-sector workforce (82.7 percent), which accounts for the higher pay when using Rattner's measure, Baker said. Rattner argues that viewing the data his way is more representative of typical workers' earnings without being influenced by the top of the pay scale. Another liberal economist and former Obama administration adviser, Jared Bernstein of the Center for Budget Policies and Priorities, faulted Rattner for excluding benefits on top of wages. "Manufacturing workers often have benefits," he said. Another BLS source for wage data (yes, there are a lot of them) shows that when looking at total compensation (wages plus benefits), manufacturing workers earn $35.14 an hour, which is higher than the $28.44 average for careers in the service-providing industry and $29.63 for all private-sector workers in December 2013. "Since it's widely believed that workers trade off benefit pay for lower wages, it's a mistake to just consider wages in this sort of comparison when you're dealing with an industry that pays benefits (as opposed to, say, fast food)," Bernstein said. Matthew Lavoie, a spokesman for the National Association of Manufacturers, said 97 percent of the group's 12,000 members provide health insurance. Rattner conceded that manufacturers earn more than service-industry workers when benefits are included in his New York Times column. In our interview with Rattner, he anticipated these objections to his claim. "But my point remains the same: the perception that manufacturing jobs are better jobs is out of date," Rattner wrote. Note also that over the past year, per-hour wages for all industries rose by 50 cents per hour, but in manufacturing, they rose by only 21 cents per hour. The trend is not manufacturing's friend, as my NYT piece pointed out. Our ruling: Rattner was careful on This Week to single out data for per-hour wages when he argued that manufacturers are not paid as much as the rest of the workforce. His claim relies on the most recent data for production workers in the manufacturing industry, who earn about $1 less than the average of their private-sector counterparts. However, factoring in supervisors shows that manufacturers make 41 cents more per hour. Adding benefits gives manufacturers more of an edge. We won't take sides and say what dataset we think is best. What we can say is that Rattner makes an accurate point by one measure. On balance, we rate the claim Mostly True.

FMD_test_367

Fannie Mae Eases Credit to Aid Mortgage Lending

10/02/2008

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

FMD_test_368

Does a Meme Accurately Describe 'Why It's a Big Deal Kamala Harris is VP'?

01/27/2021

Voting in the 2020 U.S. Election may be over, but the misinformation keeps on ticking. Never stop fact-checking. Follow our post-election coverage here. here On Inauguration Day, Kamala Harris made history several times over. In being sworn in on Jan. 20, 2021, the outgoing California senator became the first Black person, first woman, and first person of South Asian heritage to be elevated to the vice presidency. Inauguration Day The historic nature of her achievement was placed in stark context in a viral meme that showed Harris, whose parents immigrated to the United States from India and Jamaica, respectively, juxtaposed with a long list of official portraits of white men. (Charles Curtis, who served with Herbert Hoover from 1929 to 1933, had some Native American heritage and was therefore the first person of color to hold the office of vice president). Charles Curtis The meme also highlighted several purported landmarks in the slow progress of women's rights and racial desegregation in the United States, as follows: Dont understand why its a big deal that Kamala Harris is VP? Until Red box? She would have been enslaved. Until Blue box? She couldnt vote. Until Yellow box? She had to attend a segregated school. Until Green one? She couldnt have her own bank account. The following screenshot shows a selection of instances of the meme on Facebook and demonstrates its popularity on social media in January 2021: popularity The vice presidents highlighted in various colors were as follows (along with the dates of their tenure as vice president): Red: Andrew Johnson, March 4 to April 15,1865 Andrew Johnson Blue: Calvin Coolidge, March 4, 1921, to Aug. 3, 1923 Calvin Coolidge Yellow: Richard Nixon, Jan. 20, 1953, to Jan. 20, 1961 Richard Nixon Green: Spiro Agnew, Jan. 20, 1969, to Oct. 10, 1973 Spiro Agnew The claims made in the meme were therefore that: until Johnson's tenure as vice president (in 1865), Harris would have been enslaved due to her racial heritage; until Coolidge's tenure as vice president (1921 to 1923), she would have been denied the right to vote due to her gender; until Nixon's tenure as vice president (1953 to 1961), she would have been forced to attend a segregated school due to her racial heritage; and until Agnew's tenure as vice president (1969 to 1973), she would have been denied the right to her own bank account, due to her status as a married woman. On the whole, the claims contained a high degree of historical accuracy, though in some cases they over-simplified certain discriminatory practices and made some relatively minor errors in identifying the vice president in office during certain major reforms. As a result, we're issuing a rating of "true." The following is our assessment of each of those claims. The creator of the meme appears to have chosen the year 1865, and therefore the tenure of Johnson, because that is the year in which the 13th Amendment, which outlawed slavery, was passed. The text of the amendment reads as follows: text Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction. Congress passed the amendment in January 1865, while Johnson was vice president-elect to President-elect Abraham Lincoln, but it was not ratified by the states until December 1865, by which time Johnson had ascended to the presidency after Lincoln's assassination, leaving the vice presidency vacant for the duration of his presidency. So the sequence of events is a bit muddled, but it is certainly reasonable to place the 13th Amendment, and the abolition of slavery, during the Johnson era. Until the passing of the 13th Amendment, Black people in the United States lacked legal protection against enslavement. That doesn't mean that all Black people before 1865 were slaves, but the vast majority were. Based on figures included in the 1860 U.S. Census (page 14), some 89% of Black people in the country at that time were slaves. page 14 Slavery was far more prevalent in the southern states, but on average, a Black woman in the U.S. shortly before the 13th Amendment had close to a 90% likelihood of being enslaved. From a human rights perspective, Black people had no legal or constitutional protection from slavery, which is likely the thrust of the point made in the meme. The 19th Amendment, which gave women the right to vote, was passed by Congress in June 1919 and ratified by the states in August 1920. The text of the amendment read: text The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex. Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation. On both those dates, Thomas Riley Marshall was vice president, under President Woodrow Wilson. So the meme was incorrect in stating that women could not vote until the vice presidency of Calvin Coolidge. In fact, women voted for the first time in the November 1920 election, which saw Warren Harding and his running mate Coolidge elected president and vice president, respectively. Thomas Riley Marshall That inaccuracy does not impinge upon the truth of the broader point being made in the meme, namely that Harris, as a woman, would not have been able to vote in the United States until the early 1920s. However, the meme does miss an important additional barrier to voting rights that Harris, as a Black woman, could have faced even after the passage of the 19th Amendment. While the 15th Amendment in principle gave Black men the right to vote, and the 19th Amendment gave all women the right to vote, states continued to discriminate against Black voters by imposing obstacles such as poll taxes, literacy tests, and "grandfather clauses" all of which were designed to suppress Black voters. 15th Amendment obstacles It wasn't until the Voting Rights Act of 1965 that such practices were prohibited by federal law, although many activists argue that present-day voter-ID rules continue the legacy of electoral restrictions that have a disproportionate impact on voters of color. Voting Rights Act argue The creator of the meme appears to have selected the vice presidency of Nixon (1953 to 1961) because that was the period during which the U.S. Supreme Court declared racial segregation in public schools constituted a violation of the Equal Protection clause in the 14th Amendment of the Constitution, in the landmark 1954 ruling in Brown vs. the Board of Education. In a follow-up ruling in 1955, the court ordered school districts to arrange for the desegregation of public schools "with all deliberate speed." declared follow-up ruling Most, though not all, schools were racially segregated in the 19th and early-20th centuries in the United States. So a Black student, such as Harris, would very likely have been forced to "attend a segregated school," as the meme claims. Brown vs. the Board of Education marked the beginning of the end of school segregation, but it did not bring about integration overnight. Over the course of the 1950s, 1960s, and 1970s, state lawmakers and local authorities fought protracted and often bitter battles to resist the Supreme Court's clear mandate. battles So while the meme was right to point out that Black students would be very likely forced to attend segregated schools before the decision in Brown vs. the Board of Education, it's also the case that many Black students were forced to attend segregated schools for many years after the ruling, as well. What changed in 1954 was that the nation's highest court clearly declared that system of racial segregation to be unconstitutional. The meme appears to refer to the enactment of the Equal Credit Opportunity Act (ECOA) in the early 1970s, which made it illegal for financial services companies to discriminate against customers on the basis of anything other than their creditworthiness. The legislation stated that: stated It shall be unlawful for any creditor to discriminate against any applicant, with respect to any aspect of a credit transaction(1) on the basis of race, color, religion, national origin, sex or marital status, or age (provided the applicant has the capacity to contract)... However, the law wasn't enacted until October 1974, when the office of vice president was vacant. Spiro Agnew resigned in late 1973, after he was charged with bribery and tax fraud, and his replacement, Gerald Ford, ascended to the presidency in August 1974, after Nixon resigned. So the meme is again mistaken on the precise sequence of events. While Agnew was vice president, banks could (and did) legally deny credit to a woman on the basis of extraneous considerations such as her marital status, her husband's income and credit history, and so on. and did The meme also somewhat overstated the restrictions in place before 1974. Women, including married women, could open their own bank accounts before the ECOA was passed, but often faced difficulty and discrimination in doing so. It was particularly difficult for women to obtain a line of credit or a credit card, in her own name. In 1972, the National Commission on Consumer Finance published a report that found the following common discriminatory practices in lending: report What the ECOA changed in 1974, and what the meme appears to allude to, is that banks and lenders could no longer legally engage in such discriminatory practices.

FMD_test_369

Fraudulent scheme regarding refrigerators and ovens at Target and Walmart gains traction on Facebook.

08/16/2022

On Aug. 16, 2022, we received mail from our readers that asked if Facebook pages named Target Fans and Walmart Fans were legitimately giving away or donating hundreds of refrigerators and ovens. The truth was that these pages were nothing more than the first step of potentially dangerous survey scams. The scammers appeared to be based in Indonesia. The posts showed pictures of refrigerators and ovens (ranges) with the caption, "We are happy to announce that we will be donating 670 refrigerators and cookers which cannot be sold due to a few scratches and minor damage, all machines are in working order, so we will send them randomly to someone who writes 'DONE' before August 19th!" A search of Facebook for the words Target Fans and the lowercase and special characters ??????? ???? showed dozens of pages that were hosting the survey scams. Target Fans ??????? ???? Survey scams like the one for the Target refrigerators giveaway are a specific kind of ruse. They promise big prizes up front, but then lead to a seemingly endless number of surveys with other tantalizing prizing promises, such as a $750 transfer via the mobile finance app, Cash App. Usually, the scammers who created the Facebook posts are hoping that users sign up for accounts on various websites that might land them small amounts of commission. Target At the same time, survey scams can also be quite dangerous, reported AARP.org: reported AARP.org Amid questions about the supposed subject, sham surveys solicit personal or financial information, such as a credit card number to pay a shipping fee for your prize something a legit survey will not do. They might trick you into signing up for a free trial offer thats actually a costly subscription for a dietary supplement or other product. Clicking on the link might also launch malware that can scrape sensitive data from your device. Either way, the scammers get information they can use for identity theft or sell on to other bad actors. Some major retailers, including Amazon and Walmart, do offer gift cards as prizes for customers who complete online surveys about their shopping experience, but those companies say they will never ask participants to provide sensitive data. We strongly advise readers to never click any links in offers that seem too good to be true. Also, we recommend sharing our article with family members or friends who might be susceptible to falling for this kind of a Target or Walmart Facebook scam. In sum, no, Target and Walmart weren't giving away or donating refrigerators or ovens on Facebook on pages named Target Fans and Walmart Fans. Walmart Facebook Source: Beware of Survey Scams That Require Personal Information. AARP, https://www.aarp.org/money/scams-fraud/info-2021/survey.html.

FMD_test_370

Under Mayor Tom Barrett, the number of Milwaukee police officers has not increased.

08/18/2014

Milwaukee Ald. Bob Donovan, a candidate for mayor in 2016, worries that upcoming retirements could further reduce what he sees as an undersized police force under Mayor Tom Barrett. Inhis state of the city speech Feb. 24, 2014, Barrett noted he had added 120 new officers in his 2014 budget. Donovan hit on that number when interviewed in the wake of his mayoral announcement. The reality is the number of officers has not increased, Donovan said during a July 29, 2014 appearance on theCharlie Sykes show on WTMJ-AM. Now the mayor will continue to say were hiring 120 cops this year. That doesnt take into consideration the fact that weve had 150 retirements, or that we havent filled positions going way back. When we asked Donovan about the comment, he did not cite hard numbers, but told us he figures unfilled positions and retirements have outstripped the addition of recruits over the 10 years Barrett has been in office. Is Donovan right? Has police strength -- at least by the numbers -- been flat or gone down on Barretts watch? To answer that question, we turned to the citys Fire and Police Commission, which issues an annual report that details the size of the overall force. To be sure, the actual number of bodies on the force on any given date is constantly changing, since retirement dates vary while recruit classes mean a wave of new bodies joins the force at once. The Fire and Police Commissionreports, available online, are as close to an official tally of police strength as we found. They list, by race and gender, the number of persons on the Police Department payroll as of the last pay period of each year. The latest covers 2012, so we obtained figures for 2013 and so far in 2014 directly from the commission. We used 2004 as the pre-Barrett baseline for our comparisons, because Barrett didnt take office until spring 2004 and therefore did not propose the budget for that year. All figures factor in retirements, terminations and new hires. Police officers At the end of 2004, 1,402 police officers were on the payroll. That number fell to 1,357 by the end of 2013, a 3 percent drop. By that measure -- the one the public sees -- Donovan is correct that officer strength has not increased. Barrett administration officials note it can be misleading to look only at strength of force at any one point in time. A new class of officer recruits came on line in late 2004, boosting the number, they said. A comparison of pay period one in 2004 to the same period in 2014, for example, actually shows a small increase in officer strength. A better measure than point in time comparisons, they said, is average strength across the whole year. That was 1,349 in 2004, they said, and based on the first half of 2014 its 1,341 now -- a smaller decline. Still, that approach does not change the accuracy of Donovans claim. Total sworn officers City officials often will refer to this larger figure when discussing officer strength, and Donovan did as well when we contacted him. It includes not only patrol officers but detectives, supervisors, various technicians and specialists as well as the police chief and the top command staff. At the end of 2004, the figures show 2,006 sworn officers were on board. That number fell to 1,828 by late 2013 and to 1,875 by mid-July 2014. Earlier in 2004, according to Barretts budget staff, the figure was 1,932. And Barretts office released figures using the average strength throughout the year that show a smaller drop in overall sworn strength. Again, those figures change the angle of descent, but not the downward direction of the trend. Within those numbers, the detective ranks fell by more than one fourth. So by this broader measure, Donovan is on target again. Ten-year trend The staff strength figures from the Fire and Police Commission show that the police officer ranks grew early in Barretts tenure, but have slipped gradually with one exception since then. Year 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 P.O.s* 1,402 1,362 1,390 1,441 1,406 1,392 1,362 1,348 1,384 1,357 1,345** As for the broader sworn ranks, a similar trend is evident. By way of explaining the lack of growth in the police force, Barrett chief of staff Patrick Curley and city budget officials said state shared-revenue aid to Milwaukee has dropped by $25 million since 2004 while the police budget is $65 million higher. They said the department under Chief Edward Flynn has re-deployed officers from administrative tasks to community policing. That was accomplished by hiring more civilians to do those desk jobs, they said. Efficiencies have helped avoid layoffs seen in some big cities, Barrett spokeswoman Jodie Tabak said. The Barrett officials told PolitiFact Wisconsin that our inquiry for this fact check led the mayor to quickly unveil aproposal to add 15 more officers to a training classthat will graduate in April 2015. It already had been under consideration to announce later this year, they said. The mayor will propose his 2015 budget in September. Our rating Donovan said the number of Milwaukee police officers has not increased under Mayor Tom Barrett. Donovans claim is on target because reports from the citys Fire and Police Commission indicate a decline in the number of officers since 2004. And other measuring sticks offered by Barretts office show the same trend. We rate Donovans claim True.

