Datasets:

amanrangapur

/

Fin-Fact

like 9

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/wendys-closing-locations-2023/

Is Wendy's Closing All Locations, as Announced in Late 2023?

Jordan Liles

11/24/2023

In October and November 2023, online advertisements were displayed to users on Facebook and Instagram that each showed a photo of Wendy's fast-food restaurant founder Dave Thomas. Thomas became a household name in the U.S. in the 1990s while starring in hundreds of the company's TV commercials. household name The caption of the ads in question read, "Closing Time: All The Restaurant Chains Closing." They appeared to hint that Wendy's would be closing down its entire restaurant chain, going bankrupt or going out of business for other reasons. These were two versions of the ads that ran in late 2023. Users who clicked on the ads with the Wendy's-themed photo of Thomas were led to one of two articles. In one lengthy, list-style article hosted by Investing.com, the headline read, "Last Call: You May See Fewer of These Restaurant Chains in 2023." Wendy's appeared in the story at number 44 out of 123 restaurants, with a paragraph that began with, "Wendy's itself is not going out of business": Investing.com 44. Wendys Year Established: 1969 Headquarters: Dublin, Ohio, United States Wendys itself is not going out of business, but the restaurants biggest franchisee operator, NPC International, sadly is. NPC International operates 385 Wendys in the US, meaning that the future of those stores is now in serious jeopardy. NPC also operates over 1,225 Pizza Huts in America. NPC filed for Chapter 11 in July of 2020, citing $903 million in debt. NPC tried to sell off 900 Pizza Huts to Yum! Brands to pay off some of the debt, but Yum! Brands backed out of the deal, citing concerns that creditors would snatch the locations up before they got the chance to move in. The article only ended up revealing that a franchisee named NPC International had sold its Wendy's restaurants to another operator. The sale was approved by a judge in 2021, according to RestaurantBusinessOnline.com, meaning this was old news. RestaurantBusinessOnline.com A second article attached to some of the Facebook and Instagram ads led to sportzbonanza.com. The story's headline read, "Classic Fast Food Restaurants That Are Gone for Good." However, Wendy's was not mentioned in the article. Also, the story was dated Oct. 14, 2020, which again also made this article old news. sportzbonanza.com The reason why these kinds of ads exist on Facebook and Instagram along with their lengthy articles is usually for something called advertising arbitrage. Advertising arbitrage is a strategy by which an advertiser hopes to make more money on ads displayed in a lengthy article than it would cost to display an initial clickbait ad meant to attract users to the article. Advertising arbitrage Since both articles were at least two years old, we wouldn't be surprised to see these misleading ads continuing to appear well in the 2024 calendar year, and perhaps beyond. Dave Thomas - Wendys, Daughter & Facts. Biography, https://www.biography.com/business-leaders/dave-thomas. Liles, Jordan. Snopes Tips: How To Avoid Ad Arbitrage Clickbait. Snopes, 2 Jan. 2022, https://www.snopes.com/articles/387913/avoid-ad-arbitrage-clickbait/. Maze, Jonathan. Bankruptcy Court Approves the $801M Sale of NPC International. RestaurantBusinessOnline.com, 21 Jan. 2021, https://restaurantbusinessonline.com/financing/bankruptcy-court-approves-801m-sale-npc-international.

false

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/nike-make-america-great-again-hat/

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

Dan Evon

09/07/2018

In early September 2018, an image purportedly showing the Nike "swoosh" symbol on the tag of a "Make America Great Again" hat started spreading online: The image was posted in the midst of a controversy over former NFL quarterback Colin Kaepernick's involvement in a new advertising campaign for Nike, a sports apparel company. Kaepernick made headlines in 2016 by kneeling during pregame renditions of the national anthem to protest racial inequality and police brutality. controversy 2016 The "take a knee" protests, which caught on with other NFL players and spread to athletes in other sports, were viewed by some (including President Trump) as unpatriotic and disrespectful to veterans. So when Kaepernick showed up in Nike's 0th anniversary "Just Do It" ad campaign, some disgruntled consumers took to social media to share photographs and videos of themselves destroying various pieces of Nike apparel to demonstrate their displeasure. destroying It appears that this image of a Nike-branded "Make America Great Again" cap was posted in an attempt to "troll" pro-Trump conservatives who were upset over Kaepernick's endorsement deal ("Make America Great Again," or "MAGA," is a well-known Trump slogan). When the image was shared by Twitter user @Nicoxw1, for example, it included a message facetiously noting that "133,291,000 Americans will have a stroke today." message The image is a hoax, merely a manipulated version of an older viral image showing a "Made in China" tag on a "Make America Great Again" hat. Here's a look at the original photograph, as well as a side-by-side comparison of the Nike MAGA hat image (right) and the original "Made in China" image (left): It should be noted that while some third-party companies do produce "Make America Great Again" hats in China, the website DonaldJTrump.com, from which customers can purchase official MAGA merchandise, states that all their products are proudly made in U.S.A. third-party companies Sandritter, Mark. "A Timeline of Colin Kaepernicks National Anthem Protest and the Athletes Who Joined Him." SB Nation. 25 September 2017. Abad-Santos, Alex. "Why the Social Media Boycott Over Colin Kaepernick Is a Win for Nike." Vox. 6 September 2018.

false

https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2017/jul/27/dan-patrick/dan-patrick-says-32-percent-texas-public-school-sp/

Of all the money we spend on education, less than 32 percent goes to teachers.

W. Gardner Selby

07/27/2017

Dan Patrick framed his case for ordering Texas schools to shift money toward higher teacher salaries by suggesting that less than a third of school spending currently reaches teacher pocketbooks. The Republican lieutenant governor,addressing reportersbefore the July 2017 start of a special legislative session called by Gov. Greg Abbott, said: Of all the money we spend on education, less than 32 percent goes to teachers. By email, Patrick spokesman Alejandro Garcia offered as the basis of Patricks claim astate publicationpresenting statistics such as student enrollment. We did not spot information in the document speaking to what Patrick said. Texas Education Agency figures But when we reached out to the Texas Education Agency, spokeswoman Lauren Callahan responded by pointing out state-posted figures for the 2015-16 school year, the latest year of audited spending totals. That year, according to the agency, state governmentrecorded receipts of $58,796,907,294related to public schools from state, local, federal and other revenue sources. The same year,according toanother agency web page, 347,328 teachers were paid combined base salaries of $18,023,516,741, averaging $51,892. That $18 billion breaks out to 31 percent of the nearly $59 billion in total receipts. Some more money went to teachers, though, in nearly $1 million in stipends such as whats paid to teachers that oversee extracurricular activities, Callahan told us. The resulting total teacher compensation, $19,005,561,634, divides out to 32 percent of the total education receipts. Additional money goes into other salaries. According to the agency, Texas schools in 2015-16 paid more than $24 billion to 68,699 teacher support staff broken out by TEA into more than 20 job categories including counselors, school nurses and athletic trainers plus 237,460 administrative, professional, paraprofessional and auxiliary staff with spending on all employee salaries accounting for more than 70 percent of school-related receipts. Keep in mind, though, Patrick singled out the share of all spending solely devoted to teacher pay. School district advocates When we asked finance experts who advocate for school districts if the equation based on TEA data holds up, we heard back that the math works, but the total-spending figure folds in spending deserving of an asterisk. In emails,Joe Wisnoski, a former TEA finance administrator who advises and lobbies for school districts, andTom Canbyof the Texas Association of School Business Officials each suggested its unfair to compare the $18 billion spent on teacher salaries to total receipts, which count money that doesnt play into school employee salaries, each expert wrote. Wisnoski suggested its more appropriate to compare spending on teacher salaries to operating expenditures, which means not judging the teacher salaries against any money districts raise in bond proceeds or whats spent on capital projects such as buildings or to pay off debt. Wisnoski noted that none of those funding streams would be available to could be diverted to salaries anyway. According to the TEAs posted figures for 2015-16, 2015-16 all funds operating expenditures for schools totaled nearly $49.5 billion --of which the spending on teacher salaries accounted for 36.4 percent, Wisnoski said and we confirmed. There are lots of ways to include or exclude things in the world of school district finances, Wisnoski said, and what is most appropriate somewhat depends on the person making the point and the specific point being made. Canby called the equation that got us to 32 percent of all spending going to teacher salaries a misleading apples divided by oranges calculation. He said he would gauge the share of spending on teacher salaries, starting from 2016actual expenditure totalshe said he fetched from the statesPublic Education Information Management System. Those figures suggest that teacher salaries cost $19,131,375,774 with benefits adding $3,429,356,293. The resulting $22,560,732,067 accounted for 47.7 percent of $47,303,105,584 in operating expenditures statewide, Canby noted. Canby also emailed us a web link to a July 2017commentaryby TASBOs executive director, Tracy Ginsburg, stating that the group had been unable to verify numbers aired by Patrick indicating that of $163,000 spent per classroom, $52,000 is paid to classroom teachers. Ginsburg encouraged readers to consider a June 2017reportby Moak, Casey & Associates, the lobbying and consulting firm whose associates include Wisnoski. That report says that in 2015-16, Texas school employee salaries and benefits absorbed 79 percent of $46.4 billion spent on basic educational costs. The share of that spending on teacher salaries alone doesnt appear in the report, which states that instruction accounted for 61 percent of basic costs, taking into account some 333,000 teachers plus 63,700 education aides. The instruction entry in the report says: Also included here are the salaries and benefits costs of 4,500 librarians as well as the books and other materials that can be found in Texas school libraries. The cost of instructional materials and staff development are also included in this category as instructional costs. Our ruling Patrick said: Of all the money we spend on education, less than 32 percent goes to teachers. This percentage, we found, aligns with the simple comparison of total teacher salaries to all funds spent on public schools. But its worth clarifying that not all funds can be diverted to teacher salaries. You could also say that close to half of available school spending in 2015-16 went to teacher salaries. We rate the statement Mostly True. MOSTLY TRUE The statement is accurate but needs clarification or additional information. Click here formoreon the six PolitiFact ratings and how we select facts to check.

true

https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2016/dec/16/kirk-watson/kirk-watson-says-average-austin-homeowner-pays-130/

In Austin, Texas, the average homeowner is paying about $1,300 to $1,400 just for recapture, meaning funds spent in non-Austin school districts.