FMD_test_371

A college loan is the sole type of loan in the United States that cannot be refinanced when interest rates decrease.

04/06/2016

Former President Bill Clinton raised a hot-button issue while campaigning for his wife in Los Angeles this week: America's mounting student loan debt. Student debt in the United States has reached $1.3 trillion, trailing only the amount Americans owe on their mortgages. It is often blamed for preventing young people from buying houses and cars, which fuels the country's economy. Undergraduates in the class of 2015 graduated with an average of $35,000 in student loan debt, the highest in history, according to Edvisors.com, a financial aid website. If elected president in November, Democratic frontrunner Hillary Clinton would remove a unique barrier related to college loans, the former president claimed. A college loan is the only loan in the United States that you cannot refinance when interest rates go down, Bill Clinton said, speaking at a recent campaign rally at Los Angeles Trade-Technical College. We wondered: Is refinancing really off-limits for all college loans? With student loan debt being such a significant issue this election year, we decided to check the facts. Past efforts at change Both Hillary Clinton and Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, her rival for the Democratic presidential nomination, have pledged to allow student loans to be refinanced. However, they weren't the first to call for this change. In June 2014, Senate Republicans rejected legislation by Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., that would have allowed student borrowers to refinance their federal loan debt. Homeowners are refinancing. Small businesses are refinancing. We just want young people who got an education to have their shot, Warren was quoted as saying in a Washington Post news article at the time. Republicans argued that they were not convinced the legislation would have resulted in lower borrowing costs and labeled it an election stunt. The bill would have allowed people with federal and private loans issued prior to 2010 to refinance at 3.86 percent, the article stated. It added that the Obama administration estimated that the bill could have helped 25 million borrowers save $2,000 each over the lifetime of their loans, totaling $50 billion. Former President Bill Clinton speaks during a campaign stop for his wife, Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton, Tuesday, Feb. 16, 2016, at the West End Community Development Center in Greenville, S.C. (AP Photo/Paul Sancya) Our research As they campaigned across the country, Hillary Clinton and Sen. Sanders have each pledged to allow for the refinancing of college loan debt. What they, and apparently Bill Clinton, are discussing is refinancing federally backed student loans, which account for about 90 percent of all student borrowing. We turned to the nonprofit college planning group American Student Assistance for some advice. They and other groups say federal student loans can be refinanced into private loans. However, doing so can remove federal protections such as fixed interest rates and the ability to pause repayments. Additionally, private student loans can be refinanced into new lower-interest private loans. But there is no provision in federal law allowing the refinancing of a federal loan into another, lower-interest federal loan. There is no federal refinancing. Congress sets the interest rate for federal student loans, and most of these rates are fixed by law, regardless of how solid your credit or income becomes post-graduation, American Student Assistance advises potential borrowers. PolitiFact Texas examined a similar claim in 2014 and rated it Mostly True. They spoke with Heather Jarvis, a North Carolina attorney specializing in student loan law, who told them that some graduates may be able to refinance student loans at lower rates through private lenders. However, she noted that this would only occur in cases where borrowers have substantial income. Jarvis added that refinancing federal loans with a private loan is risky. The borrower gives up important protections that accompany federal loans (like flexible repayment and discharge provisions). Students repaying federally backed loans, Jarvis said, are effectively barred from refinancing opportunities because federal law makes no provision for the government to make such offers. Asked about the former president's statement, Bill Clinton's press secretary said in an email that it's very safe to say that the vast majority of students with debt have federal debt. She pointed to statistics from the College Board showing that federal loans account for about 90 percent of student borrowing. She mentioned that a small percentage of borrowers can refinance a federal student loan by converting it into a private loan. Our ruling Former President Bill Clinton stated at a recent campaign rally in Los Angeles: A college loan is the only loan in the United States that you cannot refinance when interest rates go down. Borrowers of federally backed student loans, which account for about 90 percent of student loans, cannot refinance those into lower-interest federal loans. Congress sets the interest rate on these loans, and there is no provision in federal law that allows for them to be refinanced. Depending on factors such as income, some borrowers can refinance their federal loans into lower-interest private loans, though they risk losing their federal loan protections. Clinton most likely was referring only to federally backed loans when he made his statement, but a clarification about private loans would have been helpful. We rated his claim Mostly True. MOSTLY TRUE The statement is accurate but needs clarification or additional information. Click here for more on the six PolitiFact ratings and how we select facts to check.

FMD_test_372

Did a Pico Jackfruit Snake Bite Cause a Gruesome Hand Injury?

08/15/2019

A set of gruesome photographs supposedly showing the aftermath of a "pico jackfruit snake" bite is frequently shared online. We'll be posting these photographs below. As they show a severe hand injury, this article may not suitable for all viewers. The photographs first went viral in August 2017 after they were posted to the Facebook group Faculty of Veterinary Medicine in New York. The first photograph in the set shows what appears to be a small cut on a person's thumb. Subsequent photographs show the injury worsening, due to the snake's venomous bite, until eventually the thumb is amputated. Again, the following photographs may not be suitable for all viewers: We haven't been able to uncover too many specifics about these photographs, such as where they were taken or the identity of the snake-bit victim. When these images first started circulating on Facebook in 2017 (the original post has since been deleted), the snake was identified as a "sharp-nosed viper," not a "pico jackfruit snake." In fact, we found no snake by the latter's name. It likely refers to a bushmaster snake, another genus of venomous pit-vipers, which is known by a variety of names across South America, such as the pineapple snake, the silent rattlesnake, and the stinging jackfruit. Regardless of the specific species of snake, these photographs appear to provide a genuine look at the painful aftermath of a venomous snakebite. News.com.au talked to Brian Fry, an associate professor in the school of biological sciences at the University of Queensland, when these images first went viral: News.com.au That type of snake [Sharp-nosed viper] has a venom that is extremely tissue destroying, Dr Fry told news.com.au. The reason for this is that they kill their prey by haemorrhagic shock, where some parts of the venom damage the blood vessel walls, while other parts destroy the ability of the blood to clot, leading to a state of massive internal bleeding in a prey animal. As Associate Professor in the School of Biological Sciences at the University of Queensland, Dr Fry said because it is a Chinese snake; antivenom for a bite like this might be hard to come by in remote areas. If it was in a private collection somewhere, they probably didnt have it and likely none of the nearby zoos would either, he explained. Thus, theyd have to suffer through the full effects. While we haven't been able to find much information about this specific set of photographs, we have found other snake-bite cases that resulted in similar injuries. A 2015 article from the BBC explained some of the science behind deadly venomous snake bites: cases resulted similar injuries BBC Snake venom is made up of several hundred proteins which all have a slightly different toxic effect on the human body. One snake's poison may not be like another's, even if they are from the same species. But, on the whole, there are two main ways snakes make us suffer by attacking the circulatory system (ie. the blood) and/or the nervous system. Haemotoxic venom goes for the bloodstream. It can trigger lots of tiny blood clots and then when the venom punches holes in blood vessels causing them to leak, there is nothing left to stem the flow and the patient bleeds to death. Other venoms can increase blood pressure, decrease blood pressure, prevent bleeding or create it. They are all bad news. Neurotoxic venom tends to act more quickly, attacking the nervous system and stopping nerve signals getting through to the muscles. This means paralysis, starting at the head, moving down the body until, if untreated, the diaphragm is paralysed and the patient can't breathe. A classic sign of this is ptosis, when people can't keep their eyes open. Around the area of the bite, necrosis can set in. That happens when the venom destroys nearby muscles, tissues and cells. Long-term, this can lead to amputations, the loss of the use of a limb or the need for multiple skin grafts. In sum, the above photographs most likely show the gruesome aftermath of a snake bite, but because we were unable to uncover specific details about the pictures, we've rated this claim "Unproven." Brown, Vanessa. "Horror Snake Bite Causes Victims Thumb to Turn Black Before Being Amputated" News.com.au. 15 August 2017. Weisberger, Mindy. "What Should You Do If You're Bitten by a Venomous Snake?" Live Science. 2 June 2019. BBC. "The amazing science behind fatal snake bites." 13 September 2015.

FMD_test_373

Home Depot Facebook Coupon Scam

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 rewards that are 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.

FMD_test_374

Did Justice Burger Call Gun Lobby's Take on 2nd Amendment a Fraud on the American Public?

05/26/2022

In the days following a mass shooting at an elementary school in Uvalde, Texas, that left 19 children and two adults dead, a quote from former U.S. Supreme Court Justice Warren Burger started circulating on social media. Burger, who was appointed to the Supreme Court in 1969 by then-President Richard Nixon and retired in 1986, supposedly said: The Gun Lobbys interpretation of the Second Amendment is one of the greatest pieces of fraud, I repeat the word fraud, on the American People by special interest groups that I have ever seen in my lifetime. The real purpose of the Second Amendment was to ensure that state armies the militia would be maintained for the defense of the state. The very language of the Second Amendment refutes any argument that it was intended to guarantee every citizen an unfettered right to any kind of weapon he or she desires. While these words truly originated with the conservative justice, the above-displayed meme cobbles together three different passages that Burger either wrote or spoke at different times. The first part of this meme "The gun lobby's interpretation of the Second Amendment is one of the greatest pieces of fraud, I repeat the word fraud, on the American People by special interest groups that I have seen in my lifetime" comes from an interview Burger gave to PBS News in 1991. The second part of this meme "the real purpose of the Second Amendment was to ensure that state armies, the militia, would be maintained for the defense of the state" and the third part "The very language of the Second Amendment refutes any argument that it was intended to guarantee every citizen an unfettered right to any kind of weapon he or she desires" comes from an articles Burger wrote for The Associated Press about the Bill of Rights in 1991. 11 Dec 1991, Wed Record Searchlight (Redding, California) Newspapers.com 11 Dec 1991, Wed Record Searchlight (Redding, California) Newspapers.com Th "real purpose" quote can be seen in the article's fifth paragraph. The "very language" portion comes a two paragraphs later. Biskupic, Joan. Guns: A Second (Amendment) Look. Washington Post, https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/national/longterm/supcourt/stories/courtguns051095.htm. Accessed 26 May 2022. Burger, Warren. Government Has Right to Regulate Guns. Associated Press, 11 Dec. 1991, p. 13. newspapers.com, https://www.newspapers.com/clip/102574603/record-searchlight/. How the NRA Rewrote the Second Amendment | Brennan Center for Justice. https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/how-nra-rewrote-second-amendment. Accessed 26 May 2022. Second Amendment Does Not Guarantee the Right To Own a Gun (From Gun Control, P 99-102, 1992, Charles P Cozic, Ed. -- See NCJ-160164) | Office of Justice Programs. https://www.ojp.gov/ncjrs/virtual-library/abstracts/second-amendment-does-not-guarantee-right-own-gun-gun-control-p-99. Accessed 26 May 2022. Warren Burger and NRA: Gun Lobbys Big Fraud on Second Amendment. The Milwaukee Independent, 4 Oct. 2017, https://www.milwaukeeindependent.com/syndicated/warren-burger-and-nra-gun-lobbys-big-fraud-on-second-amendment/.

FMD_test_375

Of the 14 wealthy OECD countries with a wealth tax in 1996, 10 have since then abandoned it.

05/10/2019

Elizabeth Warren pins a lot of hopes on her ultra-millionaire tax. The Democratic presidential candidate would like to impose a 2% levy on assets exceeding the $50 million mark and 3% on those over $1 billion. The revenues would fund her plans for universal child care, student debt forgiveness, and other programs she has in mind. In a Fox News op-ed, an analyst at the conservative Heritage Foundation noted that a wealth tax isn't a new idea. Joel Griffith stated that many European nations have tried it and subsequently scrapped it. Of the 14 wealthy countries in the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) with a wealth tax in 1996, 10 have since abandoned it, Griffith wrote on April 28. We found different numbers, but there has been a turn away from wealth taxes. With Warren's plan on the table, the European experience is worth exploring. Griffith obtained his numbers from an article on the website of the Tax Foundation, a group concerned about how taxes distort business decisions. The foundation's analysis drew on data from the OECD, a Paris-based international body with roots in the post-war recovery of Europe. The OECD data shows that 13 countries collected revenues from net wealth taxes in 1996, measured in local currency, but it shows 14 when measured as a percentage of GDP. We can't account for the difference. There's another twist: one of those countries is Austria, which ended its wealth tax in 1994. So the actual count that year was either 12 or 13. (It's only slightly off from what Griffith wrote, but we care about these details.) Tallying the countries that have a wealth tax today is even trickier, largely because definitions vary. We found room for debate over what constitutes a wealth tax. All wealth taxes tax things that are owned, not money earned, but they vary in a couple of key respects. They might target the wealthy (Norway's tax, for example, affects net worth above 1.48 million Norwegian Kroner) or a broader swath of residents. Some tax all assets, while others—such as Belgium with stocks and bonds, or France with real estate—focus only on specific assets. A 2018 report from the respected German-based think tank Ifo Institute for Economic Research counted just three countries with a wealth tax: Switzerland, Norway, and Spain. However, the authors noted that Italy and the Netherlands also tax wealth in limited ways, and France swapped a broad wealth tax for a narrow one on real estate wealth that kicks in on property worth at least 1.3 million Euros. The international accounting firm Ernst and Young affirmed that Italy does have a wealth tax. Another accounting firm, KPMG, reported in 2018 that Belgium added a wealth tax when it imposed a tax on securities, such as stocks and bonds. To complicate matters further, some OECD countries have dropped, added, or changed their wealth taxes since 1996. The Tax Foundation article Griffith relied on stated that today, six OECD countries have wealth taxes in one form or another. (One of its charts showed four, but that stopped counting in 2017.) How to sort this out? By the strictest definition, today only three wealthy OECD countries have a wealth tax. With a looser standard, as many as seven do. (Some tallies include Hungary, but it might not count as a wealthy country, as the claim states.) The general reason European countries dropped their wealth taxes was that they were more trouble than they were worth. In Germany, the tax was found unconstitutional, but it wasn't raising that much money anyway. A review of the wealth tax option by the European Commission stated that in the past, determining the value of assets was challenging and cheating was easier. Opportunities for avoidance and evasion reduce the capacity of wealth taxes to generate revenue, contributing to the perception that wealth taxes produce little net benefit, the report said. Decisions to repeal net wealth taxes have often been justified by efficiency and administrative concerns, OECD analysts wrote in a 2018 report. The revenues collected from net wealth taxes have also, with a few exceptions, been very low. Switzerland reaps far more than other nations, taking in revenues equal to 1% of GDP, while Norway brings in 0.4% and Spain 0.2%. Of the countries that eliminated a wealth tax, Denmark was typical; in 1996, the tax brought in just 0.1% of GDP. The earlier taxes also tended to reach down into the middle class, not just the uber-rich, making their repeal politically popular. For some, the European experience casts a deep shadow over Warren's proposal. Wojciech Kopczuk, an economist at Columbia University, warned that valuing assets is tough, regardless of the plan's focus on the very rich. Kopczuk stated that this does not resolve administrative problems, which are as daunting in the United States as in Europe. On the other hand, he added that a tax starting at $50 million could hold popular support. There is also a difference in overall tax regimes. The OECD analysts noted that the arguments for and against a wealth tax depend on all the other tax laws in a given country. In that light, Reuven Avi-Yonah, director of the international tax program at the University of Michigan Law School, stated that Europe is not at all like America. Income tax rates and sometimes inheritance taxes are higher in Europe, which means there is less need to tax the rich through a wealth tax. We have previously examined the debate over whether Warren's plan would raise as much as she hopes. Warren's campaign staff told us that they have learned lessons from Europe, arguing that focusing on the 76,000 wealthiest people and taxing all assets with no complicating exceptions would lighten the administrative burden. There are also indications that Europe is taking a second look at wealth taxes. Both the OECD and the European Commission have noted a renewed interest in wealth taxation. Griffith stated that of the 14 wealthy OECD countries with a wealth tax in 1996, 10 have since abandoned it. We found there are different ways to consider wealth taxes, and Griffith used the strictest one based on dated information. We determined that either 12 or 13 countries had a wealth tax in 1996, and nine have ended their taxes since then. Today, six or seven European nations have some form of wealth tax, either broad or narrow. The meaning of the European experience from two decades ago is debatable, but that is not the basis for our ruling. We looked only at the countries and their tax laws. The numbers in the statement are off. European countries did move away from wealth taxes, but not quite to the extent stated in the op-ed. We rate this claim Mostly True.