W. Gardner Selby

12/16/2016

For years, Austin taxpayers have indirectly helped fund schools elsewhere in accord with the states more than 20-year-old system for equalizing aid among school districts, some of which have vast differences in taxable property wealth. Kirk Watson, the Democratic state senator from Travis County, attached an ear-catching figure to those costs during a November 2016Texas Tribune panel discussionabout hot issues in the 2017 legislative session. In Austin, Texas, Watson said, the average homeowner is paying about $1,300 to $1,400 just for recapture, as in funds shifted to less property-rich districts elsewhere. And so thats going to the state to fund state obligations. We have got to look at how were doing our school finance system so that we can do right by the people in this state and have a fair and equitable system. We asked Watsons office how he arrived at his figure for how much average Austin homeowners are paying to schools elsewhere. By email, Kate Alexander said Watson relied on September 2016 testimony by the Austin school districts chief financial officer. According to Nicole Conley'sprepared remarksfor a Sept. 28, 2016, appearance at a joint hearing of the Texas House committees on appropriations and public education, Conley described the Austin school district as the states largest single payer of recapture. Our payment alone comprises 13 percent of all state collections, Conleys testimony says. During the next five yearsbetween fiscal years 2016 and 2020Austin ISD is projected to pay almost $2.6 billion in recapture payments to the state. By 2019, more than half of every tax dollar collected in Austin will go to the state. Later inher testimony: Conley said: So to put it in perspective, we could lower our tax rate by 35 cents if we werent sending $406 million to the state under the recapture system. For the average homeowner in Austin, that would amount to about $1,400 in lower taxes. Thats fairly substantial; thats pretty significant tax relief. That would certainly make Austin more affordable for some of our taxpayers. To our inquiry, district spokesman Jacob Barrett told us Conley reached her savings figure for the average homeowner starting from the districts 2016-17 budget indicating it expects to pay $406 million in recapture to the state in accord with the school funding system. That payment amounts to 38 percent of the districts $1.061 billion in budgeted property taxes, Barrett noted. Barrett said the district got to the average homeowners share of the budgeted recapture payment starting from its average taxable value of a home in the district of $328,844 (as of June 2016) on which such an owner expected to pay $3,548 in school maintenance and operations property taxes at the M&O tax rate of $1.079 per $100 valuation. Finally, Barrett said, multiplying the 38 percent by that $3,548 delivers the portion of taxes on an average-value residence that goes to recapture of $1,355. Barrett also emailed us a December 2012district documentshowing that by amount, the Austin district's 2015 recapture payment was followed by what was paid by the Highland Park (Dallas); Eanes; Cotulla; and Karnes City districts, respectively. Also, the document says, the Austin districts annual recapture payment is projected to exceed $630 million in 2019 when more than half of every school property tax dollar collected locally will be recaptured by the state. Next, we asked non-district experts--Joe Wisnoski, a former Texas Education Agency official; Tom Canby of the Texas Association of School Business Officials; and Christy Rome, who advocates for districts required to make recapture payments--to evaluate how the Austin district determined the average Austin homeowner will pay $1,355 in school property taxes toward the districts 2016-17 recapture total. Solid, each expert said. By email, Wisnoski cautioned though: The average doesnt really describe much about the distribution of payment amounts, so you dont really know how many taxpayers are clustered close to that amount, and how many are really far away (high or low) compared to the average. Finally, we looked into how much a district resident with the median value home might be paying toward its recapture total. For that, we ran the median value of homes in the Austin district as of Aug. 8, 2016--$261,487--through the districts equation. Result: The median-value homeowner will be expected to pay $2,821 in M&O school taxes, of which $1,078 would be her or his share of the districts recapture payment. Barrett, the district spokesman, didnt question our math. He noted, though, that Watson referred to the average homeowner. Its fair, Barrett said by email, to use the variable that we do. Our ruling Watson said the average Austin homeowner pays about $1,300 to $1,400 just for recapture, as in funds ultimately spent in other districts. By the Austin districts analysis, the owners of a home at the districts average taxable value for 2016-17 stands to pay $1,355 in school property taxes toward the districts more than $400 million recapture payment for the year. We rate this 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. https://www.sharethefacts.co/share/f5103bc2-4b1f-4b8e-9d32-d1795f788004

true

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/alexandria-ocasio-cortez-hot-dog-on-stick/

Was Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez Once Fired from Hot Dog on a Stick?

Dan Evon

02/14/2019

Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez has been the subject of a number of false rumors and misleading memes ever since she won a seat as the youngest woman ever elected to the U.S. House of Representatives in 2018. One of many disparaging attacks on the freshman lawmaker came in the form of a photograph that supposedly showed her working at a "Hot Dog on a Stick" stand (a staple of shopping mall food services) and a piece of text claiming that she had been fired from that job for incompetence: The text of the meme stated that "Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez was fired from a Hot Dog on a Stick job in 2008 for incompetence. And the Democrats elected her to Congress." This meme did not relay a credible story about Congresswoman Ocasio-Cortez. In fact, it didn't even feature a photograph of her. This picture used in the meme was taken by Flickr user Michael Zampeli and showed a young woman named Stephanie preparing a batch of lemonade at a Hot Dog on a Stick outlet. While the image used in the meme has been degraded to the point where the name tag on the food worker's hat is illegible, the original photograph on Flickr clearly showed that the tag bore the name "Stephanie": Flickr It should also be noted that Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez was elected to Congress at the age of 29. If this meme were true (which it is not), the alleged firing would have occurred when she was just 18 years-old. This baseless meme is just the latest attack on the congresswoman. We've previously debunked rumors holding that Ocasio-Cortez had a credit score of 430 and a history of evictions, and that her Green New Deal legislation included a provision requiring that men recycle their urine. attack credit score urine Hess, Abigail. "29-Year-Old Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez Is Poised to Become the Youngest Woman in Congress." NBC News. 6 November 2018. Zampelli, Michael. "Hot Dog on a Stick." Flickr. 16 February 2008.

false

https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2010/nov/14/mark-warner/warner-says-deficit-would-grow-65-billion-if-we-ke/

$65 billion would be added to the deficit if we keep the cuts for people on the highest incomes.

Wes Hester

11/14/2010

Sen. Mark Warner is pitching a plan that would allow some Bush-era tax cuts to expire as scheduled and apply the additional tax revenue toward business tax cuts and incentives to spur the economy.Laying out his plan in anOp-Ed in the Financial Times, Warner notes that a Republican-Democrat compromise is being considered by the Obama administration that would temporarily extend all the tax breaks for two more years.However, this latter approach has problems beyond the $65bn that would be added to the deficit if we keep the cuts for people on the highest incomes, Warner writes. In Washington such temporary benefits also have a strange way of becoming permanent.Since Warners own plan hinges on reapplying the $65 billion in additional tax revenue that would come from allowing the tax breaks for the wealthy to expire, we thought it prudent to check the figure.Asked for the source, Warners communication director Kevin Hall pointed to estimates by the U.S. Treasury.Those projections show that allowing the cuts to expire along with adjustments to the capital gains and dividends would amount to $74.4 billion over two years.Heres why we mention that factor: If the Bush tax cuts are allowed to expire as scheduled, the top tax rate on long-term capital gains would rise from 15 percent to 20 percent. Dividends, which are currently taxed at 15 percent, would be taxed at the same rates as ordinary income with a top rate of 39.9 percent.But if we look exclusively at allowing the Bush cuts to expire, its $62.5 billion for the two years.Hall said Warner excludes the capital gains and dividends change because they might not be enacted, and capital gains isnt really what people talk about when they say income taxes.Gerald Prante, senior economist with the nonpartisan Tax Foundation, disagreed on that point. He also suggested looking at more recent figures from the Office of Management and Budget, noting that the Treasury numbers are based upon estimates that have since been revised.The OMB figures show that allowing the cuts for the wealthy to expire would generate more than $66 billion in tax revenue over two years. But thats including the adjustment to the capital gains.Without it, the two-year total is closer to $57 billion.Its worth noting, however, that the numbers from both sources look at the revenue to be gained from repealing the tax cuts permanently as opposed to eliminating them after a two-year extension.If there was only a two-year extension, the cost may not be $66 billion as [the] Joint Committee on Taxation/Treasury would assume tax planning that could change the costs, moving income between years, noted Prante. But overall, Warner's claim is fine...the $65 billion figure is not an exaggeration.So, if we use the Treasurys numbers, and look exclusively at the tax revenue raised by the two years worth of repealed cuts for the wealthy, then Warner is very close.Using the more recent OMB figures, hed be nearer by including the capital gains adjustment, but is still in the neighborhood.Accepting that pinpointing a number using evolving projections is not an exact science, we find Warners claim to be Mostly True.

true

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/did-jamaica-ban-k-pop/

Did Jamaica Ban K-Pop?

Dan Evon

06/09/2021

In June 2021, messages started to circulate on social media claiming that the country of Jamaica had banned K-Pop music. circulate on social media Jamaica has not banned K-pop. This claim originates with a satirical article that was published in 2018 on the website 8satire.com. In addition to having "satire" in the website name, 8satire.com (which previously published content as "8shit") also carries a disclaimer labeling its content as fiction: 8Shit is a satire news and humor website. All its content is fiction (except those posts under the serious category) and shouldnt be taken as real. All references, names and marks or institutions in this website are used as contextual elements, like in any novel or science-fiction story. It should also be noted that while Jamaica is most famous for Reggae music, Jamaicans enjoy a variety of different musical genres. The Jamaican Observer reported in 2019 that a K-Pop party hosted by the Embassy of the Republic of Korea in Jamaica was well-attended by young Jamaicans: Jamaican Observer reported Despite South Korea being approximately 13,473 km away from Jamaica, the K-pop wave has breached Jamaican shores. Last September the Embassy of the Republic of Korea in Jamaica hosted its annual K-Lovers' Party and Talent Competition and its inaugural Korean Language Speech Competition. The events were well-attended by young Jamaicans who openly expressed their love for Korean culture by singing along to popular K-pop tracks in the Korean language, dancing to the music, and participating in the two competitions. It was surprising to see the display of talent, particularly because there are not many places to learn Hangul, the Korean language, in Jamaica. The events represented the growing interest in Korean culture among the Jamaican youth.

false

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/legislature-solitaire/

Does This Photograph Show Legislators Playing Solitaire?

David Mikkelson

11/01/2009

A photograph which appears to show representatives playing solitaire on their laptops during a legislative session has certainly struck a chord among many viewers, undoubtedly because it seemingly confirms a widely held view of elected representatives as paid fat cats frittering away their time at frivolous pursuits rather than engaging in serious governmental problem solving efforts. The photograph is real, although it has erroneously been attributed to a number of different legislative bodies, from the U.S. Congress to a variety of state legislatures: This picture is worth a trillion $$ This was sent to me showing our Congress at work. It was said that this was while Congress was in session, appears to be true, and that it was during the health care debate. Even if it wasnt during the health care debate, if this is how they spend their time while they are supposed to be deciding on important issues, then I not only want a rebate on my tax dollars, I want to see some new people who actually care about what is happening and are paying close attention to the matter at hand sitting in those seats. Seems like we dont need to be sending them on any more expen$ive vacations, theyre already on one. It seems to me that if all we are doing is paying these congressmen and women a gigantic salary to sit in congressional session and play solitaire or whatever, its time to bring most of them back home by replacement. Democrats, republicans, independents it makes no difference. The bills theyre passing by playing solitaire instead of voting for us are taking away our freedoms with every key stroke Fire 'em all! Folks we need to forward this to everyone we know to get the word out about these people that are being paid by our tax dollars. Nothing else needs to be said. This is one of their THREE DAY WORK WEEKS that we all pay for. I am ready to start from the beginning by voting out all elected officials and not letting any of them stay in office for more than two terms. No more lifelong healthcare, retirement, voting in their own pay raises, taking perks on our taxes, etc. These are the folks that can't get the budget out by Oct. 1, Seriously!!! So, we've got a 30 day budget extension. Well, guess what, 30 days from now we will be in the same boat. I guess this makes it easy for the news 'reporters' as all they have to do is recycle the same headlines from this week and from 2 years ago. And these yo-yo's will still be playing SOLITAIRE!!! The picture was actually snapped in the Connecticut House of Representatives on 31 August 2009 by photographer Jessica Hill, while Rep. Larry Cafero was delivering a lengthy speech on the state budget. The photo was captioned by the Associated Press as follows: "House Minority Leader Lawrence F. Cafero Jr., R-Norwalk, far right, speaks while colleagues play solitaire on their computers as the House convenes to vote on a new budget for the fiscal year in the Capitol, in Hartford, Conn." Jessica Hill Ms. Hill described the reaction to her photograph as follows: I have received a great deal of mail and even a few calls from people all over the country over the last couple of months about the photograph I have as a lead off image on my member page. Some viewers have even gone so far to say they believe the photograph is not authentic. I take my profession very serious. There is nothing staged or altered in the photograph and it is insulting to me to have been accused of otherwise from people who do not even know me. Rep. Jack Hennessy (D-Bridgeport), one of two Connecticut legislators shown in the photo playing solitaire on a laptop computer (the other was Rep. Barbara Lambert [D-Milford]), issued a letter of apology to his constituents: apology It was certainly bad judgment for me to play a computer game even for just a few minutes during the final House session on the budget. I am embarrassed, and I apologize to each and every person in the North End and to people across the state. My actions were inexcusable. I do want my constituents to know that my poor judgment for a few moments in no way means I ignored your interests in representing you on this very serious matter. Over the past seven months, as a member of the General Assembly's Finance Committee, I have participated fully in the budget process and have played an active role in crafting a budget that provides the necessary services that our communities so desperately need while at the same time minimizing any negative impact on the city of Bridgeport and its people. I sincerely apologize to each of you. I look forward to having the continued privilege of representing you and your interests in Hartford. I thank you in advance for your understanding and have been humbled by those of you who have already expressed your understanding and forgiveness. Brown, DeNeen L. "For a Day, First Lady Becomes a Lunch Lady." The Washington Post. 6 March 2009. Sweet, Lynn. "Can Michelle Influence What We Eat, Too?" Chicago Sun-Times. 6 March 2009. Associated Press. "First Lady Puts Service on the Menu." The Australian. 7 March 2009.

true

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/legislature-solitaire/

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

David Mikkelson

11/01/2009

A photograph which appears to show representatives playing solitaire on their laptops during a legislative session has certainly struck a chord among many viewers, undoubtedly because it seemingly confirms a widely held view of elected representatives as paid fat cats frittering away their time at frivolous pursuits rather than engaging in serious governmental problem solving efforts. The photograph is real, although it has erroneously been attributed to a number of different legislative bodies, from the U.S. Congress to a variety of state legislatures: This picture is worth a trillion $$ This was sent to me showing our Congress at work. It was said that this was while Congress was in session, appears to be true, and that it was during the health care debate. Even if it wasnt during the health care debate, if this is how they spend their time while they are supposed to be deciding on important issues, then I not only want a rebate on my tax dollars, I want to see some new people who actually care about what is happening and are paying close attention to the matter at hand sitting in those seats. Seems like we dont need to be sending them on any more expen$ive vacations, theyre already on one. It seems to me that if all we are doing is paying these congressmen and women a gigantic salary to sit in congressional session and play solitaire or whatever, its time to bring most of them back home by replacement. Democrats, republicans, independents it makes no difference. The bills theyre passing by playing solitaire instead of voting for us are taking away our freedoms with every key stroke Fire 'em all! Folks we need to forward this to everyone we know to get the word out about these people that are being paid by our tax dollars. Nothing else needs to be said. This is one of their THREE DAY WORK WEEKS that we all pay for. I am ready to start from the beginning by voting out all elected officials and not letting any of them stay in office for more than two terms. No more lifelong healthcare, retirement, voting in their own pay raises, taking perks on our taxes, etc. These are the folks that can't get the budget out by Oct. 1, Seriously!!! So, we've got a 30 day budget extension. Well, guess what, 30 days from now we will be in the same boat. I guess this makes it easy for the news 'reporters' as all they have to do is recycle the same headlines from this week and from 2 years ago. And these yo-yo's will still be playing SOLITAIRE!!! The picture was actually snapped in the Connecticut House of Representatives on 31 August 2009 by photographer Jessica Hill, while Rep. Larry Cafero was delivering a lengthy speech on the state budget. The photo was captioned by the Associated Press as follows: "House Minority Leader Lawrence F. Cafero Jr., R-Norwalk, far right, speaks while colleagues play solitaire on their computers as the House convenes to vote on a new budget for the fiscal year in the Capitol, in Hartford, Conn." Jessica Hill Ms. Hill described the reaction to her photograph as follows: I have received a great deal of mail and even a few calls from people all over the country over the last couple of months about the photograph I have as a lead off image on my member page. Some viewers have even gone so far to say they believe the photograph is not authentic. I take my profession very serious. There is nothing staged or altered in the photograph and it is insulting to me to have been accused of otherwise from people who do not even know me. Rep. Jack Hennessy (D-Bridgeport), one of two Connecticut legislators shown in the photo playing solitaire on a laptop computer (the other was Rep. Barbara Lambert [D-Milford]), issued a letter of apology to his constituents: apology It was certainly bad judgment for me to play a computer game even for just a few minutes during the final House session on the budget. I am embarrassed, and I apologize to each and every person in the North End and to people across the state. My actions were inexcusable. I do want my constituents to know that my poor judgment for a few moments in no way means I ignored your interests in representing you on this very serious matter. Over the past seven months, as a member of the General Assembly's Finance Committee, I have participated fully in the budget process and have played an active role in crafting a budget that provides the necessary services that our communities so desperately need while at the same time minimizing any negative impact on the city of Bridgeport and its people. I sincerely apologize to each of you. I look forward to having the continued privilege of representing you and your interests in Hartford. I thank you in advance for your understanding and have been humbled by those of you who have already expressed your understanding and forgiveness. Brown, DeNeen L. "For a Day, First Lady Becomes a Lunch Lady." The Washington Post. 6 March 2009. Sweet, Lynn. "Can Michelle Influence What We Eat, Too?" Chicago Sun-Times. 6 March 2009. Associated Press. "First Lady Puts Service on the Menu." The Australian. 7 March 2009.

true

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/legislature-solitaire/

Is this photograph depicting legislators playing solitaire?

David Mikkelson

11/01/2009

A photograph which appears to show representatives playing solitaire on their laptops during a legislative session has certainly struck a chord among many viewers, undoubtedly because it seemingly confirms a widely held view of elected representatives as paid fat cats frittering away their time at frivolous pursuits rather than engaging in serious governmental problem solving efforts. The photograph is real, although it has erroneously been attributed to a number of different legislative bodies, from the U.S. Congress to a variety of state legislatures: This picture is worth a trillion $$ This was sent to me showing our Congress at work. It was said that this was while Congress was in session, appears to be true, and that it was during the health care debate. Even if it wasnt during the health care debate, if this is how they spend their time while they are supposed to be deciding on important issues, then I not only want a rebate on my tax dollars, I want to see some new people who actually care about what is happening and are paying close attention to the matter at hand sitting in those seats. Seems like we dont need to be sending them on any more expen$ive vacations, theyre already on one. It seems to me that if all we are doing is paying these congressmen and women a gigantic salary to sit in congressional session and play solitaire or whatever, its time to bring most of them back home by replacement. Democrats, republicans, independents it makes no difference. The bills theyre passing by playing solitaire instead of voting for us are taking away our freedoms with every key stroke Fire 'em all! Folks we need to forward this to everyone we know to get the word out about these people that are being paid by our tax dollars. Nothing else needs to be said. This is one of their THREE DAY WORK WEEKS that we all pay for. I am ready to start from the beginning by voting out all elected officials and not letting any of them stay in office for more than two terms. No more lifelong healthcare, retirement, voting in their own pay raises, taking perks on our taxes, etc. These are the folks that can't get the budget out by Oct. 1, Seriously!!! So, we've got a 30 day budget extension. Well, guess what, 30 days from now we will be in the same boat. I guess this makes it easy for the news 'reporters' as all they have to do is recycle the same headlines from this week and from 2 years ago. And these yo-yo's will still be playing SOLITAIRE!!! The picture was actually snapped in the Connecticut House of Representatives on 31 August 2009 by photographer Jessica Hill, while Rep. Larry Cafero was delivering a lengthy speech on the state budget. The photo was captioned by the Associated Press as follows: "House Minority Leader Lawrence F. Cafero Jr., R-Norwalk, far right, speaks while colleagues play solitaire on their computers as the House convenes to vote on a new budget for the fiscal year in the Capitol, in Hartford, Conn." Jessica Hill Ms. Hill described the reaction to her photograph as follows: I have received a great deal of mail and even a few calls from people all over the country over the last couple of months about the photograph I have as a lead off image on my member page. Some viewers have even gone so far to say they believe the photograph is not authentic. I take my profession very serious. There is nothing staged or altered in the photograph and it is insulting to me to have been accused of otherwise from people who do not even know me. Rep. Jack Hennessy (D-Bridgeport), one of two Connecticut legislators shown in the photo playing solitaire on a laptop computer (the other was Rep. Barbara Lambert [D-Milford]), issued a letter of apology to his constituents: apology It was certainly bad judgment for me to play a computer game even for just a few minutes during the final House session on the budget. I am embarrassed, and I apologize to each and every person in the North End and to people across the state. My actions were inexcusable. I do want my constituents to know that my poor judgment for a few moments in no way means I ignored your interests in representing you on this very serious matter. Over the past seven months, as a member of the General Assembly's Finance Committee, I have participated fully in the budget process and have played an active role in crafting a budget that provides the necessary services that our communities so desperately need while at the same time minimizing any negative impact on the city of Bridgeport and its people. I sincerely apologize to each of you. I look forward to having the continued privilege of representing you and your interests in Hartford. I thank you in advance for your understanding and have been humbled by those of you who have already expressed your understanding and forgiveness. Brown, DeNeen L. "For a Day, First Lady Becomes a Lunch Lady." The Washington Post. 6 March 2009. Sweet, Lynn. "Can Michelle Influence What We Eat, Too?" Chicago Sun-Times. 6 March 2009. Associated Press. "First Lady Puts Service on the Menu." The Australian. 7 March 2009.