FMD_test_376

Macy's Drops SodaStream Over Israeli Controversy?

10/24/2014

Claim: Macy's removed SodaStream products from its stores because the products are made in disputed territory in Israel. PROBABLY Example: [Collected via e-mail, October 2014] Bowing to pressure from left-wing pro-Palestinian activists, Macy's has decided to scrub Israeli-made SodaStream products from its shelves. Origins: In October 2014, a rumor began to circulate that retailer Macy's had "caved" to activist pressure and removed SodaStream products from its retail outlets and online storefront. Claims stated that the removal of SodaStream products from Macy's stores came under pressure from activist groups who objected to the manufacture of the products in disputed territory in Israel. The rumor's first major appearance came on 7 October 2014, in a larger Wall Street Journal article about SodaStream's declining revenue. In the article, an analyst stated that Macy's had stopped carrying SodaStream but did not cite a specific reason for the retailer's decision. SodaStream released only its revenue expectations of $125 million and its projected operating income of $8.5 million. Those numbers shocked even the more bearish investors and analysts. Jim Charnier, an analyst at Monness Crespi Hardt, said he had been expecting a poor quarter because he learned early in September that Macy's Inc. had stopped carrying SodaStream and saw other negative figures from the market. Yet he said that the company's estimated revenue of $125 million and operating income of $8.5 million are still far below his expectations, as it shows that revenue in the U.S. could have dropped by more than 50%. Macy's did not immediately return requests for comment. While the quote in context seems to imply that poor sales influenced Macy's decision to sever its relationship with SodaStream, it was not backed by any comment from Macy's or SodaStream about why products made by the latter company were being discontinued by the retailer. SodaStream's CEO commented on tepid earnings reports and suggested in May 2014 that a weak holiday sales season and excess inventory (not political sentiment) had adversely impacted the brand's revenues. CEO Daniel Birnbaum blamed the 28% drop in U.S. sales on a weak holiday season, creating excess retailer inventory. SodaStream's guidance for the year wasn't as bad as the company sees revenue growth of 15% for the year, but just a 3% improvement in net income. Both projections were better than analyst estimates but are reflective of SodaStream's growing pains. As of 24 October 2014, Macy's website still displays an active product page for SodaStream, but none of the categories are populated with products available for sale. However, skincare company Ahava has also been the target of boycotts and calls for action for similar reasons, and Macy's has not discontinued the sale of that brand. If Macy's dropped SodaStream to placate pro-Palestinian interests in a public relations move, it's highly unlikely the retailer would choose not to confirm its action. It is far more likely that the overall weak market for home soda-making equipment influenced Macy's decision to temporarily or permanently discontinue sales of SodaStream products. Neither company has yet officially commented on the status of Macy's business relationship with SodaStream. Last updated: 24 October 2014 Farrell, Maureen. "SodaStream Losing a Lot of Its Pop." The Wall Street Journal. 7 October 2014.

FMD_test_377

What Does a Blobfish Look Like in Its Natural Environment?

04/28/2021

The blobfish is often regarded as the "world's ugliest fish" (it was even "awarded" this title during a British Science Festival in 2013) in large part because most people encounter this deep-water dwelling creature after it's been hastily pulled to the surface in a fishing net. The change in pressure between the blobfish's natural environment (a depth of about 3,000 feet) and the open air has a dramatic effect on the fish's body, and causes this deep-water creature to resemble, well, a blob. British Science Festival in 2013 The non-profit environmental group Ocean Conservancy writes: There are several species of blobfish in the family Psychrolutidae, all of which are deep sea dwellers that make their homes between 2,000 and 4,000 feet below sea level. At these depths, the pressure is up to 120 times greater than at the surface, forcing blobfish to adapt. They don't have much bone or muscle, allowing the pressure of the deep sea to provide their with body structural support. When brought to the surface, the blobfish decompresses, giving it the iconic gelatinous look that we all know and love. In its natural habitat, however, the blobfish is much less blobby. In April 2021, an image started circulating on social media that supposedly showed a blobfish in its natural habitat: This is a genuine picture of a blobfish that was taken circa 2017 at anaquarium in Japan. While this may not be the blobfish's natural habitat, it does show a living blobfish underwater. circa 2017 In 2020, the Aquamarine Fukushima aquarium caught another bobflish that was put on display. There are several photographs and videos of this blobfish, which which they lovingly named Bob, on the aquariums social media accounts: Aquamarine Fukushima aquarium Here's another video of Bob the Blob feeding: The aquarium writes: The fish (Psychrolutes phrictus) is called blobfish or blob sculpin in English. Because the fish is grotesque appearance when it is caught as by catch in bottom trawling nets. But the living blobfish (we call Bob) is so cute with a big head, small eyes and many small fleshy threads like mustache. Bob started eating sweet shrimp (Pandalus eous). We believe that Bob will live long. Come see cute Bob! For a true look at a blobfish in its natural environment, here's a video taken by the E/V Nautilus research vessel off the California coast in 2016:

FMD_test_378

Can the 'FireChat' App Send Messages Without an Internet Connection?

09/07/2017

As a series of hurricanes made landfall in August and September 2017, those living in the affected areas have been searching for a communication tool that would enable them to send messages in the event of a service outage. An app called "FireChat" is one of the most widely suggested tools, due to its purported ability to send messages without an internet connection: web site When no Internet connection or cellular networks are available, FireChat uses the radios inside our phones to connect them directly with one another. In that case (which is also called "offline" or off-the-grid), messages will travel up to 70 meters (210 feet) from one phone to the next. If there are more than two devices, they will form a network and messages will bounce from one device to the next, thus extending the range of the network. The more people use FireChat, the better the network gets for everybody. This is why FireChat works really well for very large groups of people. In other words, FireChat wouldn't be able to send a text message from Miami, Florida to Seattle, Washington (a distance of more than 3,000 miles) unless an unbroken chain of tens of thousands of FireChat users spanned that distance. However, it can be used to send messages within a community of FireChat users without the Internet: used What's unique about FireChat is that it also works when there is no Internet connection or cellular phone coverage. It even works on a plane. When your community gets together, it creates your own free communication network and doesnt rely on traditional networks. You don't have to do anything special: just keep FireChat on your smartphone and keep Bluetooth and WiFi on (yes, even if there is no Internet access). This is game-changing since you can create local communication networks at zero cost and also stay connected during sports games, rallies, music festivals, and in emergency situations. The MIT Technology Review explained more about how the app works in an article that was published shortly after FireChat's initial release in 2014: explained FireChat makes use of a feature Apple introduced in the latest version of its iOS mobile software, iOS7, called multipeer connectivity. This feature allows phones to connect to one another directly using Bluetooth or Wi-Fi as an alternative to the Internet. If youre using FireChat, its nearby chat room lets you exchange messages with other users within 100 feet without sending data via your cellular provider. Micha Benoliel, CEO and cofounder of startup Open Garden, which made FireChat, says the app shows how smartphones can be set free from cellular networks. He hopes to enable many more Internet-optional apps with the upcoming release of software tools that will help developers build FireChat-style apps for iPhone, or for Android, Mac, and Windows devices. This approach is very interesting for multiplayer gaming and all kinds of communication apps, says Benoliel. Christophe Daligault, the vice president of sales and marketing for the app, told NPR that it works on a "mesh" network: NPR Mesh networks can be used to set up temporary networks in disaster zones, and even to spread the Internet to remote areas beyond the reach of existing wireless networks and cables. That's the technology that Google and Facebook are counting on for their plans of spreading the Internet across the globe with balloons and drones. [...] "Once you build a mesh network ... now you have a network that is resilient, self-healing, cannot be controlled by any central organization, cannot be shut down and is always working," Daligault says. "I think that solves many other drawbacks or challenges of the mobile broadband Internet today." He says none of this would be possible without the rapid spread of smartphones, because that means no extra hardware is needed. "Each [phone] becomes a router and in a sense you're growing the Internet everyone who joins the mesh network creates an extension of the Internet," Daligault says. "In a year or two from now, I think people won't even remember that you had to be on Wi-Fi or get a cell signal to be able to communicate." The FireChat app can send messages without Internet service as stated. However, the app does some have limitations. Potential users, especially those searching for an emergency communication tool to use during a natural disaster, should visit the FireChat home page to make sure that they understand how the app works: FireChat The messaging app Zello was also widely suggested for emergency communications in September 2017. Although there are several benefits to that particular app during an emergency (it is billed as a "walkie-talkie" app), Zello does not work without the internet. Zello Toor, Amar. "This App Lets Rescue Workers Send Offline Alerts When Disaster Strikes" The Verge. 19 May 2016. Yu, Alan. "How One App Might Be A Step Toward Internet Everywhere." NPR. 7 April 2014. Simonite, Tom. "The Latest Chat App for iPhone Needs No Internet Connection." MIT Technology Review. 28 March 2014.

FMD_test_379

Austin mayoral candidate Mike Martinez takes corporate money.

08/07/2014

A supporter of an Austin mayoral candidate declared that another candidate accepts corporate donations--which would be illegal, he did not add. In a July 29, 2014, Facebook post, Eugene Sepulveda of Austin, treasurer for attorney Steve Adlers mayoral campaign, declared Adler isnt taking corp money, PAC money or bundled contributions, meaning money gathered from multiple sources by a single person. Commenting below Sepulvedas post, Austin political consultant Mark Littlefield, who supports City Council member Mike Martinez for mayor, asked: Are other candidates taking corporate money? Sepulveda replied: Mike Martinez takes corporate money. Steve wont. A Martinez backer, Jose Velasquez, asked us to check Sepulvedas claim. We wondered first if perhaps laws have changed dramatically so that Texas candidates may accept corporate donations. Not so, we were reminded, in that Texas adopted its ban on corporate donations to candidates more than a century ago. A September 2013 Texas Ethics Commissionguide for candidates for local officespecified that state law bars contributions to candidates for state and local office from labor unions and most corporations. More recently, Austin lawyer Tim Sorrells, the commissions former general counsel, advised candidates for city office in an April 2, 2014,blog post: In Texas, it is still a felony of the third degree for a corporation or labor organization to contribute directly to a candidate or a candidate committee. We asked Sepulveda, a social entreprenuer and philanthropist, to elaborate on his Facebook statement. By email, he told us: I should have said Mike was taking money from business entities. I was referring to his acceptance of contributions from LLCs as well as PACs and bundlers. LLCs are Limited Liability Companies. My bad for not being more specific, Sepulveda wrote. In another email, he said that when Velasquez asked him about the corporate claim, I used the term corporate generically, even referring him to the documents filed with the city clerk. If I'd been trying to mislead anyone, I certainly wouldn't have pointed them to the candidate-filed reports. Sepulveda, who said he made his Facebook comments as an Adler supporter and not as a spokesman for Adlers campaign, elaborated that according to a campaign-finance filing, Martinez fielded contributions from 13 businesses, which we confirmed from Martinezs July 15, 2014,campaign finance report, which showed the cited contributions ranging from $50 to $350. We noticed the business contributors included several limited liability companies, which prompted us to ask an election-law expert,Trey Trainorof Austin, if such companies can legally give to candidates for local office. By phone, Trainor said LLCs may legally make donations so long as none of their members are corporations. Also by phone, Austin lawyer Ed Shack, who said he has helped Adlers campaign, said the same. Martinez campaign spokesman Nick Hudson told us the campaign earlier confirmed from state records and by contacting each contributor that none of the LLCs giving to Martinezs effort had corporate members. Hudson agreed it would be illegal for Martinez to accept corporate donations. Meanwhile, Sepulveda replied to us that he had since posted a comment on Facebook, below his original claim, stating he should have said Martinez accepted donations from business entities including LLCs rather than corporations. It appeared the afternoon of Aug. 4, 2014. Our ruling Sepulveda said on Facebook that Martinez takes corporate donations. Thats not so. In fact, corporate donations remain forbidden and accepting such could lead to a felony charge. However, any candidate may field contributions from PACs and LLCs (so long as a donor LLC has no corporate members). This advocates claim, which he clarified on Facebook six days later, shakes out as incorrect and ridiculous. 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.

FMD_test_380

Over the course of one four-year term, it costs taxpayers more than $1 million simply to operate the governors mansion.

11/21/2010

The governors mansion -- a kingly abode for the governor and his family, right?Dont think like a peasant. It isso much more.Executive residences, as the National Governors Associationcalls them, are regarded as an important symbol of the states culture and heritage. As state treasures, executive residences provide an appropriate setting for official state entertaining and are often highly valued as a venue for community functions.Oh.The NGA goes on:Given the critical role executive residences play in official state and cultural activities, considerable care is required in managing, staffing and maintaining the executive residence.Gee, sounds like that could get kinda expensive. Just how much does it cost taxpayers to run the Wisconsin governors mansion -- ahem,executive residence?Too much, says state Sen.Bob Wirch, a Democrat from Pleasant Prairie in Kenosha County. Echoingacallhe made in 2002, when Democratic Gov. Jim Doyle was elected, Wirch wants Republican Governor-elect Scott Walker to sell or lease the 34-room manor.Over the course of one four-year term, Wirch claimed in anewsreleaseNov. 15, 2010, it costs taxpayers more than $1 million simply to operate.Wirch also noted Walkers owncall tocitizensfor ideas on how to make state government run more efficiently. After all, with astructural deficit, lost revenue because of a state Supreme Courtdecisionand other issues, the new governor faces a projected shortfall of$3billionfor the 2011-13 budget.It is hard to set a good example, Wirch said in his statement, if you are living in a mansion.Walker, who will beinauguratedJan. 3, 2011, plans to move with his family from Wauwatosa into the residence, said his spokesman, Cullen Werwie.He said Walker has no comment on Wirchs recommendation to sell or lease the mansion, which is perched on the shores of Lake Mendota.The homes replacement value is $1.63 million, according to the state Department of Administration. But Wirch believes that with its 3.7 acres of land, the estate is worth more than $2.5 million.Perhaps, like us, youve never been to the mansion (although you can see it inpictures).Well, according to the Department of Administration, the state Historical Society and the office of first lady Jessica Doyle, it: Nice. So, who takes care of it?Seven employees, according to Vicki Heymann, the mansions residence director. Full-timers include Heymann, a chef, a gardener and a facilities maintenance specialist. The part-timers are a housekeeper, a laundress and flower arranger, and the head of the waitstaff, who has worked at the mansion for more than 32 years.OK, now lets get to Wirchs claim that operating the mansion costs more than $1 million during a four-year term.Wirchs office said the state Legislative Fiscal Bureau put the operating costs at $265,000 per year. That would come to $1.06 million over four years.The senators per-year number is a touch high, but his four-year figure of more than $1 million is on target.The fiscal bureau told PolitiFact Wisconsin that the mansions operating expenses are budgeted at $262,500 in 2009-10 and the same amount for 2010-11, nearly all of which is salaries. Thats a total of $1.05 million over four years.In fact, actual expenditures are running higher, according to the state Department of Administration. They were $290,462 in 2008-09 and $273,340 in 2009-10. If that were carried out over four years, the total would be $1.13 million.Wisconsin is one of 44 states that provided a governors residence as of 2004, according to the most recentsurveydone by the National Governors Association.Heres how three of the other six treat their governors: OK, lets bring all this mansion talk home.In calling on Governor-elect Scott Walker to save taxpayer dollars, state Sen. Bob Wirch said selling or leasing the governors mansion would enable the state to cut more than $1 million over four years on the cost of operating the mansion. Based on the latest budget and expenditure figures, the operating costs do exceed $1 million over four years.We rate Wirchs statement True.