true

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/fox-news-festivus-michael-cohen/

Did Fox News Discuss the 'War on Christmas' While Other Networks Covered Michael Cohen's Guilty Pleas?

Dan MacGuill

08/22/2018

On 21 August 2018, President Donald Trump's former lawyer Michael Cohen pleaded guilty to eight criminal charges, including multiple counts of tax evasion and violations of federal campaign finance laws. Cohen also appeared to implicate his former client in possible criminal wrongdoing, alleging that Trump, while a candidate, directed Cohen to pay hush money to two women who claimed to have had affairs with the future president. guilty 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. convicted Both the Manafort and Cohen cases came about due to 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 import. Elements of this criticism were accurate and proportionate in pointing out the striking differences between how most TV news networks reported on the developments and how Fox News covered them. differences However, one viral Twitter post appeared to contain a screen shot of Fox News contributor Tomi Lahren discussing the 'War on Christmas,' while other networks covered Cohen's guilty pleas. The chyron in the image read "TOMI: OBAMA CREATED FESTIVUS TO DESTROY CHRISTMAS." War on Christmas (Festivus is an unofficial holiday which acts as an alternative to Christmas, and originated in an episode of the sitcom "Seinfeld.") 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 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 which first appeared in December 2017. appeared Congrats, @BarackObama, on apparently creating Seinfeld pic.twitter.com/5g2t7eYDHj @BarackObama pic.twitter.com/5g2t7eYDHj jordan (@JordanUhl) December 24, 2017 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 December 24, 2017 The meme does indeed consist of a screenshot of a real Fox News appearance which 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 August 31, 2017 It's not clear whether those who posted the edited image in the context of Cohen and Manafort's legal travails in August 2018 intended to engage in satire, or to trick other internet users into believing Lahren really discussed Festivus on that day. Diane Sevenay, whose viral tweet was re-posted by "The Other 98%", is a comedy writer. writer As reported by Mashable, a satirical Fox/Cohen news coverage meme emerged on 21 August, with Twitter users taking turns to parody Fox News' content on the day of Cohen's guilty pleas: Mashable CNN - Cohen plea dealMSNBC - Cohen plea dealFox News - Are cats becoming too tall? Fred Delicious (@Fred_Delicious) August 21, 2018 August 21, 2018 CNN: Manafort guilty on 8 countsNYT: Manafort guilty of fraudAP: Cohen pleads guiltyFox News: Were the lobsters on the Titanic happy that it sank? #1 Rachel (@rachel) August 21, 2018 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 which read "Jury finds Manafort guilty on eight counts in fraud trial" before following up with a second one about the mistrial on the ten other charges: page Same topic. Different perspectives. ?? #Manafort pic.twitter.com/r2ZUgFSxDS #Manafort pic.twitter.com/r2ZUgFSxDS Push the Push (@pushthepush) August 21, 2018 August 21, 2018 Neumeister, Larry and Tom Hays. "Cohen Pleads Guilty, Implicates Trump in Hush-Money Scheme." Associated Press. 22 August 2018. Barakat, Matthew et al. "Ex-Trump Campaign Chairman Paul Manafort Guilty of 8 Charges." Associated Press. 22 August 2018. Stanley-Becker, Isaac. "In Trump's Right-Wing Media Universe, It Was a Day Like Any Other." The Washington Post. 22 August 2018. Sung, Morgan. "What Was Fox News Covering While Manafort and Cohen Were in Court? This Hilarious Meme Has Some Answers." Mashable. 21 August 2018.

false

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/fox-news-festivus-michael-cohen/

Was Fox News talking about the 'War on Christmas' while other networks focused on Michael Cohen's guilty pleas?

Dan MacGuill

08/22/2018

On 21 August 2018, President Donald Trump's former lawyer Michael Cohen pleaded guilty to eight criminal charges, including multiple counts of tax evasion and violations of federal campaign finance laws. Cohen also appeared to implicate his former client in possible criminal wrongdoing, alleging that Trump, while a candidate, directed Cohen to pay hush money to two women who claimed to have had affairs with the future president. guilty 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. convicted Both the Manafort and Cohen cases came about due to 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 import. Elements of this criticism were accurate and proportionate in pointing out the striking differences between how most TV news networks reported on the developments and how Fox News covered them. differences However, one viral Twitter post appeared to contain a screen shot of Fox News contributor Tomi Lahren discussing the 'War on Christmas,' while other networks covered Cohen's guilty pleas. The chyron in the image read "TOMI: OBAMA CREATED FESTIVUS TO DESTROY CHRISTMAS." War on Christmas (Festivus is an unofficial holiday which acts as an alternative to Christmas, and originated in an episode of the sitcom "Seinfeld.") 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 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 which first appeared in December 2017. appeared Congrats, @BarackObama, on apparently creating Seinfeld pic.twitter.com/5g2t7eYDHj @BarackObama pic.twitter.com/5g2t7eYDHj jordan (@JordanUhl) December 24, 2017 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 December 24, 2017 The meme does indeed consist of a screenshot of a real Fox News appearance which 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 August 31, 2017 It's not clear whether those who posted the edited image in the context of Cohen and Manafort's legal travails in August 2018 intended to engage in satire, or to trick other internet users into believing Lahren really discussed Festivus on that day. Diane Sevenay, whose viral tweet was re-posted by "The Other 98%", is a comedy writer. writer As reported by Mashable, a satirical Fox/Cohen news coverage meme emerged on 21 August, with Twitter users taking turns to parody Fox News' content on the day of Cohen's guilty pleas: Mashable CNN - Cohen plea dealMSNBC - Cohen plea dealFox News - Are cats becoming too tall? Fred Delicious (@Fred_Delicious) August 21, 2018 August 21, 2018 CNN: Manafort guilty on 8 countsNYT: Manafort guilty of fraudAP: Cohen pleads guiltyFox News: Were the lobsters on the Titanic happy that it sank? #1 Rachel (@rachel) August 21, 2018 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 which read "Jury finds Manafort guilty on eight counts in fraud trial" before following up with a second one about the mistrial on the ten other charges: page Same topic. Different perspectives. ?? #Manafort pic.twitter.com/r2ZUgFSxDS #Manafort pic.twitter.com/r2ZUgFSxDS Push the Push (@pushthepush) August 21, 2018 August 21, 2018 Neumeister, Larry and Tom Hays. "Cohen Pleads Guilty, Implicates Trump in Hush-Money Scheme." Associated Press. 22 August 2018. Barakat, Matthew et al. "Ex-Trump Campaign Chairman Paul Manafort Guilty of 8 Charges." Associated Press. 22 August 2018. Stanley-Becker, Isaac. "In Trump's Right-Wing Media Universe, It Was a Day Like Any Other." The Washington Post. 22 August 2018. Sung, Morgan. "What Was Fox News Covering While Manafort and Cohen Were in Court? This Hilarious Meme Has Some Answers." Mashable. 21 August 2018.

false

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/fox-news-festivus-michael-cohen/

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

Dan MacGuill

08/22/2018

On 21 August 2018, President Donald Trump's former lawyer Michael Cohen pleaded guilty to eight criminal charges, including multiple counts of tax evasion and violations of federal campaign finance laws. Cohen also appeared to implicate his former client in possible criminal wrongdoing, alleging that Trump, while a candidate, directed Cohen to pay hush money to two women who claimed to have had affairs with the future president. guilty 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. convicted Both the Manafort and Cohen cases came about due to 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 import. Elements of this criticism were accurate and proportionate in pointing out the striking differences between how most TV news networks reported on the developments and how Fox News covered them. differences However, one viral Twitter post appeared to contain a screen shot of Fox News contributor Tomi Lahren discussing the 'War on Christmas,' while other networks covered Cohen's guilty pleas. The chyron in the image read "TOMI: OBAMA CREATED FESTIVUS TO DESTROY CHRISTMAS." War on Christmas (Festivus is an unofficial holiday which acts as an alternative to Christmas, and originated in an episode of the sitcom "Seinfeld.") 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 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 which first appeared in December 2017. appeared Congrats, @BarackObama, on apparently creating Seinfeld pic.twitter.com/5g2t7eYDHj @BarackObama pic.twitter.com/5g2t7eYDHj jordan (@JordanUhl) December 24, 2017 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 December 24, 2017 The meme does indeed consist of a screenshot of a real Fox News appearance which 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 August 31, 2017 It's not clear whether those who posted the edited image in the context of Cohen and Manafort's legal travails in August 2018 intended to engage in satire, or to trick other internet users into believing Lahren really discussed Festivus on that day. Diane Sevenay, whose viral tweet was re-posted by "The Other 98%", is a comedy writer. writer As reported by Mashable, a satirical Fox/Cohen news coverage meme emerged on 21 August, with Twitter users taking turns to parody Fox News' content on the day of Cohen's guilty pleas: Mashable CNN - Cohen plea dealMSNBC - Cohen plea dealFox News - Are cats becoming too tall? Fred Delicious (@Fred_Delicious) August 21, 2018 August 21, 2018 CNN: Manafort guilty on 8 countsNYT: Manafort guilty of fraudAP: Cohen pleads guiltyFox News: Were the lobsters on the Titanic happy that it sank? #1 Rachel (@rachel) August 21, 2018 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 which read "Jury finds Manafort guilty on eight counts in fraud trial" before following up with a second one about the mistrial on the ten other charges: page Same topic. Different perspectives. ?? #Manafort pic.twitter.com/r2ZUgFSxDS #Manafort pic.twitter.com/r2ZUgFSxDS Push the Push (@pushthepush) August 21, 2018 August 21, 2018 Neumeister, Larry and Tom Hays. "Cohen Pleads Guilty, Implicates Trump in Hush-Money Scheme." Associated Press. 22 August 2018. Barakat, Matthew et al. "Ex-Trump Campaign Chairman Paul Manafort Guilty of 8 Charges." Associated Press. 22 August 2018. Stanley-Becker, Isaac. "In Trump's Right-Wing Media Universe, It Was a Day Like Any Other." The Washington Post. 22 August 2018. Sung, Morgan. "What Was Fox News Covering While Manafort and Cohen Were in Court? This Hilarious Meme Has Some Answers." Mashable. 21 August 2018.

false

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/fox-news-festivus-michael-cohen/

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

Dan MacGuill

08/22/2018

On 21 August 2018, President Donald Trump's former lawyer Michael Cohen pleaded guilty to eight criminal charges, including multiple counts of tax evasion and violations of federal campaign finance laws. Cohen also appeared to implicate his former client in possible criminal wrongdoing, alleging that Trump, while a candidate, directed Cohen to pay hush money to two women who claimed to have had affairs with the future president. guilty 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. convicted Both the Manafort and Cohen cases came about due to 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 import. Elements of this criticism were accurate and proportionate in pointing out the striking differences between how most TV news networks reported on the developments and how Fox News covered them. differences However, one viral Twitter post appeared to contain a screen shot of Fox News contributor Tomi Lahren discussing the 'War on Christmas,' while other networks covered Cohen's guilty pleas. The chyron in the image read "TOMI: OBAMA CREATED FESTIVUS TO DESTROY CHRISTMAS." War on Christmas (Festivus is an unofficial holiday which acts as an alternative to Christmas, and originated in an episode of the sitcom "Seinfeld.") 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 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 which first appeared in December 2017. appeared Congrats, @BarackObama, on apparently creating Seinfeld pic.twitter.com/5g2t7eYDHj @BarackObama pic.twitter.com/5g2t7eYDHj jordan (@JordanUhl) December 24, 2017 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 December 24, 2017 The meme does indeed consist of a screenshot of a real Fox News appearance which 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 August 31, 2017 It's not clear whether those who posted the edited image in the context of Cohen and Manafort's legal travails in August 2018 intended to engage in satire, or to trick other internet users into believing Lahren really discussed Festivus on that day. Diane Sevenay, whose viral tweet was re-posted by "The Other 98%", is a comedy writer. writer As reported by Mashable, a satirical Fox/Cohen news coverage meme emerged on 21 August, with Twitter users taking turns to parody Fox News' content on the day of Cohen's guilty pleas: Mashable CNN - Cohen plea dealMSNBC - Cohen plea dealFox News - Are cats becoming too tall? Fred Delicious (@Fred_Delicious) August 21, 2018 August 21, 2018 CNN: Manafort guilty on 8 countsNYT: Manafort guilty of fraudAP: Cohen pleads guiltyFox News: Were the lobsters on the Titanic happy that it sank? #1 Rachel (@rachel) August 21, 2018 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 which read "Jury finds Manafort guilty on eight counts in fraud trial" before following up with a second one about the mistrial on the ten other charges: page Same topic. Different perspectives. ?? #Manafort pic.twitter.com/r2ZUgFSxDS #Manafort pic.twitter.com/r2ZUgFSxDS Push the Push (@pushthepush) August 21, 2018 August 21, 2018 Neumeister, Larry and Tom Hays. "Cohen Pleads Guilty, Implicates Trump in Hush-Money Scheme." Associated Press. 22 August 2018. Barakat, Matthew et al. "Ex-Trump Campaign Chairman Paul Manafort Guilty of 8 Charges." Associated Press. 22 August 2018. Stanley-Becker, Isaac. "In Trump's Right-Wing Media Universe, It Was a Day Like Any Other." The Washington Post. 22 August 2018. Sung, Morgan. "What Was Fox News Covering While Manafort and Cohen Were in Court? This Hilarious Meme Has Some Answers." Mashable. 21 August 2018.

false

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/nyt-breathe-like-a-baby-for-stress/

Did the NYT Tell People to 'Breathe Like a Baby' to Relieve Election Day Stress?

Bethania Palma

11/09/2022

On Nov. 8, 2022, the day of much-anticipated midterm elections, The New York Times published a list of tips to help particularly stressed election watchers. A couple of those tips earned the Times a round of jeering from right-wing media and social media users. right-wing media users Yes, the tipscame from the Times. Some seem straight forward enough. Limit scrolling on your phone for updates, take a short walk, for example. A couple of them went viral for the wrong reasons, including "breathe like a baby" and face-plunge into ice water. the tips The list of tips is titled "5 ways to soothe election stress" with pointers that include, "Breathe like a baby. Focus on expanding your belly as you breathe, which can send more oxygen to the brain." Here's a screenshot of the list, as posted on the social media platform Twitter: posted (Screenshot, @nytimes Twitter page) The phrase "breathe like a baby" may sound infantilizing, but the breathing practice described in the list above is a technique known as diaphragmatic breathing, sometimes called belly breathing, and it is known to ease anxiety and stress, whether it's from the watching election returns or anything else. known Licensed clinical psychologist Dianne Grande wrote in Psychology Today that the technique works because "it signals the brain and body to relax." That's because it stimulates the body's parasympathetic nervous system, known as the "rest and digest" aspect of the nervous system think of it as the opposite of the "fight or flight" response, per the University of California, Los Angeles' Health blog. stimulates We can't say we found much in the way of reputable medical sources to support the idea that going face first into a bowl of ice will help with anxiety, election-related or otherwise, though Psychology Today says research does support the idea that hot and cold baths can help with mood. says "Relaxation Therapies," Integrative Digestive Health & Wellness, UCLA Health. https://www.uclahealth.org/medical-services/gastro/wellness/wellness-approaches/relaxation-therapies#:~:text=Diaphragmatic%20breathing,rest%20and%20digest)%20nervous%20system. Accessed 9 Nov. 2022. Solan, Matthew. "Ease Anxiety and Stress: Take a (Belly) Breather." Harvard Health, 26 Apr. 2019, https://www.health.harvard.edu/blog/ease-anxiety-and-stress-take-a-belly-breather-2019042616521. Grande, Dianne. "The Simplest Stress Management Skill." Psychology Today, 31 July 2021,https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/in-it-together/202107/the-simplest-stress-management-skill.