FMD_test_381

Is Macaulay Quote About 'Dominating' India with English Culture Real?

10/11/2022

On Oct. 11, 2022, we received an email from a reader who said they spotted a questionable quote meme on WhatsApp. The quote was titled "My India in 1835" and was credited to "Lord Macaulay," whose full name was Thomas Babington Macaulay. We found no historical records to confirm that Macaulay ever said the exact words quoted in the meme. At the same time, the quote may have been somewhat of a paraphrase, as Macaulay did express his thoughts on how best to educate the Indian populace in other words. WhatsApp Macaulay was an English politician, author, and historian who lived from 1800-1859. According to Britannica.com, he was perhaps best known for writing a five-volume work, "The History of England from the Accession of James the Second." Britannica.com The History of England from the Accession of James the Second The fake quote reads as follows (with the words "ancient education system" being bolded in the meme): My India in 1835Read Carefully "I have travelled across the length and breadth of India and I have not seen one person who is a beggar, who is a thief such wealth I have seen in this country, such high moral values, people of such caliber, that I do not think we would ever conquer this country, unless we break the very backbone of this nation, which is her spiritual and cultural heritage and therefore, I propose that we replace her old and ancient education system, her culture, for if the Indians think that all that is foreign and English is good and greater than their own, they will lose their self esteem, their native culture and they will become what we want them, a truly dominated nation." Lord Macaulay's Address to the British Parliament on 2nd Feb. 1835 In order to establish whether or not the quote was real, we first looked to Google Books. The Google Books website allows anyone to search the text of just about every book in the world for free. Google Books We searched for various portions of the exact quote, placing quotation marks around the words. However, the only results we found were in recent books that were written in the 21st century. A prominent quote from 1835 would not magically make its first appearance in literature nearly two centuries later. The quote was likely at least partially born on the internet and took on a life of its own, somehow finding its way from the web into recent books. After the Google Books search, we stumbled upon a helpful fact check by Agence France-Presse (AFP). In the AFP story, they reported on the same quote, except the word "India" had been replaced with "Africa." It's unclear which version of the quote came first, but it was likely the one naming India. Nevertheless, AFP concluded the attribution of the quote to Macaulay is incorrect. Agence France-Presse (AFP) replaced with "Africa." The AFP fact check pointed out that the man pictured in the quote meme bore a striking resemblance to "a portrait ofBritish army officer Sir Henry John William Benti[n]ck," not Macaulay. It also mentioned that Macaulay had expressed his views on the benefits of English-language education in India in an 1835 document, "Minute on Education": portrait Minute on Education Authorship of the speech has also been attributed to Lord William Benti[n]ck -- not to be confused with Sir Henry John William Benti[n]ck -- who was a contemporary of Macaulay's and served as Governor-General of British India. attributed to Lord William Benti[n]ck Macaulay's Minute on Education in 1835, which promoted the superiority of Western education, was supported by Lord William Benti[n]ck. In the document, Macaulay talks of creating a class of persons Indian in blood and colour, but English in tastes, in opinions, in morals and in intellect. In "Minute on Education," Macaulay argued that teaching in the English language was necessary to improve education in India. In his opinion, the languages spoken at the time by the people of India were a roadblock to effectively funds allotted by Parliament to improve the country's education. "We have to educate a people who cannot at present be educated by means of their mother-tongue," he said. The following passage is from Macaulay's "Minute on Education," which included the "blood and color" quote that appeared in the AFP report: In one point I fully agree with the gentlemen to whose general views I am opposed. I feel with them that it is impossible for us, with our limited means, to attempt to educate the body of the people. We must at present do our best to form a class who may be interpreters between us and the millions whom we govern, -- a class of persons Indian in blood and color, but English in tastes, in opinions, in morals and in intellect. To that class we may leave it to refine the vernacular dialects of the country, to enrich those dialects with terms of science borrowed from the Western nomenclature, and to render them by degrees fit vehicles for conveying knowledge to the great mass of the population. India gained independence from British rule in 1947. gained independence In sum, there's no record of Macaulay uttering the exact words cited in the quote meme in regard to "dominating" India in the 1835, though he did express thoughts in writing on the subject of Indian education at the time, including his conviction that the education of Indians should be conducted in English, not Indians' native languages. Fenton, Roger. Sir Henry John William Bentinck. National Portrait Gallery, London, 1855, https://www.npg.org.uk/collections/search/portrait/mw157047/Sir-Henry-John-William-Bentinck. Google Books. https://books.google.com/. India Independence Day (1947). United States Census Bureau, 15 Aug. 2022, https://www.census.gov/newsroom/stories/india-independence-day.html. Knowles, Michael David. Thomas Babington Macaulay, Baron Macaulay | English Politician and Author. Britannica, https://www.britannica.com/biography/Thomas-Babington-Macaulay-Baron-Macaulay. Macaulay, Thomas. The History of England from the Accession of James the Second. Penguin Books Limited, 1848. Macaulay, Thomas Babington. Minute on Education. Columbia University in the City of New York, 1835, https://www.columbia.edu/. Malawi Government. Facebook, https://www.facebook.com/malawigovernment/. Mitra, Anirban. The Infamous Macaulay Speech That Never Was. The Wire, 19 Feb. 2017, https://thewire.in/history/macaulays-speech-never-delivered. Saint-Cricq, Thomas, and Charlotte Mason. Lord Macaulay Never Gave This Speech to UK Parliament. Agence France-Presse (AFP), 25 Feb. 2020, https://factcheck.afp.com/lord-macaulay-never-gave-speech-uk-parliament.

FMD_test_382

Is Charles Barkley Leaving TNT's 'Inside the NBA'?

06/13/2023

On June 13, 2023, one day after the Denver Nuggets had won their first NBA title, we looked into a claim that was made in an online article that said former NBA star Charles Barkley was leaving the TNT TV show, "Inside the NBA." won According to the story, Barkley had either resigned or his contract with TNT was "abruptly terminated." The headline of the article read, "TNT Has Pointed The Finger At Charles's Wife, Maureen Blumhardt, For The Analyst's Unexpected Resignation." However, this rumor was false. The made-up story was published on an unknown date prior to June 13 in order to push a scam involving the promotion of purported keto weight loss gummies. The article showed a logo for an apparently made-up news organization named, "Breaking News Alerts (BNA)." It wasposted to the dubious website top-magazine-trending.com and began as follows: She's famously known as Charles Barkley's wife, but Maureen Blumhardt has proven she's a savvy businesswoman in her own right - and Charles Barkley is in DEEP trouble for it. Maureen Blumhardt, most famously known as the 59-year-old wife of Charles Barkley, has shocked the entire world after being revealed as the sole reason for her husband's departure from his hit TV show 'Inside The NBA'. Why? Because she failed to disclose her massive weight loss company to TNT (while making regular appearances on the show), which is actually a HUGE competitor to the show's sponsor 'Weight Watchers'. Maureen's product is one tenth of the price and twice as effective as their competing product, which has Weight Watchers threatening to pull advertising from the network completely. Charles Barkley's contract was abruptly terminated. Lucky for them, Maureen's product has been incredibly successful and is taking over the weight loss world by storm - and her net worth is even more than his! The product is called Quickshot Keto Gummies and it has taken the world by storm. Quickshot Keto Gummies is repeatedly selling out within minutes and Maureen says her number one struggle as CEO is sourcing enough products to be able to adequately service the demand. We were unable to obtain a working link to the article to include in our fact check. The reason for this was that scammers employ tactics to make their articles hidden unless they've been accessed via specific ads. When users click on those specific ads, the ads act like a key to open a door, unlocking the article to display on their screens. The top of the article falsely claimed that the news had been shared by CBS News, ABC, NBC, and Fox. The scam also misleadingly said that celebrities including Jennifer Aniston, Ellen DeGeneres, Kim Kardashian, Charlize Theron, and Sandra Bullock all joined with Barkley and his wife, Maureen Blumhardt, to endorse keto weight loss gummies, even though they had nothing to do with the products. The image and likeness of each of these famous people were used without permission. Barkley The article played on the oldmeme of unnamed doctors being mad about something. Remember old ads with the line, "Doctors Hate Him"? The story said that Blumhardt had made doctors "angry" and "furious" by revealing something about keto weight loss gummies. Again, this was completely made up. meme CBD and keto gummies scams often claim that people will be able to magically lose weight with the products, and that no diet or exercise would be required. In the past, many of the websites where the supposed weight loss gummies could be purchased enrolled customers in subscription charges of hundreds of dollars per month. They also sometimes didn't display phone numbers for customer service, something that may have been done on purpose in order to make it more difficult for customers to find a way to cancel a monthly subscription. If any readers were victimized by these scams, we recommend contacting your credit card company to tell them what happened. You also can report fraudulent activity to the U.S. Federal Trade Commission (FTC). report fraudulent activity For more details on how these sorts of keto weight loss gummies scams work, we encourage readers to look through some of our past articles on the subject. some of our past articles on the subject "One Weird Trick / Doctors Hate Him."Know Your Meme, 10 Mar. 2020, https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/one-weird-trick-doctors-hate-him. Pells, Eddie. "Nuggets Take Home 1st NBA Title in Rugged 94-89 Win over Heat." The Associated Press, 13 June 2023, https://apnews.com/article/nuggets-heat-nba-finals-jokic-99c0f25e6e468a97f8c86330f988933d.

FMD_test_383

Did Biden Call for an 'End to Shareholder Capitalism'?

08/06/2020

In the summer of 2020, multiple readers asked Snopes to investigate claims that former U.S. Vice President and presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden had called for an end to "shareholder capitalism." In July and August, Facebook users shared posts that contained the following text: "Biden wants to end Shareholder Capitalism...that's your 401[k]...your pensions...your retirement...are you voting for that?" Another social media meme suggested that Biden's proposals would result in the destruction or liquidation of 401(k) pension savings. Those memes did not accurately reflect remarks made by Biden in July 2020 on the subject of "shareholder capitalism." At a July 9 event in Dunmore, Pennsylvania, Biden delivered a relatively conventional stump speech, touching on several familiar themes: his working-class upbringing in nearby Scranton, the values he inherited from his family, and his vision for an American economy that, according to him, places less emphasis on corporate profit and greater emphasis on rewarding hard work and smaller-scale entrepreneurship, especially in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, which devastated some smaller businesses and left millions unemployed. As part of this broader "Wall Street versus Main Street" theme, Biden said the following (emphasis added): "Enough is enough, it's time to reverse the priorities in this country. It's time to help small businesses, middle-class folks, manage their way through a pandemic, and let's help millions of would-be entrepreneurs get out from under their debts so they can start businesses. And it's time corporate America paid their fair share of taxes...The days of Amazon paying nothing in federal income tax will be over. Let's make sure that workers have power and a voice. It's way past time to put an end to the era of shareholder capitalism—the idea that the only responsibility a corporation has is to its shareholders. That's simply not true; it's an absolute farce. They have a responsibility to their workers, their community, and their country. That isn't a new or radical notion. These are basic values and principles that helped build this nation in the first instance. Now the challenge is to take these fundamental values and apply them to the new economy we have to build in the years ahead..." Biden did not propose dissolving the stock market, prohibiting the public trading of companies, or shareholder investment and dividends. In saying, "It's way past time to put an end to the era of shareholder capitalism," Biden was taking a position in a long-running ethical debate between "shareholder" and "stakeholder" theories. One academic has helpfully summed up that philosophical conflict as follows: Shareholder theory asserts that shareholders advance capital to a company's managers, who are supposed to spend corporate funds only in ways that have been authorized by the shareholders. As Milton Friedman wrote, "There is one and only one social responsibility of business—to use its resources and engage in activities designed to increase its profits so long as it engages in open and free competition, without deception or fraud." On the other hand, stakeholder theory asserts that managers have a duty to both the corporation's shareholders and "individuals and constituencies that contribute, either voluntarily or involuntarily, to [a company's] wealth-creating capacity and activities, and who are therefore its potential beneficiaries and/or risk bearers." Although there is some debate regarding which stakeholders deserve consideration, a widely accepted interpretation refers to shareholders, customers, employees, suppliers, and the local community. In the short video below, philosopher and professor of business administration R. Edward Freeman—arguably the primary advocate for stakeholder theory—outlines the approach: Biden characterized the era of shareholder capitalism as one in which the following idea holds sway: "[that] the only responsibility a corporation has is to its shareholders." His rejection of that principle was classic stakeholder theory: "That's simply not true; it's an absolute farce. They [companies] have a responsibility to their workers, their community, and their country." We asked the Biden campaign for details on any specific proposals the former vice president had or how exactly he envisioned an end to "the era of shareholder capitalism," but we did not receive a response in time for publication. Although those details were not available, it's clear that Biden was not calling for the abolition of shareholding itself. Rather, he proposed bringing an end to the era of shareholder capitalism, meaning an end to the predominance of that particular ethical approach and a new gravitation towards the stakeholder-driven approach—a position that, whether or not one agrees with its tenets, has in recent years become orthodox among progressives, within the Democratic Party, and even among business leaders themselves. In 2019, for example, the Business Roundtable—an influential group of chief executive officers of some of the largest companies in the United States—executed a high-profile shift in its approach, writing: "Since 1978, Business Roundtable has periodically issued Principles of Corporate Governance that include language on the purpose of a corporation. Each version of that document issued since 1997 has stated that corporations exist principally to serve their shareholders. It has become clear that this language on corporate purpose does not accurately describe the ways in which we and our fellow CEOs endeavor every day to create value for all our stakeholders, whose long-term interests are inseparable." What Biden called for in his Dunmore speech was therefore, as he rightly said, not a "new or radical notion." It was not an end to the stock market nor the ability of individuals to buy and sell shares, and therefore it was not a proposal that would cause pensions to evaporate, as several Facebook memes falsely claimed.