true

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/medical-device-excise-tax/

Medical Device Excise Tax

David Mikkelson

01/08/2013

Claim: "Obamacare" provisions imposed a 2.3% excise tax as of 1 January 2013. : Health care legislation imposed a 2.3% excise tax on the sale of medical devices as of 1 January 2013. The Cabela's chain (and some other stores) mistakenly applied medical excise taxes to some non-medical purchases made on 1 January 2013. The medical excise tax applies to non-medical items such as archery and sport fishing equipment, tires, coal, and "gas guzzling" automobiles. Example: [Collected on Facebook, January 2013] OK.... Here comes some of those Obama care taxes on Jan 1, 2013. Soon every purchase you make, there will more taxes. On 103.98 I was charged 8.58 for Texas state taxes. And then Obama care medical tax another 2.39. So the more you spend, the more goes to the "so called free Obama care". Let the ObamaCare fun begin! Clothing now counts as being taxed under the ObamaCare because it "alters the function of the body" See blurb below. I wish more companies would have the balls to do it the way Cabella's is, but most will bury it the cost of the product. The new law provides that any device defined in 201(h) of the Federal Food, Drug, & Cosmetic Act (FFDCA) that is intended for humans will be taxable. The FFDCA is written very broadly to include instruments, machines, implants and in vitro reagents, among others. 201(h) also includes associated parts and accessories, which are (1) recognized in the official National Formulary, or the United States Pharmacopeia, or any supplement to them; (2) intended for use in the diagnosis, cure, treatment or prevention of disease or other conditions, or (3) intended to affect the structure or any function of the body, excluding products relying on a chemical reaction within or on the body or being metabolized to achieve their primary intended purposes. Included is a copy of a Cabela's receipt that charges a Medical Excise Tax of $11.97. This is what the guy said he bought: 3 pair of hiker socks2 safe door pocket organizers1 pair female boots1 female jacket1 female workout pant1 Lyman sonic brass cleaner The receipt total was $520.82. 2.3% of that is................................ drum roll please.......................................... $11.97. Origins: One of the provisions in the reconciliation bill (HR 4872) passed in conjunction with the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA) health care legislation, also known as "Obamacare," instituteda 2.3%tax HR 4872 onthefirstsaleofmedicaldevicesas of 1 January2013. (Technically the medical device tax is an excise tax which applies only to manufacturers, producers, or importers and is not to be paid directly by consumers, but the costs of such taxes are typically passed along to consumers through higher prices.) The text of the legislation states that the roster of taxable medical devices does not include "eyeglasses, contact lenses, hearing aids, and any other medical device determined to be of a type that is generally purchased by the general public at retail for individual use." Anticipating what constitutes a "taxable medical device" under this legislation can be rather confusing, as explained in a July 2012 tax adviser article. tax adviser Under Sec. 4191(b)(1), a taxable medical device is a device, as defined in Section 201(h) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA) (21 U.S.C. 321(h)), that is intended for humans. The latter provision defines device as an instrument, apparatus, implement, machine, contrivance, implant, in vitro reagent, or other similar or related article including any component, part, or accessory that meets certain requirements. The device must be: (1) Recognized in the official National Formulary, or the United States Pharmacopeia, or any supplement to them;(2) Intended for use in the diagnosis of disease or other conditions, or in the cure, mitigation, treatment, or prevention of disease in man or other animals; or(3) Intended to affect the structure or any function of the body of man or other animals. The device must also not achieve its primary intended purposes through chemical action within or on the body of man or other animals and not depend upon being metabolized for the achievement of its primary intended purposes. Sec. 4191(b)(1) limits the definition for purposes of the tax to devices intended for humans. Under what is commonly called the retail exemption, the tax provision does not apply to eyeglasses, contact lenses, hearing aids, and any other medical device determined by Treasury to be of a type that is commonly purchased by the general public at retail for individual use. According to proposed regulations issued by the Internal Revenue Service in February 2012, the medical items that would be exempt from the tax because they are "commonly purchased by the general public at retail for individual use" should be determined as: proposed regulations A device will be considered to be of a type generally purchased by the general public at retail for individual use if it is regularly available for purchase and use by individual consumers who are not medical professionals, and if the design of the device demonstrates that it is not primarily intended for use in a medical institution or office or by a medical professional. The following factors suggest that a device is of a type that is regularly available for purchase and use by individual consumers who are not medical professionals: (A) Consumers who are not medical professionals can purchase the device through retail businesses that also sell items other than medical devices, such as drug stores, supermarkets, and similar vendors.(B) Consumers who are not medical professionals can use the device safely and effectively for its intended medical purpose with minimal or no training from a medical professional.(C) The device is classified by the FDA under Subpart D of 21 CFR Part 890(Physical Medicine Devices). Why the medical device excise tax should have been applied to all the items listed in the receipts pictured above was something of a mystery to viewers when these images were originally circulated back in January 2013. Although some states allow sellers to pass along the expense of the new medical device excise tax to customers by "separately stating a line item charge on the invoice or receipt given to their customers for 'Federal Excise Tax' or something similar,"the vendor in this case, Cabela's, is a retailer of hunting, fishing, camping and related outdoor recreation merchandise not known for selling medical devices, and the items listed in the receipts (such as a Ruger Attache Pistol Case) would not seem by any stretch of the imagination to fit FDA definitions of medical devices. Cabela's Ruger Attache Pistol Case The answer was that vendors typically use upgraded sales software at the beginning of each year which is programmed to handle changes in tax laws that have just gone into effect, and on 1 January 2013 Cabela's found that their upgraded software was improperly applying the medical device excise tax to all purchases rather than just those of qualifying items: A companywide glitch in Cabela's cash register system that added a 2.3 percent Medical Excise Tax to customers' purchases everything from boots to bullets was an error and will be refunded, a company spokesman said. The error was discovered last week after consumers in several states notified the company that the surcharge appeared on their sales receipt and had been applied to all of their purchases. "It was a glitch in the system, said Cabela's spokesman Joe Arterburn said. The error was limited to transactions that occurred Jan. 1 and was caught that same day by the Sidney, Neb.-based hunting and outdoor outfitter. Images of Cabela's sales receipts showing the surcharge have appeared on various websites prompting several rumors. One rumor alleged that retailers had begun passing their employees' insurance coverage costs onto consumers in the form of a medical excise tax. Other sites claimed that because the tax had been applied to shoes and shirts that clothing and footwear are now considered medical devices under the new law. Both speculations are false. Some readers have incorrectly interpreted the listing of federal excise taxes on forms of sport fishing equipment, archery equipment, tires, coal, and gas guzzlers in Chapter 5 of IRS Publication 510 as evidence that those items are now being taxed as medical devices. This interpretation is incorrect: those items are all subject to excise taxes that were enacted well prior to, and have nothing to do with, the excise tax on medical devices created by the PPACA. The excise taxes on sport fishing equipment, for example, were enacted in the 1950s through the Sport Fish Restoration Act, and the excise tax on archery equipment was enacted in 1975 to help support the Wildlife Restoration Program. Publication 510 Sport Fish Restoration Act Wildlife Restoration Program Last updated: 28 June 2013

true

https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2018/mar/08/noah-smith/has-automation-driven-job-losses-steel-industry/

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

Louis Jacobson

03/08/2018

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

true

https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2008/aug/29/sarah-palin/each-alaskan-got-1200/

When oil and gas prices sent state revenues up, Palin sent a large share of that revenue directly back to the people of Alaska.

Angie Drobnic Holan

08/29/2008

John McCain chose Sarah Palin, governor of Alaska, as his running mate for the 2008 election. Palin joined the ticket at an event in Dayton, Ohio, on Aug. 29, 2008, delivering a speech discussing her biography and qualifications to be vice president. When she entered public office, she said her goals were to stop wasteful spending, and cut property taxes, and put the people first. When oil and gas prices went up so dramatically and the state revenues followed with that increase, I sent a large share of that revenue directly back to the people of Alaska, Palin said of her accomplishments as governor. We looked into the record and found that Palin did push for a measure to return state surplus revenue back to residents of mineral-rich Alaska. On Aug. 7, 2008, the Alaska Legislature approved a measure she promoted that would send $1,200 to every Alaskan who qualifies. That comes to about $741-million for state residents, out of an estimated $2.7-billion in increased oil taxes and royalties. Purists might argue that the rebates only come to 35 percent of the estimated excess revenue. But still, it seems fair to us to describe a $741-million outlay as large, and $1,200 per person is a nice windfall. We find Palin's statement True.

true

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/costco-coupon-scam/

Costco 'Anniversary' $75 Coupon Scam

David Mikkelson

03/12/2012

In November 2019, a survey scam was spread via Facebook purporting to offer free $75 Costco coupons in celebration of the company's anniversary to users who clicked particular links and then followed the instructions found there: The scam provided links which led to web pages (not operated or sponsored by Costco) displaying a Bud Light logo along with entreaties to spread the scam further by sharing the pages and writing thank you in the comments field: Users who followed instructions were then led into a set of pages prompting them to input a fair amount of personal information (including name, address, e-mail address, date of birth, and phone numbers), complete a lengthy series of surveys, and finally sign up (and commit to paying) for at least six "Reward Offers" that usually involve applying for a credit card or signing up for some sort of paid subscription service. Those intent upon snapping up free stuff via such lures should keep in mind that there is often a further downside to the process beyond their personal disappointment and the financial enrichment of the scam artists preying upon their gullibility: All too often such adventures in clickjacking also result in the download of trojans and other viruses onto the computers of those looking to score the promised goodies. Costco themselves says of such schemes that: There are numerous posts circulating on Facebook stating that we are giving away $100 to $1,000 Costco Cash Cards to all Facebook users. While we love our fans and members, Costco is not giving away Costco Cash Cards to Facebook users, and is not associated with this program. The Costco $150 coupon offer is a variation of the company anniversary survey scam, a ploy that also depends on the unwary unwittingly promoting the phony coupon to their social media friends: anniversary survey scam These web pages (which are not operated or sponsored by the companies they reference) typically ask the unwary to click what appear to be Facebook share buttons and post comments to the scammers site (which is really a ruse to dupe users into spreading the scam by sharing it with all of their Facebook friends). Those who follow such instructions are then led into a set of pages prompting them to input a fair amount of personal information (including name, age, address, and phone numbers), complete a lengthy series of surveys, and finally sign up (and commit to paying) for at least two Reward Offers (e.g., Netflix subscriptions, credit report monitoring services, prepaid credit cards)[.]

false

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/irs-notice-2/

IRS Notice

David Mikkelson

11/28/2006

Claim: The IRS is sending out unsolicited e-mail providing taxpayers with a web form to use to check on the status of their federal income tax returns and refunds. Status: False. Examples: [Collected on the Internet, 2005] You filed your tax return and you're expecting a refund. You have just one question and you want the answer now - Where's My Refund? Access this secure Web site to find out if the IRS received your return and whether your refund was processed and sent to you. New program enhancements allow you to begin a refund trace online if you have not received your check within 28 days from the original IRS mailing date. Some of you will also be able to correct or change your mailing address within this application if your check was returned to us as undelivered by the U.S. Postal Service. "Where's My Refund?" will prompt you when these features are available for your situation. To get to your refund status, you'll need to provide the following information as shown on your return: Your first and last name Your Social Security Number (or IRS Individual Taxpayer Identification Number) Your Credit Card Information Okay now, Where's My Refund? Where's My Refund? Under the Privacy Act of 1974, we must tell you that our legal right to ask for information is Internal Revenue Code Sections 6001, 6011, 6012(a) and their regulations. They say that you must furnish us with records or statements for any tax for which you are liable, including the withholding of taxes by your employer.We ask for information to carry out the Internal Revenue laws of the United States, and you are required to give us this information. We may give the information to the Department of Justice for civil and criminal litigation, other federal agencies, states, cities, and the District of Columbia for use in administering their tax laws.If you don't provide this information, or provide fraudulent information, the law provides that you may be charged penalties and, in certain cases, you may be subject to criminal prosecution. We may also have to disallow the exemptions, exclusions, credits, deductions, or adjustments shown on the tax return. This could make your tax higher or delay any refund. Interest may also be charged. Origins: In December 2005 we began seeing copies of the above-reproduced phishing scam, an e-mail purporting to come from the Internal Revenue Service (sent with a return address of <[email protected]>) and offering consumers a link to a handy web form they can use to check the status of their federal income tax returns and refunds. Of course, the web form the recipient is directed to after clicking on the provided link is not from the real IRS web site, but an imitation hosted on a server in a foreign country (Mexico in the example we received) that harvests information scammers can use for identity and financial theft by prompting the user to input all sorts of personal data (name, Social Security number, address) as well as other financial information (credit card number, ATM PIN). phishing The IRS does not ask for personal identifying or financial information via unsolicited e-mail, and in no case would the IRS need information such as credit card numbers or ATM PINs in order to respond to inquiries about the status of tax returns or refunds. Taxpayers can contact the IRS via telephone at 1-800-829-1040 for questions regarding their taxes, or they can visit the genuine Where's My Refund? page on the IRS web site. Where's My Refund? Last updated: 20 December 2005 Sources: Tri-Town News [Howell, NJ]. "IRS Warns of E-Mail Scam." 8 December 2005.

false

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/irs-notice-2/

Rephrase this document: IRS Notification

David Mikkelson

11/28/2006

Claim: The IRS is sending out unsolicited e-mail providing taxpayers with a web form to use to check on the status of their federal income tax returns and refunds. Status: False. Examples: [Collected on the Internet, 2005] You filed your tax return and you're expecting a refund. You have just one question and you want the answer now - Where's My Refund? Access this secure Web site to find out if the IRS received your return and whether your refund was processed and sent to you. New program enhancements allow you to begin a refund trace online if you have not received your check within 28 days from the original IRS mailing date. Some of you will also be able to correct or change your mailing address within this application if your check was returned to us as undelivered by the U.S. Postal Service. "Where's My Refund?" will prompt you when these features are available for your situation. To get to your refund status, you'll need to provide the following information as shown on your return: Your first and last name Your Social Security Number (or IRS Individual Taxpayer Identification Number) Your Credit Card Information Okay now, Where's My Refund? Where's My Refund? Under the Privacy Act of 1974, we must tell you that our legal right to ask for information is Internal Revenue Code Sections 6001, 6011, 6012(a) and their regulations. They say that you must furnish us with records or statements for any tax for which you are liable, including the withholding of taxes by your employer.We ask for information to carry out the Internal Revenue laws of the United States, and you are required to give us this information. We may give the information to the Department of Justice for civil and criminal litigation, other federal agencies, states, cities, and the District of Columbia for use in administering their tax laws.If you don't provide this information, or provide fraudulent information, the law provides that you may be charged penalties and, in certain cases, you may be subject to criminal prosecution. We may also have to disallow the exemptions, exclusions, credits, deductions, or adjustments shown on the tax return. This could make your tax higher or delay any refund. Interest may also be charged. Origins: In December 2005 we began seeing copies of the above-reproduced phishing scam, an e-mail purporting to come from the Internal Revenue Service (sent with a return address of <[email protected]>) and offering consumers a link to a handy web form they can use to check the status of their federal income tax returns and refunds. Of course, the web form the recipient is directed to after clicking on the provided link is not from the real IRS web site, but an imitation hosted on a server in a foreign country (Mexico in the example we received) that harvests information scammers can use for identity and financial theft by prompting the user to input all sorts of personal data (name, Social Security number, address) as well as other financial information (credit card number, ATM PIN). phishing The IRS does not ask for personal identifying or financial information via unsolicited e-mail, and in no case would the IRS need information such as credit card numbers or ATM PINs in order to respond to inquiries about the status of tax returns or refunds. Taxpayers can contact the IRS via telephone at 1-800-829-1040 for questions regarding their taxes, or they can visit the genuine Where's My Refund? page on the IRS web site. Where's My Refund? Last updated: 20 December 2005 Sources: Tri-Town News [Howell, NJ]. "IRS Warns of E-Mail Scam." 8 December 2005.

false

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/irs-notice-2/

Paraphrase: Communication from the Internal Revenue Service (IRS)

David Mikkelson

11/28/2006

Claim: The IRS is sending out unsolicited e-mail providing taxpayers with a web form to use to check on the status of their federal income tax returns and refunds. Status: False. Examples: [Collected on the Internet, 2005] You filed your tax return and you're expecting a refund. You have just one question and you want the answer now - Where's My Refund? Access this secure Web site to find out if the IRS received your return and whether your refund was processed and sent to you. New program enhancements allow you to begin a refund trace online if you have not received your check within 28 days from the original IRS mailing date. Some of you will also be able to correct or change your mailing address within this application if your check was returned to us as undelivered by the U.S. Postal Service. "Where's My Refund?" will prompt you when these features are available for your situation. To get to your refund status, you'll need to provide the following information as shown on your return: Your first and last name Your Social Security Number (or IRS Individual Taxpayer Identification Number) Your Credit Card Information Okay now, Where's My Refund? Where's My Refund? Under the Privacy Act of 1974, we must tell you that our legal right to ask for information is Internal Revenue Code Sections 6001, 6011, 6012(a) and their regulations. They say that you must furnish us with records or statements for any tax for which you are liable, including the withholding of taxes by your employer.We ask for information to carry out the Internal Revenue laws of the United States, and you are required to give us this information. We may give the information to the Department of Justice for civil and criminal litigation, other federal agencies, states, cities, and the District of Columbia for use in administering their tax laws.If you don't provide this information, or provide fraudulent information, the law provides that you may be charged penalties and, in certain cases, you may be subject to criminal prosecution. We may also have to disallow the exemptions, exclusions, credits, deductions, or adjustments shown on the tax return. This could make your tax higher or delay any refund. Interest may also be charged. Origins: In December 2005 we began seeing copies of the above-reproduced phishing scam, an e-mail purporting to come from the Internal Revenue Service (sent with a return address of <[email protected]>) and offering consumers a link to a handy web form they can use to check the status of their federal income tax returns and refunds. Of course, the web form the recipient is directed to after clicking on the provided link is not from the real IRS web site, but an imitation hosted on a server in a foreign country (Mexico in the example we received) that harvests information scammers can use for identity and financial theft by prompting the user to input all sorts of personal data (name, Social Security number, address) as well as other financial information (credit card number, ATM PIN). phishing The IRS does not ask for personal identifying or financial information via unsolicited e-mail, and in no case would the IRS need information such as credit card numbers or ATM PINs in order to respond to inquiries about the status of tax returns or refunds. Taxpayers can contact the IRS via telephone at 1-800-829-1040 for questions regarding their taxes, or they can visit the genuine Where's My Refund? page on the IRS web site. Where's My Refund? Last updated: 20 December 2005 Sources: Tri-Town News [Howell, NJ]. "IRS Warns of E-Mail Scam." 8 December 2005.

false

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/facebook-listens/

Facebook Listens?

David Mikkelson

05/27/2014

In May 2014 Facebook announced they would be rolling out an "Identify TV and Music" feature that would allow users who access the social media platform through their cell phones to identify and tag music or television programs playing in their area. When a user begins to compose a status update, Facebook will activate the phone's microphone, filter out live conversations, and try to detect and identify audio programming. If a matching song is found, Facebook will include a sample of the music in the status; if a matching television program is found, Facebook will label the specific season and episode "so you can avoid any spoilers": announced When writing a status update if you choose to turn the feature on you'll have the option to use your phone's microphone to identify what song is playing or what show or movie is on TV. That means if you want to share that you're listening to your favorite Beyonc track or watching the season premiere of Game of Thrones, you can do it quickly and easily, without typing. If you share music, your friends can see a 30-second preview of the song. For TV shows, the story in News Feed will highlight the specific season and episode youre watching, so you can avoid any spoilers and join in conversations with your friends after you've caught up. Facebook said the digital fingerprinting feature would be opt-in only, meaning users would have to give the program permission to start. Once activated, an icon on the face of the phone would indicate that the microphone was active and the phone was listening. Users who opted in could still choose to turn off the feature on a post-by-post basis. (Audio fingerprinting would only be available in the United States and only via iOS and Android mobile apps; it would not function if Facebook were accessed through a browser.) Facebook's announcement was later updated to address rumors that the new app would listen in on, and store, user conversations: Myth: The feature listens to and stores your conversations. Fact: Nope, no matter how interesting your conversation, this feature does not store sound or recordings. Facebook isn't listening to or storing your conversations. Here's how it works: if you choose to turn the feature on, when you write a status update, the app converts any sound into an audio fingerprint on your phone. This fingerprint is sent to our servers to try and match it against our database of audio and TV fingerprints. By design, we do not store fingerprints from your device for any amount of time. And in any event, the fingerprints can't be reversed into the original audio because they don't contain enough information. Myth: Facebook is always listening using your microphone. Fact: Nope, if you choose to turn this feature on, it will only use your microphone (for 15 seconds) when you're actually writing a status update to try and match music and TV. Two years later, a similar rumor erupted, holding that Facebook was listening to user conversations in order to better target advertising and content to them. rumor Griffin, Andrew. "Facebook Is Using Smartphones To Listen To What People Say, Professor Suggests." The Independent. 31May 2016. Hill, Kashmir. "Facebook Wants To Listen in on What You're Doing." Forbes. 22 May 2014. Kleinman, Zoe. "Facebook 'Listening' Claim Denied By Professor" BBC. 3June2016. Tate, Ryan. "Facebook Will Soon Detect What You're Watching and Listening To." Wired. 21 May 2014. Tate, Ryan. "Why Facebook Spent a Year Learning to Listen in on Your TV Shows." Wired. 22 May 2014. Facebook Newsroom. "Facebook Does Not Use Your Phones Microphone for Ads or News Feed Stories." 2 June 2016.

false

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/negligent-homicide-speeding-crash/

Was a Woman Charged While Off-Duty Cop Who Killed Her Child Was Not?