FMD_test_384

Was Uterus Mailed to Supreme Court? TikTok Fantasy Goes Viral

06/30/2022

In June 2022, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a ruling that overturned the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision, ending 50 years of constitutionally protected abortion rights. While many people took to the streets to protest the ruling, others used social media to share fantasy scenarios of protesting by other means. On TikTok, for example, some users fantasized about mailing their uterus to the Supreme Court as an act of protest. While the video described a potential future action ("I need to mail" vs. "I mailed"), other TikTok users shared videos claiming that someone had indeed followed through with this action. Although several TikTok users asserted that someone literally sent their uterus to the Supreme Court, there is no actual evidence that this occurred. Protests against the Supreme Court in the wake of the Roe v. Wade ruling garnered significant coverage from mainstream media outlets. If someone truly had one of their organs removed, placed it in a box, and sent it to the Supreme Court, there would certainly be news coverage of the incident. However, no credible news outlets have reported any such events. While there are numerous videos on TikTok making this claim, none contain images of the alleged package or the identity of the supposed sender. In fact, most of the TikTok videos we viewed involve imagining what it would be like for an employee of the Supreme Court to open such a package. The notion that someone mailed their uterus to the Supreme Court is part of a larger trend on TikTok, where users claim that extreme actions were taken to protest the abortion ruling. For instance, another series of videos claimed (without evidence) that several Supreme Court justices had their credit card numbers leaked. Social media users also claimed (without evidence) that the IP addresses of the justices had been leaked.

FMD_test_385

Is this Bill Clinton pictured alongside Jeffrey Epstein?

07/22/2019

On July 10, 2019, we examined a claim that Google was "scrubbing" its search results of any pictures showing President Bill Clinton together with convicted sex offender and billionaire financier Jeffrey Epstein. While this rumor was false (Google's search results were not notably different from those of Yahoo, DuckDuckGo, Yandex, or Bing), we were left with one unanswered question: Are there any photos of Epstein and Clinton? After all, Clinton flew on Epstein's private plane, a convicted sex offender who was arrested again in July 2019 on new charges related to child sex prostitution. The two were also both present at a "small dinner party" in 1995 hosted by Revlon mogul Ron Perelman to raise funds for the Democratic National Convention. It seems reasonable to believe that someone at some point took a photograph of these two well-known public figures together. On July 22, 2019, Josh Rosner, the managing director of independent research consultancy Graham Fisher & Co, alerted us to his tweet containing a photograph of Epstein and Clinton that was published in a 2003 issue of Vanity Fair: Josh Rosner published, "Disturbing! The #press wiped all pictures of @BillClinton & #JeffreyEpstein from the #internet. Even @VanityFair, which published this image in '03 from their #sex(?) trip to Brunei, scrubbed it." Again, no evidence exists that this image was "wiped" from the Internet. In fact, this image is available online in Vanity Fair's digital archive (subscription required). This photograph was published in a March 2003 article by Vicky Ward entitled, "The Talented Mr. Epstein." The photograph's caption reads: "Epstein with President Clinton in Brunei, 2002." One possible explanation for why this photograph doesn't appear in search engines is that Vanity Fair didn't publish it as a standalone image. Rather, it is embedded in a digital copy of the March 2003 edition of the magazine. While we're not in the business of offering predictions, we would bet that this image will start finding its way into Google Images and other image-based search engines in the near future, especially if more outlets pick up and publish stories including this image. Clinton is mentioned three other times in the Vanity Fair story; each iteration is reproduced below (emphasis ours): "Lately, Jeffrey Epstein's high-flying style has been drawing oohs and aahs: the bachelor financier lives in New York's largest private residence, claims to take only billionaires as clients, and flies celebrities including Bill Clinton and Kevin Spacey on his Boeing 727. But pierce his air of mystery and the picture changes. Vicky Ward explores Epstein's investment career, his ties to retail magnate Leslie Wexner, and his complicated past. In addition to the town house, Epstein lives in what is reputed to be the largest private dwelling in New Mexico, on an $18 million, 7,500-acre ranch which he named 'Zorro.' 'It makes the town house look like a shack,' Epstein has said. He also owns Little St. James, a 70-acre island in the U.S. Virgin Islands, where the main house is currently being renovated by Edward Tuttle, a designer of the Aman resorts. There is also a $6.8 million house in Palm Beach, Florida, and a fleet of aircraft: a Gulfstream IV, a helicopter, and a Boeing 727, replete with trading room, on which Epstein recently flew President Clinton, actors Chris Tucker and Kevin Spacey, supermarket magnate Ron Burkle, Lew Wasserman's grandson, Casey Wasserman, and a few others, on a mission to explore the problems of AIDS and economic development in Africa. Epstein is known about town as a man who loves women—lots of them, mostly young. Model types have been heard saying they are full of gratitude to Epstein for flying them around, and he is a familiar face to many of the Victoria's Secret girls. One young woman recalls being summoned by Ghislaine Maxwell to a concert at Epstein's town house, where the women seemed to outnumber the men by far. 'These were not women you'd see at Upper East Side dinners,' the woman recalls. 'Many seemed foreign and dressed a little bizarrely.' This same guest also attended a cocktail party thrown by Maxwell that Prince Andrew attended, which was filled, she says, with young Russian models. 'Some of the guests were horrified,' the woman says. 'He's reckless,' says a former business associate, 'and he's gotten more so. Money does that to you. He's breaking the oath he made to himself—that he would never do anything that would expose him in the media. Right now, in the wake of the publicity following his trip with Clinton, he must be in a very difficult place.' In 2002, around the time that this photograph was taken, Clinton told New York Magazine via a spokesperson that, 'Jeffrey is both a highly successful financier and a committed philanthropist with a keen sense of global markets and an in-depth knowledge of twenty-first-century science. I especially appreciated his insights and generosity during the recent trip to Africa to work on democratization, empowering the poor, citizen service, and combating H.I.V./AIDS.' Clinton once had a relationship with Epstein and even took multiple trips on his private plane. However, the former president said that he hasn't had contact with Epstein for a decade and knows nothing about the crimes the latter has been accused or convicted of. Clinton, of course, isn't the only high-profile politician connected to Epstein. U.S. President Donald Trump has also been photographed with Epstein.

FMD_test_386

Inflation has been caused by the global economies shutting down all at once, reopening all at once. And the U.S. economy is recovering at a far faster pace than any other country in the OECD.

02/16/2022

Americans are facing conflicting signals on the economy. The economy is growing rapidly, unemployment is low, and wages are rising. But inflation a broad pattern of rising consumer prices is at a four-decade high, and for many voters, that fact seems to be crowding out any other economic news. During a Feb. 13 roundtable discussion on ABCs This Week, panelists addressed Americans concerns about inflation. Patrick Gaspard who served in President Barack Obamas administration and is now president and CEO of the Center for American Progress, a liberal think tank blamed the coronavirus pandemic for inflation. We all know that inflation has been caused by the global economies shutting down all at once, reopening all at once, Gaspard said. And the fact of the matter is that the U.S. economy is recovering at a far faster pace than any other country in the OECD. That is an absolute fact. (The OECD is the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development, a group of38 advanced, industrialized nations.) A look at cross-national data shows that economic growth in the United States has indeed outpaced that of the other large, comparable economies, and experts agree that this rapid growth has been a factor in the United States currently high inflation rate. But rapid economic growth is not the only reason why the U.S. is experiencing high inflation. As evidence for his claim, Gaspards office pointed to areportdated Feb. 7 by the OECD. The report found that the United States was the only member of the Group of Seven industrial economies that had seen its inflation-adjusted gross domestic product rise above its pre-pandemic level. The other six nations in the G-7 Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan and the United Kingdom all had yet to reach the GDP levels they had in the fourth quarter of 2019. (Gross domestic product is the sum of all economic activity in a country and is often used as the primary metric for economic growth.) This supports Gaspards comment on This Week. Other calculations further back up his assertion about robust U.S. growth. If you strip the inflation adjustment from GDP growth, to enable a cleaner comparison of GDP to inflation, the United States GDP growthranked fifthamong the nations that belong to the Group of 20 (a wider group of large economies than the G-7). In this measurement, the U.S. trailed only Turkey, India, China and South Korea. Notably, the United States growth rate exceeded that of each of its fellow G-7 members, whose economies are most similar to that of the U.S. Meanwhile, in arecent paper, Brookings Institution senior fellow Gian Maria Milesi Ferretti found much the same pattern. He compared how countries current GDP levels compared with projections made before the pandemic. The United States finished at the top of the heap in his analysis as well. There is also something to Gaspards contention that rapid economic growth and inflation are connected. When we looked at the latest annual inflation rates for the G-7 nations, we found that the U.S. had the highest inflation. However, the correlation between rapid growth and high inflation isnt perfect. Germany and Canada had the second- and third-highest inflation rates, respectively, but their economic growth barely edged into positive territory when factoring in the pandemic. And the United Kingdom and France nearly matched the U.S.s GDP growth rates but have experienced more modest inflation. Overall, Gaspards focus on rapid GDP growth as a driver of inflation is reasonable, experts said but they added that the causes of inflation are more complicated. The current inflation is not monocausal or easily understood, said James Feyrer, a Dartmouth College economist. Ferretti said that some global factors affecting inflation are clearly at play, including higher energy prices and disruption of supply chains. Lower rates of labor force participation in the U.S., stemming heavily from pandemic factors such as a shortage of child care options, also played a role. In fact, one of the factors driving rapid growth in the U.S. generous fiscal support from the federal government is something that Biden did have control over. Stimulus payments and other financial support from the federal government put more money into Americans hands, driving up demand for goods amid international supply-chain challenges driven by the pandemic. Many countries adopted expansionary policies, but on the fiscal side, the U.S. really stands out, Ferretti said. With very large support to private incomes, U.S. consumption has been very strong, particularly for goods. This has clearly helped the speed of the recovery. But a combination of strong demand and labor shortages, he said, has resulted in higher inflationary pressures than in other advanced economies. In other words, where inflation is concerned, Biden isnt entirely a victim of global forces. His policies were a factor as well. Gaspard said that inflation has been caused by the global economies shutting down all at once, reopening all at once. And the U.S. economy is recovering at a far faster pace than any other country in the OECD. The U.S. has experienced faster economic growth than most of its most direct global competitors, and experts agree that this has contributed to inflationary pressures. While many of these inflationary pressures are traceable to global factors related to the pandemic, some have flowed from the fiscal choices made by the Biden administration. We rate the statement Mostly True.

FMD_test_387

Did Dakota Territory divide into two states in order to gain additional Republican Senators?

04/23/2021

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

FMD_test_388

Robert McCulloch Sold Fundraising T-Shirts for Darren Wilson?

11/26/2014

St. Louis prosecutor Robert McCulloch was the president of Backstoppers, an organization aimed at supporting the families of first responders in crisis, during the controversy in Ferguson. Backstoppers sold "I support Ofc. Darren Wilson" shirts to raise money for the policeman's defense fund. On 24 November 2014, St. Louis County Prosecutor Bob McCulloch announced in a lengthy press conference that a grand jury had declined to indict Officer Darren Wilson in the shooting death of Ferguson teenager Michael Brown. The decision was both controversial and widely criticized, intensifying existing concerns regarding McCulloch's perceived partiality toward law enforcement officers. McCulloch is the president of the board of Backstoppers, a local organization that supports the families of first responders, particularly those killed in the line of duty. A Washington Post opinion column published following the press conference criticized McCulloch's role in the Mike Brown case concerning his personal and professional history. When asked whether he had any regrets about the way he handled the case, McCulloch replied, "No, not at all." This response was not surprising, given McCulloch's history. The fact that his father, a police officer, was killed by a black suspect does not by itself disqualify him, but his record should have: not a single prosecution of a shooting by police in his 23 years on the job. Four times he presented evidence to a grand jury in such cases and did not secure an indictment; now he can add a fifth. The points made by the columnist were not unique; they aligned with rumors that began circulating in St. Louis in the weeks following Brown's death. According to claims that started around 15 September 2014, McCulloch's partiality extended beyond his charitable work and record of not prosecuting officers. Several blog posts from mid-September 2014 focused on an Internet fundraising effort using the website Teespring.com. Individuals interested in the case noticed an online T-shirt fundraiser selling shirts that read "I support Ofc. Darren Wilson" (with "PRO POLICE" printed on the back), which suggested a connection between Wilson's defense and McCulloch's organization. The shirt's description explained: "I SUPPORT OFFICER D. WILSON" is an officer-inspired design to show support for Officer Darren Wilson of the Ferguson Police Department in Missouri. Donations from purchases will be divided between a fund set up for Officer Wilson at gofundme.com and The BackStoppers Inc. organization, which can be visited at backstoppers.org for more information. A post on 14 September 2014 included a board member list that did not reflect McCulloch's move from Vice President to President of the organization. The controversy reached the St. Louis Post-Dispatch by 15 September 2014, at which time the newspaper spoke with Backstoppers' executive director, Ron Battelle. Battelle told the outlet that Backstoppers had not initiated the fundraiser, was not affiliated with it in any way, did not know who was responsible for selling the shirts, and that should any money be offered from the proceeds to Backstoppers, the group would reject the funds. The controversy subsided but resurfaced on 25 November 2014 in the wake of McCulloch's statement to the press on 24 November 2014. A Facebook user shared an image questioning Backstoppers' connection to the shirts. In response, Backstoppers issued a statement via Facebook, reiterating that the fundraiser was not connected with their organization: "Contrary to recent posts on social media, The BackStoppers is not participating in or has benefited from any fundraising activity involving the Ferguson matter. We scrutinize our contributions, and if we receive funds involving the Ferguson matter, those funds would be rejected by the Board of Directors. Our mission is to provide assistance to families of police, fire, and EMS officers who die in the line of duty. We are currently helping 66 families, which includes 64 children. This is and always will be our first priority! We greatly appreciate the support of the St. Louis community! Thank you!" Ultimately, only nineteen "I support Ofc. Darren Wilson" shirts were sold during the initial Teespring campaign. It is unclear who created the fundraiser or how the proceeds were distributed, but any party is free to raise funds for any other party, and someone's pledging half their proceeds to Backstoppers does not indicate that Backstoppers was necessarily involved with or even aware of the fundraising effort.

FMD_test_389

The Fall of the Athenian Republic

01/28/2004

The item below began circulating on the Internet shortly after the 2000 U.S. presidential election, reappeared briefly after the 2004 presidential election, saw a strong resurgence in a modified form that replaced the names "Bush" and "Gore" with "McCain" and "Obama" after the 2008 presidential election, and was circulated again after the 2012 election in a shortened version with the names "Obama" and "Romney" replacing the original's "Bush" and "Gore": [Collected via e-mail, December 2000] At about the time our original 13 states adopted their new constitution in the year 1787, Alexander Tyler (a Scottish history professor at The University of Edinburgh [sic]) had this to say about "The Fall of The Athenian Republic" some 2,000 years prior: "A democracy is always temporary in nature; it simply cannot exist as a permanent form of government. A democracy will continue to exist until voters discover that they can vote themselves generous gifts from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates who promise the most benefits from the public treasury, resulting in every democracy finally collapsing due to loose fiscal policy, which is always followed by a dictatorship." "The average age of the world's greatest civilizations from the beginning of history has been about 200 years. During those 200 years, these nations always progressed through the following sequence: From Bondage to spiritual faith; From spiritual faith to great courage; From courage to liberty; From liberty to abundance; From abundance to complacency; From complacency to apathy; From apathy to dependence; From dependence back into bondage." Professor Joseph Olson of Hamline University School of Law, St. Paul, Minnesota, points out some interesting facts concerning the most recent presidential election: Population of counties won by: Gore = 127 million Bush = 143 million Square miles of land won by: Gore = 580,000 Bush = 2,427,000 States won by: Gore = 19 Bush = 29 Murder rate per 100,000 residents in counties won by: Gore = 13.2 Bush = 2.1 Professor Olson adds: "In aggregate, the map of the territory Bush won was mostly the land owned by the tax-paying citizens of this great country. Gore's territory encompassed those citizens living in government-owned tenements and living off government welfare..." Olson believes the U.S. is now somewhere between the "apathy" and "complacency" phase of Professor Tyler's definition of democracy, with some 40 percent of the nation's population already having reached the "governmental dependency" phase. [Collected June 2013] Professor Joseph Olson of Hamline University School of Law in St. Paul, Minnesota, points out some interesting facts concerning the last presidential election: Number of States won by: Obama: 19 Romney: 29 Square miles of land won by: Obama: 580,000 Romney: 2,427,000 Population of counties won by: Obama: 127 million Romney: 143 million Murder rate per 100,000 residents in counties won by: Obama: 13.2 Romney: 2.1 Professor Olson adds: "In aggregate, the map of the territory Romney won was mostly the land owned by the tax-paying citizens of the country. Obama's territory mostly encompassed those citizens living in low-income tenements and living off various forms of government welfare..." Olson believes the United States is now somewhere between the "complacency" and "apathy" phase of Professor Tyler's definition of democracy, with some forty percent of the nation's population already having reached the "governmental dependency" phase. If Congress grants amnesty and citizenship to twenty million criminal invaders called illegals - and they vote - then we can say goodbye to the USA in fewer than five years. If you are in favor of this, then by all means, delete this message. If you are not, then pass this along to help everyone realize just how much is at stake, knowing that apathy is the greatest danger to our freedom. What follows is our analysis of the statements included in the original piece as it initially appeared in 2000: I really enjoyed one recent message that was circulated extremely widely, at least among conservatives. It gave several interesting "facts" supposedly compiled by statisticians and political scientists about the counties across the nation that voted for George Bush and the ones that voted for Al Gore in the recent election. Supposedly, the people in the counties for Bush had more education, more income, ad infinitum, than the counties for Gore. I didn't have time to check them all out, but I was curious about one item in particular... the contention that the murder rate in the Gore counties was about a billion times higher than in the Bush counties. This was attributed to Professor Joseph Olson at the Hamline University School of Law. I had never heard of such a university, but went online and found it. And Prof. Olson does exist. "Now I'm getting somewhere," I thought. But in response to my e-mail, Olson said the "research" was attributed to him erroneously. He said it came from Sheriff Jay Printz in Montana. I e-mailed Sheriff Printz, and guess what? He didn't do the research either and didn't remember who had e-mailed it to him. In other words, he got the same legend e-mailed to him and passed it on to Olson without checking it out, and when Olson passed it on, someone thought it sounded better if a law professor had done the research, and so it grew. Who knows where it originally came from, but it's just not true. By calculating the murder rate for each county and then taking the averages, we found a murder rate (defined as the number of murders per 100,000 residents) of about 5.2 for the average Gore county and 3.3 for the average Bush county. But since people, rather than counties, commit murders, a more appropriate approach was to calculate the total number of murders in the counties won by each candidate and divide that figure by the total number of residents in those counties. This more appropriate method yielded the following average murder rates in counties won by each candidate: Gore: 6.5 Bush: 4.1 There is a distinct difference between these two numbers, but it is nowhere near as large as the quoted email message states (i.e., 13.2 for Gore vs. 2.1 for Bush). In the 2000 U.S. presidential election, George W. Bush won most of the states that are net beneficiaries of federal spending programs, while Al Gore won most of the states that are net contributors to federal spending. The information in that study corresponds to a chart prepared by the Tax Foundation for fiscal year 2005 that ranks states according to federal spending per dollar of taxes paid.

FMD_test_390

Something of Historic Proportions Is Happening

02/24/2009

For the past thirty years, I have been a historian of international and domestic politics, as well as an authority on some of the more famous criminal cases in American history. For the past four years, I have been commenting on current events. I am a student of history. Professionally, I have written 15 books in six languages and have studied it all my life. I think there is something monumentally large afoot, and I do not believe it is just a banking crisis, a mortgage crisis, or a credit crisis. Yes, these exist, but they are merely single facets of a very large gemstone that is only now coming into sharper focus. I can sense it because I know how it feels, smells, looks, and how people react to it. Yes, a perfect storm may be brewing, but there is something happening within our country that has been evolving for about ten to fifteen years. The pace has dramatically quickened in the past two. We demand and then codify into law the requirement that our banks make massive loans to people we know they can never pay back. Why? We learned just days ago that the Federal Reserve, which has little or no real oversight by anyone, has "loaned" two trillion dollars (that is $2,000,000,000,000) over the past few months but will not tell us to whom or why or disclose the terms. That is our money—yours and mine. And that is three times the 700 billion we all argued about so strenuously just this past September. Who has this money? Why do they have it? Why are the terms unavailable to us? Who asked for it? Who authorized it? I thought this was a government of "we the people," who loaned our powers to our elected leaders. Apparently not. We have spent two or more decades intentionally de-industrializing our economy. Why? We have intentionally dumbed down our schools, ignored our history, and no longer teach our founding documents, why we are exceptional, and why we are worth preserving. Students, by and large, cannot write, think critically, read, or articulate. Parents are not revolting, teachers are not picketing, and school boards continue to back mediocrity. Why? We have now established the precedent of protesting every close election (now violently in California over a proposition that is so controversial that it wants marriage to remain between one man and one woman. Did you ever think such a thing possible just a decade ago?). We have corrupted our sacred political process by allowing unelected judges to write laws that radically change our way of life, and then mainstream Marxist groups like ACORN and others to turn our voting system into a banana republic. To what purpose? Now our mortgage industry is collapsing, housing prices are in free fall, major industries are failing, our banking system is on the verge of collapse, social security is nearly bankrupt, as is Medicare and our entire government. Our education system is worse than a joke (I teach college and know precisely what I am talking about). The list is staggering in its length, breadth, and depth. It is potentially 1929 times ten. And we are at war with an enemy we cannot name for fear of offending people of the same religion, who cannot wait to slit the throats of your children if they have the opportunity to do so. And now we have elected a man no one knows anything about, who has never run so much as a Dairy Queen, let alone a town as big as Wasilla, Alaska. All of his associations and alliances are with real radicals in their chosen fields of employment, and everything we learn about him, drip by drip, is unsettling if not downright scary. Surely you have heard him speak about his idea to create and fund a mandatory civilian defense force stronger than our military for use inside our borders? No? Oh, of course. The media would never play that for you over and over and then demand he answer it. Sarah Palin's pregnant daughter and $150,000 wardrobe are more important. Mr. Obama's winning platform can be boiled down to one word: change. Why? I have never been so afraid for my country and for my children as I am now. This man campaigned on bringing people together, something he has never, ever done in his professional life. In my assessment, Obama will divide us along philosophical lines, push us apart, and then try to realign the pieces into a new and different power structure. Change is indeed coming. And when it comes, you will never see the same nation again. And that is only the beginning. I thought I would never be able to experience what the ordinary, moral German felt in the mid-1930s. In those times, the savior was a former smooth-talking rabble-rouser from the streets, about whom the average German knew next to nothing. What they did know was that he was associated with groups that shouted, shoved, and pushed around people with whom they disagreed; he edged his way onto the political stage through great oratory and promises. Economic times were tough, people were losing jobs, and he was a great speaker. And he smiled and waved a lot. People, even newspapers, were afraid to speak out for fear that his "brown shirts" would bully them into submission. And then, he was duly elected to office, a full-throttled economic crisis at hand. Slowly but surely, he seized the controls of government power, department by department, person by person, bureaucracy by bureaucracy. The kids joined a Youth Movement in his name, where they were taught what to think. How did he get the people on his side? He did it by promising jobs to the jobless, money to the moneyless, and goodies for the military-industrial complex. He did it by indoctrinating the children, advocating gun control, health care for all, better wages, better jobs, and promising to re-instill pride once again in the country, across Europe, and across the world. He did it with a compliant media—did you know that? And he did this all in the name of justice and change. And the people surely got what they voted for. Read your history books. Many people objected in 1933 and were shouted down, called names, laughed at, and made fun of. When Winston Churchill pointed out the obvious in the late 1930s while seated in the House of Lords in England (he was not yet Prime Minister), he was booed into his seat and called a crazy troublemaker. He was right, though. Don't forget that Germany was the most educated, cultured country in Europe. It was full of music, art, museums, hospitals, laboratories, and universities. And in less than six years—a shorter time span than just two terms of the U.S. presidency—it was rounding up its own citizens, killing others, abrogating its laws, turning children against parents, and neighbors against neighbors. All with the best of intentions, of course. The road to Hell is paved with them. As a practical thinker, one not overly prone to emotional decisions, I have a choice: I can either believe what the objective pieces of evidence tell me (even if they make me cringe with disgust); I can believe what history is shouting to me from across the chasm of seven decades; or I can hope I am wrong by closing my eyes, having another latte, and ignoring what is transpiring around me. Some people scoff at me, others laugh, or think I am foolish, naive, or both. Perhaps I am. But I have never been afraid to look people in the eye and tell them exactly what I believe and why I believe it. I pray I am wrong. I do not think I am.

FMD_test_391

Was Cesar Sayoc a Lifelong Democrat Who “Recently” Covered His Van in Trump Stickers?

11/06/2018

Following the arrest of Cesar Sayoc on charges that he sent mail bombs to prominent Democrats and anti-Trump media figures, the pro-Trump conspiracy contingent attempted to paint the suspect as a Democrat who posed as a Republican innuendo suggesting that Sayocs true goals were to inflict political damage on President Donald Trump and his agenda. Representative of this claim was a 26 October 2018 Facebook meme that labeled Sayoc as a Democrat posing as a Republican and asserted he had recently put his infamous pro-Trump stickers on his van, describing those (false) claims as suspicious: meme No evidence documents that Sayoc was a "lifelong Democrat" all signs point to his being relatively apolitical until 2015, although it appeared he attempted to register as a Republican twice in October 2012. And Sayocs van had sported pro-Trump stickers since at least 2017, and it had contained pro-Trump material since at least 2015. appeared Although news reports have stated that Sayocs relatives are Democrats, Cesar Sayoc has never been registered as a Democrat. His only known voter registration listed his political affiliation as the Florida Republican Party, and it was filed two weeks before Trump won that states GOP primary. Additionally a public records request yielded documents indicating that Sayoc had attempted to register as a Republican twice in October 2012 but failed to complete his application in both cases: reports documents Records from the Miami-Dade County Elections Department show that on two occasions in October 2012 Oct. 9 and Oct. 26 Sayoc initiated, but didnt complete, new voter registration applications. Both times, he checked the box next to "Republican Party" as his party affiliation. On Oct. 9, 2012, he checked the box that said his was a "new registration," but it appears he left blank the answer to a question about whether hed ever been "adjudicated mentally incapacitated with respect to voting." On Oct. 26, 2012, he didnt check any of the boxes indicating the reason behind his registration application (i.e. new registration, address change, name change, party change, etc.) Near the top of that form, someone scribbled, "INCOMP," indicating it was incomplete. According to news reports, most people who interacted with Sayoc prior to 2015 stated he did not appear to be overtly political. Ronald Lowy, a lawyer for the Sayoc family who represented Cesar during a 2002 case in which he threatened to bomb an electric company over a bill he disputed, told the New York Times that Sayoc seemed to have no outspoken partisan views during the 2002 case. told Daniel Lurvey represented Sayoc against theft charges in 2013 and 2014, and he told the Washington Examiner that he could not recall Sayoc's ever discussing politics. Instead, it appears that Sayocs chief interests during this time were bodybuilding and wrestling. told The pattern appeared to have changed by 2015. Sayoc showed up at a Brevard College alumni event for his soccer team that year, where former team members stated that he quickly made clear he was a fanatical supporter of Mr. Trump, and bombarded them with racist and misogynist conspiracy theories. Since that time, Sayoc had been an outspoken and fanatical supporter of Donald Trump and an equally outspoken opponent of Democrats online: stated On Twitter and Facebook, he railed against former President Barack Obama and Oprah Winfrey with misspelled racial epithets, threatened former Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. and praised President Trump and conservative causes. His social-media feeds were an electronic version of the white van carted away by law-enforcement officials on Friday morning, which was covered in stickers praising Mr. Trump, condemning liberals and putting cross hairs over an image of Hillary Clinton. In 2015, as part of a likely effort to make a false insurance claim, Sayoc reported to police that $45,000 worth of suits and costumes he needed for his business were stolen from his van. According to the New York Times, the police report noted that of the 139 pieces he said were taken, 11 were the presidents clothing brand. police report It is unclear exactly when the outside of Sayoc's van was first festooned with pro-Trump political stickers, but the van had been a common sighting in the South Florida region since at least New Year's Eve of 2017, as reported by the Sun Sentinel: reported I saw this van dozens of times. It always struck me, always unsettled me. It appeared that somebody at times was in the van, though it was hard to tell because of the windows, said David Cypkin, a documentary film producer who co-produced 2006s Cocaine Cowboys" ... Cypkin encountered the van regularly when he lived near the Shoppes at the Waterways in Aventura, where it was regularly parked. Cypkin believed someone could be living in the van, and finally, on the morning of New Years Eve 2017, he snapped a few quick pictures so he could get a better look at some of the stickers later. I had seen it there at least a year, Cypkin said. Assertions that Cesar Sayoc had lifelong Democratic political leanings or that his van was covered in stickers only immediately before his mail-bombing attempts do not hold up to any level of scrutiny. ORourke, Ciara. "Pipe Bomb Suspect's Florida Voting Records Show Only Republican Affiliation." PolitiFact. 5 November 2018. Healy, Jack et al. "Cesar Sayoc, Mail Bombing Suspect, Found an Identity in Political Rage and Resentment." The New York Times. 27 October 2018. Nelson, Steven. "Mail Bomb Suspect Cesar Sayoc Was a 'Big Muscle Head' Stripper, Says Former Boss." Washington Examiner. 26 October 2018. Sweeney, Dan. "'I Thought He Looked Like a Shooter': Why People Took Pictures of Cesar Sayoc's Van." Sun Sentinel. 26 October 2018.

FMD_test_392

Reynolds Wrap

08/17/2001

Claim: An ex-congressman who had sex with a subordinate won clemency from a president who had sex with a subordinate, then was hired by a clergyman who had sex with a subordinate. Example: [Collected on the Internet, 2001] Jessie Jackson has added former Chicago democratic congressman Mel Reynolds to the Rainbow/PUSH Coalition's payroll. Reynolds was among the 176 criminals excused in President Clinton's last-minute forgiveness spree. Reynolds received a commutation of his six-and-a-half-year federal sentence for 15 convictions of wire fraud, bank fraud & lies to the Federal Election Commission. He is more notorious; however, for concurrently serving five years for sleeping with an underage campaign volunteer. This is a first in American politics: An ex-congressman who had sex with a subordinate won clemency from a president who had sex with a subordinate, then was hired by a clergyman who had sex with a subordinate. His new job? Youth counselor. Origins: We can't say with absolute certainty that what's described above is "a first in American politics," since the sexual peccadilloes of American politicians were not always as widely publicized as they are now, but the gist of the piece is true (although it originally circulated back in 2001, so it now references events that occurred many years ago and not just recently): 1995-1997: President Bill Clinton's involvement with Monica Lewinsky, then a 21-year-old unpaid White House intern working in the office of Leon Panetta, Clinton's Chief of Staff, is quite familiar to anyone who follows American politics. Monica Lewinsky January 2001: The National Enquirer revealed that Jesse Jackson had been carrying on a four-year affair with Karin L. Stanford, a 39-year-old former aide with his Rainbow/PUSH Coalition staff, and that Jackson had fathered the child Stanford bore in May 1999. (Jackson has been married to Jacqueline Brown since 1962.) Karin L. Stanford January 2001: Just before leaving office, President Clinton (at the urging of Jesse Jackson, among others) commuted the sentence of former Illinois congressman Mel Reynolds, who had spent 30 months in a state prison for statutory rape (i.e., having sex with a 16-year-old campaign volunteer) and was serving a five-year sentence in federal prison for lying to obtain loans and illegally diverting campaign money for personal use. Mel Reynolds January 2001: The Chicago Sun-Times reported that former congressman Mel Reynolds would be working as the community development director of Salem Baptist Church in south-side Chicago, and as a consultant for Jesse Jackson's Rainbow/PUSH Coalition, trying to decrease the number of young African-Americans going to prison. (Reynolds' position would be more accurately characterized as that of an advisor on prison reform rather than a "Youth counselor," however.) reported Rainbow/PUSH In February 2014, Mel Reynolds was arrested in Zimbabwe for violating immigration laws and possessing pornographic material and was later deported to South Africa. In June 2015, Reynolds was indicted on charges of failing to file income tax returns from 2009 through 2012. arrested indicted Last updated: 26 June 2015 Page, Susan. "Who Gets a Pardon? It Depends on Who Asks." USA Today. 20 March 2001 (p. A7). Page, Susan and Mimi Hall. "Pardon Drama Casts Wide Net." USA Today. 23 Feburary 2001 (p. A7). Sneed, Michael. "Reynolds Might Be Really Enjoying the Ride." Chicago Sun-Times. 25 February 2001 (p. 12). Associated Press. "Celeb Pardon Push." Chicago Sun-Times. "Farrakhan Back from the Brink."

FMD_test_393

: Barefoot Cellars is Giving Away Free Cases of Wine

10/25/2015

Claim: Barefoot Cellars is giving away a limited number of free cases of wine to Facebook users who like and share a post. Origins: In October 2015, links began circulating on Facebook promising users a free case of Barefoot Cellars wine as a celebration of the brand's 50th anniversary. The embedded links involved a variety of URLs, some of which included entirely unrelated scam-bait terms like "iTunes" and "Apple." Users who clicked through to claim their purported free case of Barefoot wine were routed to a page reading "Barefoot Wine is Giving FREE Cases of Wine to Celebrate 50th Anniversary (230 Left)," which cloned the style of Facebook-based content but was hosted on a non-Facebook URL. As noted, the URLs visible in the posts didn't point to any credible domains or sites linked to Barefoot Cellars. By now, most social media users are familiar with survey scams: Kohl's, Costco, Home Depot, Lowe's, Kroger, Best Buy, Macy's, Olive Garden, Publix, Target, and Walmart are among the retailers used as bait by scammers seeking personal information and valuable page likes from Facebook users. A July 2014 article from the Better Business Bureau illustrated how individuals might spot and avoid bad actors utilizing the reputations of brands on social media. Don't believe what you see. It's easy to steal the colors, logos, and headers of an established organization. Scammers can also make links look like they lead to legitimate websites and emails appear to come from a different sender. Legitimate businesses do not ask for credit card numbers or banking information on customer surveys. If they do ask for personal information, like an address or email, be sure there's a link to their privacy policy. When in doubt, do a quick web search. If the survey is a scam, you may find alerts or complaints from other consumers. The organization's real website may have further information. Watch out for a reward that's too good to be true. If the survey is real, you may be entered in a drawing to win a gift card or receive a small discount off your next purchase. Few businesses can afford to give away $50 gift cards for completing a few questions. Last updated: 25 October 2015 Originally published: 25 October 2015.

FMD_test_394

Quotations from Hillary Clinton with Marxist ideologies.

09/02/2007

Claim: List reproduces various "Marxist" statements made by Hillary Clinton. Example: [Collected via e-mail, August 2007] A little history lesson: If you don't know the answer make your best guess Answer all the questions before looking at the answers. Who said it? 1) "We're going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good." A. Karl MarxB. Adolph HitlerC. Joseph StalinD. None of the above 2) "It's time for a new beginning, for an end to government of the few, by the few, and for the few and to replace it with shared responsibility for shared prosperity." A. LeninB. MussoliniC. Idi AminD. None of the Above 3) "(We) ... can't just let business as usual go on, and that means something has to be taken away from some people." A. Nikita KhrushevB. Josef GoebbelsC. Boris YeltsinD. None of the above 4) "We have to build a political consensus and that requires people to give up a little bit of their own ... in order to create this common ground." A. Mao Tse DungB. Hugo ChavezC. Kim Jong IlD None of the above 5) "I certainly think the free-market has failed." A. Karl MarxB. LeninC. MolotovD. None of the above 6) "I think it's time to send a clear message to what has become the most profitable sector in (the) entire economy that they are being watched." A. PinochetB. MilosevicC. Saddam HusseinD. None of the above Answers: (1) D. None of the above. Statement was made by Hillary Clinton 6/29/2004(2) D. None of the above. Statement was made by Hillary Clinton 5/29/2007(3) D. None of the above. Statement was made by Hillary Clinton 6/4/2007(4) D. None of the above. Statement was made by Hillary Clinton 6/4/2007(5) D. None of the above. Statement was made by Hillary Clinton 6/4/2007(6) D. None of the above. Statement was made by Hillary Clinton 9/2/2005 Be afraid. Be very, very afraid and voteAnybody (woman) that would vote for her just because they think it's time for a female president has got to be out of their lunatic mind! Origins: This list of purported "Marxist" quotes by former first lady, senator, presidential candidate, and secretary of state Hillary Clinton is (like many collections of utterances from various political figures) difficult to rate as strictly "true" or "false": She did make the statements reported above, but they have all been stripped of any explanatory context, and some of them had portions elided, creating potentially misleading impressions about the nature of those statements. Below we verify the source and complete wording of each statement on this list and provide the context in which it was made. (All of these entries date from between 2004 and 2007, during which time Hillary Clinton represented the state of New York in the U.S. Senate.) "We're going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good." This statement by Senator Hillary Clinton was not (as commonly assumed) addressed to the general public, but rather to a group of relatively well-to-do Democrats attending a June 2004 fundraiser for California senator Barbara Boxer. Her statement specifically referred to a desire to repeal tax cuts that had recently been enacted by the Bush administration, cuts which many Democrats had criticized as favoring the wealthy: tax cuts Headlining an appearance with other Democratic women senators on behalf of Sen. Barbara Boxer, who is up for re-election this year, Hillary Clinton told several hundred supporters some of whom had ponied up as much as $10,000 to attend to expect to lose some of the tax cuts passed by President Bush if Democrats win the White House and control of Congress. "Many of you are well enough off that ... the tax cuts may have helped you," Sen. Clinton said. "We're saying that for America to get back on track, we're probably going to cut that short and not give it to you. We're going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good." "It's time for a new beginning, for an end to government of the few, by the few, and for the few ... And to replace it with shared responsibility for shared prosperity." This entry is a pieced-together passage from a 29 May 2007 economic policy speech given by Senator Clinton on the subject of "Modern Progressive Vision: Shared Prosperity." The supposedly "Marxist" nature of this statement is undercut when the sentences that immediately followed it (affirming support for a free market economy) are included for context: speech It's time for a new beginning, for an end to government of the few, by the few and for the few, time to reject the idea of an "on your own" society and to replace it with shared responsibility for shared prosperity. I prefer a "we're all in it together" society. Now, there is no greater force for economic growth than free markets, but markets work best with rules that promote our values, protect our workers and give all people a chance to succeed. When we get our priorities in order and make the smart investments we need, the markets work well. "(We) ... can't just let business as usual go on, and that means something has to be taken away from some people." "We have to build a political consensus and that requires people to give up a little bit of their own in order to create this common ground." "I certainly think the free-market has failed." The above three statements are all out-of-context passages taken from a 4 June 2007 CNN "Presidential Forum" conducted with three Democratic presidential hopefuls, senators John Edwards, Barack Obama, and Hillary Clinton. The second statement was part of a straightforward expression of the need to for people to reach a consensus (through metaphorically giving up some of their political "turf," not literally giving up their possessions) on how to proceed in order to tackle an issue such as universal health insurance, while the first statement is another pieced-together quote that omits the contextual references to the issues of health care, dependence on foreign oil, and climate change: Presidential Forum We can set the vision. We can even work to articulate the goal. But the pathway is extraordinarily complicated because of how we live today andhow we think of ourselves in relation to our fellow citizens. Take health care. I think we could get almost unanimous agreement that having more than 45 million uninsured people, nine million of whom are children, is a moral wrong in America. And I think we could reach that agreement, and then we would have to start doing the hard work of deciding what we were going to do to make sure that they were not uninsured, because an uninsured person who goes to the hospital is more likely to die than an insured person. I mean, that is a fact. So, what do we do? We have to build a political consensus. And that requires people giving up a little bit of their own turf, in order to create this common ground. The same with energy you know, we can't keep talking about our dependence on foreign oil, and the need to deal with global warming, and the challenge that it poses to our climate and to God's creation, and just let business as usual go on. And that means something has to be taken away from some people. The third statement was part of a passage in which Senator Clinton listed a number of entities (including churches, schools, and the government, as well as the free market) that she felt had failed in helping young people to make responsible decisions (particularly in reference to abortion): Q: Could you see yourself, with millions of voters in a pro-life camp, creating a common ground, with the goal ultimately in mind of reducing the decisions for abortion to zero? A: Yes. Yes. And that is what I have tried to both talk about and reach out about over the last many years, going back, really, at least 15 years, in talking about abortion being safe, legal, and rare. And, by rare, I mean rare. And it's been a challenge, because the pro-life and the pro-choice communities have not really been willing to find much common ground. And I think that is a great failing on all of our parts, because, for me there are many opportunities to assist young people to make responsible decisions. There is a tremendous educational and public outreach that could be done through churches, through schools, through so much else. But I think it has to be done with an understanding of reaching people where they are today. We have so many young people who are tremendously influenced by the media culture and by the celebrity culture, and who have a very difficult time trying to sort out the right decisions to make. And I personally believe that the adult society has failed those people. I mean, I think that we have failed them in our churches, our schools, our government. And I certainly think the, you know, free market has failed. We have all failed. We have left too many children to sort of fend for themselves morally. "I think it's time to send a clear message to what has become the most profitable sector in (the) entire economy that they are being watched." This passage was taken from a 2 September 2005 appearance by Senator Clinton in front of constituents in Elmira Heights, New York, where (in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina) she expressed her opinion about the need for federal regulatory oversight of the oil industry in order to curb high gasoline prices and U.S. dependence on foreign oil: The anxiety and anger felt by motorists was evident at nearly every turn in her travels throughout the Finger Lakes region of Upstate New York. She made clear she shared the concern. "I think it's time to send a clear message to what has become the most profitable sector in our entire economy that they're being watched," she said in explaining her call for an inquiry by the Federal Trade Commission. "I think human nature left to itself is going to push the limit as far as possible, and that's what you need a government regulatory system for: to keep an eye on people to make the rules of the game fair, to make a level playing field and not give anybody some kind of undue advantage." Clinton criticized the new energy bill, which she opposed, as inadequate to solve the country's long-term energy problem. She said the United States has regressed over the past three decades, since the first oil shocks of the early 1970s. "We've had 30 years to do some things we haven't done," she said. "In fact we've gotten, we've gone backwards in many respects. "I am tired of being at the mercy of people in the Middle East and elsewhere, and I'm tired frankly of being at the mercy of these large oil companies," Clinton said. Last updated: 30 March 2015 Fouhy, Beth. "San Francisco Rolls Out the Red Carpet for the Clintons." Associated Press. 29 June 2004. CNN. "The Situation Room: Sojourners Presidential Forum." 4 June 2007.

FMD_test_395

Was a $3.7 Million Grant Given to the Wuhan Laboratory by the Obama Administration?

04/24/2020

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. In April 2020, reports started to circulate that the National Institutes of Health (NIH) had provided the Wuhan Institute of Virology with a $3.7 million grant in 2015, while former U.S. President Obama was still in office. These reports were often accompanied by the evidence-free suggestion that the novel coronavirus that causes COVID-19 had "escaped" from this lab, along with the insinuation that, since this lab reportedly received funding from the Obama administration, the pandemic was therefore Obama's fault. This claim received widespread attention on April 17 when a reporter from the conservative outlet Newsmax asked President Donald Trump about it during a White House press briefing. Newsmax reporter Emerald Robinson asked: "Thank you, Mr. President. U.S. Intelligence is saying this week that the coronavirus likely came from a level 4 lab in Wuhan. There's also another report that the NIH under the Obama administration in 2015 gave that lab $3.7 million in a grant. Why would the U.S. give a grant like that to China?" Trump responded: "The Obama administration gave them a grant of $3.7 million. I've been hearing about that. And we've instructed that if any grants are going to that area we're looking at it, literally about an hour ago, also early in the morning, we will end that grant very quickly. But it was granted quite a while ago. They were granted a substantial amount of money." There's a lot to unpack there, so let's start with the basic claim: Did the Obama administration grant $3.7 million to the Wuhan Institute of Virology? Between 2014 and 2019, the EcoHealth Alliance was awarded a series of grants totaling approximately $3.7 million by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (a division of the National Institutes of Health) to study the "risk of future coronavirus (CoV) emergence from wildlife using in-depth field investigations across the human-wildlife interface in China." Only a portion of this money has been used to fund research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology; approximately $700,000 of this grant money was awarded under the Trump administration. Despite having a grain of truth at its core, the claim that the Obama administration gave a $3.7 million grant to the Wuhan Institute of Virology is therefore misleading at best. It first gained prominence on April 11, 2020, following an article published in the Daily Mail. The British tabloid claimed that it had obtained documents showing that coronavirus research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology had been funded by a $3.7 million grant from the U.S. government: "Documents obtained by The Mail on Sunday show the Wuhan Institute of Virology undertook coronavirus experiments on mammals captured more than 1,000 miles away in Yunnan, funded by a $3.7 million grant from the US government." The Daily Mail did not provide links or screenshots to these documents. They did, however, write that this money funded a research paper published in November 2017 entitled: "Discovery of a rich gene pool of bat SARS-related coronaviruses provides new insights into the origin of SARS coronavirus." This is the title of a genuine paper published by researchers from the Wuhan Institute of Virology. It's also true that this paper was partially funded by money granted by the National Institutes of Health. However, when we followed up using the grant number listed in the funding section of the paper (NIAID R01AI110964), we found that the NIH did not directly issue this series of grants to the Wuhan Institute of Virology. The Department of Health and Human Services' Tracking Accountability in Government Grants System (TAGGS) shows that NIAID R01AI110964 was awarded to the EcoHealth Alliance for "understanding the risk of bat coronavirus emergence." Between 2014 and 2019, this global environmental health nonprofit organization received a total of $3.7 million from NIH. While a portion of these grants funded research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology, this lab did not receive all $3.7 million. Under award number NIAID R01AI110964, NIH also funded studies produced by institutions in the United States, Australia, and Singapore, and the work involving the Wuhan Institute of Virology was an international collaboration with the New York-based EcoHealth Alliance. Furthermore, while these funds were originally appropriated by the NIH in 2014 during the Obama administration, the most recent payment, in 2019, was authorized by the Trump administration. The payments record from the Department of Health and Human Services shows that the EcoHealth Alliance filed "Noncompeting Continuation" applications in 2015, 2016, 2017, and 2018. In 2019, however, the organization filed a renewal application (previously called a "competing continuation"). This renewal application was awarded by the NIH under Trump's administration. Here's how NIH defines these two different types of grant applications: Renewal: Initial request for additional funding for a period subsequent to that provided by a current award. Renewal applications compete for funding with all other peer-reviewed applications and must be developed as fully as though the applicant is applying for the first time. (Previously referred to as "competing continuation.") Noncompeting Continuation: Request or award for a subsequent budget period within a previously approved project for which a recipient does not have to compete with other applications. Although the initial grant was approved under the Obama administration in 2014, EcoHealth Alliance's renewal application was approved by the Trump administration in 2019. It should also be noted that these grants were not awarded to fund a laboratory. They were awarded to fund research into how bat coronaviruses could emerge and spread to human populations. The purpose of this kind of research, spurred into action by the 2002 SARS outbreak, is to understand the process of how coronaviruses become transmissible to humans. That earlier outbreak was also caused by a coronavirus linked to bats. Is it unusual for the United States to fund research in other countries? In short, no. While this claim is often circulated as if the Obama administration did something unusual, or even nefarious, by awarding a series of grants that would subsequently fund research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology, the United States routinely provides funding to international research organizations. In fact, records show that the NIH has provided approximately $2.5 million in additional funding to various organizations in China (including Wuhan University) in 2018 and 2019, under the Trump administration. In 2007, while George W. Bush was president, NIH provided more than $2 million to various research centers across China. Furthermore, international organizations often come together to solve problems that could impact the global population, such as pandemics. In 2003, for instance, the World Health Organization (WHO) called on countries around the world to develop a diagnostic test for SARS. On 17 March 2003, WHO called upon 11 laboratories in 9 countries to join a collaborative multi-center research project on SARS diagnosis. This network takes advantage of modern communication technologies (e-mail; secure website) to share outcomes of investigations of clinical samples from SARS cases in real time. Daily assessment of research results supports immediate refinement of investigative strategies and permits instant validation of laboratory findings. Network members share on the secure WHO website electron microscopic pictures of viruses, sequences of genetic material for virus identification and characterization, virus isolates, and various samples from patients and post-mortem tissues. Samples from one and the same patient can be analyzed in parallel in several laboratories, and results shared in real time. This network joins the intellectual resources of leading laboratories worldwide for a common goal: the detection of the SARS agent and the development of a diagnostic test. The COVID-19 pandemic has spurred a similar call to action. While political leaders have locked their borders, scientists have been shattering theirs, creating a global collaboration unlike any in history. Never before, researchers say, have so many experts in so many countries focused simultaneously on a single topic and with such urgency. Nearly all other research has ground to a halt.

FMD_test_396

The Unzipped Mechanic

02/28/2004

A wife returns home from shopping and spots a pair of legs sticking out from under the car in their driveway. Thinking that her husband is working on the car again, she playfully bends down and pulls down his pants zipper before cheerfully strolling into the house. As she walks through the living room, she sees her husband sitting in a chair watching TV. Startled, she asks her husband who is under the car; when her husband informs her that it's his mechanic, she faints. Be careful what you wear (or don't wear) when working under your vehicle, especially in public. From the Sydney Morning Herald, Australia, comes the story of a central west couple who drove their car to K-Mart, only to have it break down in the parking lot. The man told his wife to carry on with the shopping while he fixed the car there in the lot. The wife returned later to see a small group of people near the car. On closer inspection, she saw a pair of male legs protruding from under the chassis. Although the man was in shorts, his lack of underpants turned private parts into glaringly public ones. Unable to stand the embarrassment, she dutifully stepped forward, quickly put her hand up his shorts, and tucked everything back into place. When she regained her feet, she looked across the hood and found herself staring at her husband, who was standing idly by. The mechanic, however, had to be treated by the paramedics and received three stitches in his forehead. From the Northwest Florida Daily News comes the story of a Crestview couple who drove their car to Wal-Mart, only to have it break down in the parking lot. The man told his wife to carry on with the shopping while he fixed the car in the lot. The wife returned later to see a small group of people near the car. On closer inspection, she saw a pair of male legs protruding from under the chassis. Although the man was in shorts, his lack of underpants turned private parts into glaringly public ones. Unable to stand the embarrassment, she dutifully stepped forward, quickly put her hand up his shorts, and tucked everything back into place. When she got back on her feet, she looked across the hood and found herself staring at her husband, who was standing idly by. The mechanic, however, had to be treated by the paramedics and received three stitches in his forehead. Some versions of the legend feature a plumber working under a sink in place of the auto mechanic under the car. When the wife unzips the plumber's pants, he sits up and hits his head on the pipes, knocking himself cold. Some readers recall having heard this legend as far back as the late 1950s, a variation on a common theme of a wife's playful licentiousness resulting in her great embarrassment. Unlike other versions, however, there is no suggestion of moral censure in this telling of the legend: the ubiquitous fondled minister has been replaced by an auto mechanic, and the wife suffers no painful humiliation. In fact, the only one who comes to any harm is the innocent and unwitting mechanic who ends up with a bump on his head. An early sighting of the legend features the "dropped stretcher" motif, which appears in other urban legends, notably the Hind-Lick Maneuver (dog cold-noses naked man working under sink), Blew Moon (wife spritzes hairspray into toilet in an attempt to kill a bug; husband who afterwards lights a cigarette while on the throne blows himself up), and Frame Job (lady becomes stuck to a freshly painted toilet seat). A lady who had been after her husband for months to install a garbage disposal under the kitchen sink finally trapped him one Saturday afternoon, and he glumly got to work with his wrenches. Not wishing to listen to his colorful vocabulary as he banged his thumbs, she went out shopping. While downtown, she ran into some girlfriends and had a few cocktails, so she was feeling very friendly when she returned home. There was good old George still under the sink, working away, legs sticking out into the kitchen. So she bent down, reached under, and gave him a rudely familiar tweak. "Hi, honey," she said. There was a howl of surprise from under the sink as the man raised up and smacked his forehead against the disposal. It was the plumber! Her husband had given up on the job. The plumber crawled out, his forehead all bloody, and the wife ran to the phone for an ambulance. The husband helped the attendant load the poor plumber onto a stretcher. "How'd it happen?" asked the attendant as they were carrying the man out. When the husband told him, the attendant began laughing so hard he let go of the stretcher, and the plumber plunged to the sidewalk, breaking his arm. Imagine explaining that one to the insurance company.

FMD_test_397

Is This Video of a 'Praying Hands' Cloud Formation Real?

01/22/2023

It's not uncommon for the human eye to pick out familiar shapes among clouds in the sky, nor for the human mind to experience, however briefly, the sensation that such a resemblance is more than just coincidental. There's a name for this general phenomenon: pareidolia. It's also not uncommon, especially in this era of digital image manipulation and virality, for human beings to fabricate "eerie" photographs along the same lines to share on social media. There's also a name for this general phenomenon: hoaxes. A perfect example of the latter came to Snopes' attention in January 2023, in the form of a YouTube video (originally posted on TikTok) supposedly showing a cloud formation in the shape of shockingly detailed "praying hands." Interestingly, in addition to the above video captioned "A strange cloud in the sky of America," a very similar video can be found elsewhere on YouTube with the caption, "The cloud appeared in the sky of Ukraine during the war." Here is a comparison between the two "cloud formations": (YouTube screenshots) Note how artificial the "cloud hands" appear in both of these videos. Note, too, how similar they are to each other, as if they were both modeled after the same source image. We found other specimens with the same similarities. Clearly, these videos and photographs were the products of digital editing, not miraculous meteorological events. What source image might they have been modeled after? Our vote goes to this drawing of praying hands by the German artist Albrecht Durer, dating from about 1500: Praying hands by the German artist Albrecht Durer (1471-1528), circa 1500. (Hulton Archive/Getty Images) Definition of PAREIDOLIA. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/pareidolia. Accessed 18 Jan. 2023. "Praying Hands by the German Artist Albrecht Durer, circa 1500." Getty Images, https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/praying-hands-by-the-german-artist-albrecht-durer-circa-news-photo/2635952. Accessed 18 Jan. 2023.

FMD_test_398

Russian troops will offer protection at American events.

07/02/2013

Claim: Russian forces will be providing security at large events in the U.S. Examples: [Collected via e-mail, July 2013] I have been told that some sort of deal between the Obama administration and the Russian govt. would allow Russian military forces to act as security, on American soil, during large, special events (such as Super Bowl) or in the case of national emergencies. Any truth here? I already know how the Constitution treats such things. Now days, it doesn't seem to matter tho. Has FEMA struck an agreement with Russia that will provide for the Russian Military to provide crowd control at U.S. events on American Soil? This was reported as true in a post I saw on FB and reported that these soldiers would be able to fire on and kill Americans on U.S. soil. Origins: On 26 June 2013, Russia announced an agreement between the United States Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and the Russian Emergency Situations Ministry to share information and observation opportunities with first responders and emergency managers from each other's countries during joint rescue operations: announced The Russian Emergency Situations Ministry and the USA Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) are going to exchange experts during joint rescue operations in major disasters. This is provided by a protocol of the fourth meeting of the U.S.-Russia Bilateral Presidential Commission Working Group on Emergency Situations and seventeenth meeting of Joint U.S.-Russia Cooperation Committee on Emergency Situations, which took place in Washington on 25 June. The document provides for expert cooperation in disaster response operations and to study the latest practices. In addition, the parties approved of U.S.-Russian cooperation in this field in 2013-2014, which envisages exchange of experience including in monitoring and forecasting emergency situations, training of rescuers, development of mine-rescuing and provision of security at mass events. At the end of the meeting the parties expressed their satisfaction with the level of cooperation between the Russian Federation and the United States in the area of emergency prevention and response and agreed to develop it in order to respond efficiently to all kinds of disasters. The conspiracy site Infowars then spun this announcement into a claim that Russian military forces would be providing security for large events in the United States such as the Super Bowl and presidential inaugurations: Infowars As part of a deal signed last week in Washington DC between the Russian Emergency Situations Ministry and FEMA, Russian officials will provide "security at mass events" in the United States, a scenario that wont sit well with Americans wary of foreign assets operating on US soil. According to a press release by the Ministry of the Russian Federation for Civil Defense and Emergencies, US and Russian officials met on June 25 at the 17th Joint U.S.-Russia Cooperation Committee on Emergency Situations. In addition to agreeing with FEMA to "exchange experts during joint rescue operations in major disasters," the Russian Emergency Situations Ministry will also be providing "security at mass events" in the United States. This suggests that events designated as "National Special Security Events" by the Department of Homeland Security, which include the Super Bowl, international summits such as the G8 and presidential inaugurations, will now rely partly on Russian authorities to provide security. However, the Infowars article was an alarmist, far-fetched interpretation of the original announcement, which said nothing about Russia's providing security for events taking place within the U.S. The Russian Emergency Situations Ministry announcement merely noted that "provision of security at mass events" was one of the areas of interest which the two countries hoped to study and learn about from each other as part of their joint agreement. FEMA and the Russian news agency RIA Novosti quickly debunked Infowars' unsupported assumption, stating plainly that the U.S. and Russia would not be deploying security guards or military forces in each other's countries: The top US emergency response agency moved to quell a flurry of Internet-driven speculation that Russian security teams could be deployed at large public events in the United States, saying the two countries will not swap security guards or soldiers under a long-running partnership agreement. There will be "no exchange of security or military personnel" under a recently renewed partnership between the US Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and Russias Emergency Situations Ministry, a FEMA spokesman told RIA Novosti. "The agreement continues information-sharing meetings and observation opportunities with first responders and emergency managers," the spokesman said. Picking up on an Emergency Situations Ministry statement declaring that partnership agreement "envisages the exchange of experience" in "the provision of security at mass events," numerous websites suspicious of the US governments encroachment on its citizens' rights suggested the deal means Russian security guards could be deployed at major public gatherings. The libertarian website Infowars.com, run by radio host and conspiracy theorist Alex Jones, proposed these events could include US presidential inaugurations and the Super Bowl. The FEMA spokesman said that while the US agency will not exchange security or military personnel with its Russian counterpart, the two sides "agreed to an exchange of emergency management experts to share best practices a continuation of a 17 year partnership." Last updated: 2 July 2013

FMD_test_399

Californias prisons budgetin 1970 was about 3 percent of the general fund. Now, its 8.9 percent, about $12 billion.

01/25/2018

Democratic Gov. Jerry Brown reeled off statistics on Californias prison spending during his final State of the State Address after a total of 16 years as governor. Brown, who has followed a federal court order to reduce the states prison overcrowding, warned legislators at the state Capitol not to simply pass more crime laws but instead consider a holistic approach to criminal justice. He suggested California has gone too far on prison spending since 1970. The corrections budget then was about 3 percent of the general fund. Now, its 8.9 percent, about $12 billion, Brown said. Was the governor right? Has Californias prison spending nearly tripled as a share of the states general fund budget since 1970? We set out on a fact check. Our research Californias1970-71 fiscal year budget, produced under then Gov. Ronald Reagan, backs up the first part of Browns claim. It lists the corrections department as 2.8 percent, or nearly $40 million, of the states $1.4 billion general fund budget that year. California's 1970-71 fiscal year budget. Browns 2018-19 budget proposal, meanwhile, also supports the claim. It shows the state expects to spend 9 percent, or nearly $12 billion, of its $132 billion general fund on the corrections department. Thats up about $1 billion from prison spending two years ago. Franklin Zimring, a UC Berkeley criminal justice professor, called Browns claim about the increased share of prison spending absolutely true. Californias prison population exploded from 1980 through the late 1990s and prison building metastasized in the state, Zimring said. We went from a little over 24,000 prisoners in California prisons to over 170,000 prisoners in 2010 and 2011. Zimring attributed the increase to the states booming population during that period, tough sentencing laws, particularly 1994sThree Strikeslaw, and the national focus on drug crimes. Fewer inmates, higher costs California has sharply cut its prison population following a 2009 U.S. Supreme Court order for California to reduce prison overcrowding. The population reached a peak of163,000 inmatesin 2006, according to the Public Policy Institute of California. The state estimates it will house an average of about 119,000 prisoners this year. But as the inmate numbers have dropped, state corrections spending has continued to rise. Thats, in part, because California has the highest per capita inmate cost in the nation, at an estimated $80,000 annually for 2018-19, as we examined in arecent fact check. Theres been no corresponding reduction in prison staff as inmate numbers have fallen, causing per capita costs to spike. At the same time, prison staffing costs have increased. Jeffrey Callison, a state prisons spokesman, told us the conditions of the court order prevent California from closing prisons even as the inmate population is reduced. So long as the order is in effect we cannot close prisons because to do so would reduce our capacity, thereby pushing us back above 137.5 percent level of prison crowding, Callison said in an email. That level is tied to prison capacity and defined by the court, he said. Our ruling Gov. Jerry Brown recently claimed Californias corrections budget in 1970 was about 3 percent of the general fund. Now, its 8.9 percent, about $12 billion. Californias1970-71 fiscal year budgetsupports the first part of Browns claim, listing prison system spending as 2.8 percent of that years general fund. Browns budget proposal for this fiscal year, meanwhile, shows the corrections department is now estimated to be 9 percent of the general fund, or $12 billion. A UC Berkeley criminal justice professor told us the governors spending claim rings true, noting the states prison population exploded during the 1980s and 1990s, driven by the states overall population boom, strict criminal sentencing laws and a national focus on drug crimes. The governors numbers are on the mark and theres nothing significant missing from his statement. We rate Browns claim True. TRUE The statement is accurate and theres nothing significant missing. Click here formoreon the six PolitiFact ratings and how we select facts to check.