David Mikkelson

05/18/2020

On October 12, 2017 in Baton Rouge, Louisiana, a Nissan SUV carrying four adults and four children was making a left turn onto Florline Boulevard at a green light when a Corvette driven by a speeding off-duty police officer traveling at an estimated 94 MPH in a 50 MPH zone smashed into its passenger side, killing a 1-year-old girl who was ejected from the SUV. As noted in a meme circulated on social media in the aftermath of the accident, the officer behind the wheel of the Corvette, Christopher Manuel, was not penalized (even though he was driving nearly double the speed limit), while the dead girl's mother (who was a passenger in and not the driver of the SUV), 21-year-old Brittany Stephens, was charged with negligent homicide for not properly securing the child in a car seat: As is often the case, while the meme provided factual information, it also ignored the many complexities of this case and instead focused on a single, outrage-inducing aspect of it. The primary context omitted here is that both Manuel and Stephens were initially arrested on suspicion of negligent homicide, but prosecutors -- who deliberated for two years -- ultimately felt they could not determine who was more at fault for the child's death, nor could they meet the burden of proof needed to successfully bring criminal charges against Manuel. In the end, they took no action against either party. The crash occurred when the driver of the SUV turned left onto Florline Boulevard while Manuel was traveling northbound on Airline Highway. According to Manuel's arrest report, investigators estimated his vehicle's speed at the time of the accident at 94 MPH based on calculations from data recorded by his car's airbag control module. Both cars had green lights, so the primary issue was determining whether the SUV's driver failed to yield, or whether the Corvette's excessive speed would have made it extremely difficult or impossible for the driver to safely judge the turn. Investigators came down on the side of the latter, and Manuel filed a civil suit alleging that the driver of the SUV was at fault for turning "suddenly and without warning" into his lane. Additional complicating factors were that the driver of the SUV was unlicensed, the vehicle was carrying too many occupants, and no one in the SUV was wearing a seatbelt. Police also stated that Stephens did not properly secure her daughter's car seat, instead placing it on the SUV's center console between the two front seats, which is considered an act of "gross negligence" that was a "contributing factor in the death" of the child. gross negligence As the Baton Rouge Advocate reported, the district attorney felt his office could not fairly determine whom, if anyone, to prosecute: reported East Baton Rouge District Attorney Hillar Moore III said his office decided not to bring charges against either Manuel or Stephens, reasoning that both had contributed to the tragic outcome even though "one suffered a bigger loss." "It becomes a conundrum of 'Who's at fault?'" Moore said. "Do you really want to charge the mom with her child's death? Of course not. Which act truly caused the death, speeding or lack of proper restraint? Is one more culpable than the other? We couldn't really determine that based on the facts of the case and what the law requires." This is a trying decision, Moore said. It weighed on me as a parent with children. One aspect of the controversy surrounding the crash was Manuel's status as a member of the Baton Rouge Police Department, which some critics maintained may have influenced the DA's decision not to prosecute a criminal case against him. Another was that no one involved in the accident was even cited: [Marcus Allen, an attorney] volunteered to represent Stephens for free after news of her case went viral within some circles online. He said Moore's "unilateral decision" not to prosecute "has the look of impropriety" because the case involves a law enforcement officer and argued prosecutors could have avoided that by going forward with the case and allowing the criminal justice system to decide the officer's fate. Police recommended citations for several other people in the SUV with Stephens after finding various safety issues, including that there were too many occupants, none were wearing seatbelts and the driver was unlicensed. Prosecutors had two years to issue those citations but instead let the tickets expire without doing so. They did the same for a misdemeanor speeding count against Manuel, which also expired. Moore said prosecuting Manuel for speeding would have meant essentially forfeiting the option to charge him with negligent homicide because of double jeopardy laws at the time. But once prosecutors ruled out the more serious charge, they could have chosen to issue the speeding ticket then with no major impacts on the case. [Allen] said that's the least Moore's office could have done. "How can you overlook the glaring fact that he was going almost 100 mph?" Allen said. "You just cannot operate a vehicle that fast. For him to walk away from this with no criminal charges ... it almost appears he's above the law." Although prosecutors decided to take no action in the case, some online reports nonetheless mistakenly reported that Brittany Stephens had been convicted and sentenced to prison. reported Skene, Lea. "Baton Rouge Police: Car Seat Placed on Center Console During Crash Involving Off-Duty Cop That Killed Baby." The [Baton Rouge] Advocate. 1 March 2018. The [Baton Rouge] Advocate. "Off-Duty Baton Rouge Officer Driving Corvette Involved in Airline Highway Crash, Police Say." 13 October 2017. Skene, Lea. "Baton Rouge Police Officer Faces No Charges After 2017 Speeding Crash That Caused Baby's Death." The [Baton Rouge] Advocate. 13 November 2019. Skene, Lea. "Mother of Baby Killed in Baton Rouge Crash Involving Off-Duty Cop Arrested for Failing to Secure Child Seat." The [Baton Rouge] Advocate. 27 February 2018. Knowles, Hannah. "A Baby Died After an Officer Crashed His Corvette at 94 MPH, Investigators Say. He Wont Face Charges." The Washington Post. 15 November 2019.

neutral

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/children-raped-illegal-immigrants/

Were 10,800 U.S. Children Raped by Illegal Immigrants in 2018?

Dan Evon

01/09/2019

On 30 December 2018, News Punch, a junk news website with a long history of spreading misinformation, published an article reporting that 10,800 American children had been raped by illegal immigrants during 2018: "The number of U.S. children raped by illegal immigrants in 2018 was a staggering 10,800, according to data compiled by NCFIRE (North Carolinians for Immigration Reform and Enforcement)." News Punch misinformation This claim has multiple dubious aspects, starting with the NCFIRE data. NCFIRE purports to compile "monthly child rape reports" covering sexual assaults committed by illegal immigrants in North Carolina. Our inspection of their data, however, turned up a number of issues. For starters, while the data were compiled under the title "monthly child rape reports," the supporting documents actually included a variety of sex-related crimes, such as possession of child pornography and "indecent liberties with a child," that aren't rape. We also found one individual who was included in the 2018 report even though he raped a child in 2011. That person presumably was included in the 2018 report because of an arrest that year for failing to report an address change. report In addition to including outdated charges and crimes other than rape in the "monthly child rape reports," NCFIRE also appears to be counting arrests, not convictions. In other words, a number of individuals included in these reports have only been accused of crimes, and the charges against them may be dropped or found to be unsupported at trial. Furthermore, while some entries on this list link to genuine reports from ICE (U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement), the majority of entries include links to news reports or mugshot pages that make no mention of immigration status. Although this group claims that they "verify the illegal alien status of each individual we post in our Monthly Child Rape reports through the arresting agency of each individual," a spokesperson for the Raleigh Police Department told us that they "were not familiar" with NCFIRE. Despite the multiple problems with the rape reporting, News Punch used these statistics to come up with their 10,800 figure: Meanwhile, data compiled by NCFIRE (North Carolinians for Immigration Reform and Enforcement) reveals that the state of North Carolina has arrested an average of 18 illegal aliens every month this year for the crime of child rape. Statistically, this means that the 50 states in America are on track to arrest 10,800 illegal aliens for raping children in 2018. And that 10,800 figure is a bare-minimum, super-generous, giving-the-illegal-alien-child-rapists-the-benefit-of-the-doubt number. A total of 10,800 arrests assumes that each illegal alien child rapist only rapes one child in America. Many will rape three, four, or a dozen before they are caught, so the "true" number could be in the 30,000 to 40,000 raped children range. The claim that 10,800 children in the U.S. were raped by illegal immigrants did not originate with a law enforcement agency, government body, or other reputable crime-tracking source. Rather, an average figure pulled from questionable data compiled by one group in one state was extrapolated to the entirety of the U.S. without basis. That number also doesn't square with what we know about the criminal activities of illegal immigrants or the statistics for sexual abuse against children. Although the 2018 ICE Enforcement and Removal Operations Report does not specifically list crimes against children, it does shed some light on the number of sexual crimes committed by illegal immigrants. According to the ICE report, 5,350 charges or convictions of sexual assault were levied against illegal immigrants during the 2018 fiscal year. Another 6,888 charges or convictions relating to sexual offenses (not involving assault) were also recorded: Report Table 1 tallies all pending criminal charges and convictions by category for those aliens administratively arrested in FY2018 and lists those categories with at least 1,000 combined charges and convictions present in this population. These figures are representative of the criminal history as it is entered in the ICE system of record for individuals administratively arrested. Each administrative arrest may represent multiple criminal charges and convictions, as many of the aliens arrested by ERO are recidivist criminals. The claim that 10,800 American children were raped by illegal immigrants in 2018 is also implausible due to the fact that the vast majority of sexual crimes against children are committed by parents or relatives, as the Rape, Abuse & Incest National Network (RAINN) reported in 2016: RAINN Out of the yearly 63,000 sexual abuse cases substantiated, or found [by] strong evidence, by Child Protective Services (CPS), the perpetrator was most often the parent: U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement. "ICE Arrests Fugitive Alien in NC Wanted on Multiple Maryland Rape Charges." 18 October 2018. Rape, Abuse & Incest National Network. "Child Sexual Abuse Is a Widespread Problem." Retrieved 9 January 2019. Adl-Tabatabai, Sean. "10,800 U.S. Children Were Raped by Illegal Immigrants in 2018." News Punch. 30 December 2018. WRAL. "Moore County Man Charged with Raping Child." 1 January 2001. Updated [15 January 2019]: Added quote from Raleigh Police Department spokesperson.

false

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/coke-adds-strife/

Coke Donates to Israel

David Mikkelson

05/08/2002

Claim: Coca-Cola has announced that it will be donating four days' worth of income to Israel. Status: False. Example: [Collected on the Internet, 2002] I have heard various rumours about the nature of the relationship between Coca-Cola and the State of Israel. Today, I received a text message on my cell phone stating: "NBC states that: the income that Coca-Cola will get in the coming 4 days starting from Monday will be donated to Israel." Origins: The ongoing Arab-Israeli conflict in the Middle East makes for a precarious business climate, one in which any company doing business in both Israel and other Middle Eastern countries is subject to being denounced by one side as a supporter of the other. Companies dealing in relatively inexpensive, ubiquitous products such as soft drinks or fast food are very visible targets to those who call for boycotts to protest financial support of one side or the other. American-based companies, in particular, are often the focus of such boycotts, since the USA is not only home to many of the world's most well-known brands but has also been one of the few countries to openly support Israel. McDonald's and Coca-Cola are frequent subjects of boycott calls, the former becoming a target a few years ago when Saudi Arabian McDonald's outlets donated a portion of their proceeds to Palestinian childrens' hospitals, and the latter a current victim due to false claims that they will be "donating four days' worth of income to Israel." (Pepsi is also a member of this short list, with claims sometimes taken literally that Pepsi is a 'Jewish product' whose name is an acronym for 'Pay Every Penny to Save Israel' or 'Pay Every Penny to the State of Israel.' As the Associated Press once noted, "Calling Pepsi a 'Jewish product' is ironic, given that Pepsi was one of many multinationals that wouldn't do business in Israel during the 40-year Arab commercial boycott of the Jewish state.") donated Lately a series of graphics employing Coca-Cola imagery (like the one to the right of this text, which is itself a deception within a deception, as it uses a controversial photograph of a Jewish student who was mistakenly identified as a Palestinian) has been circulated to garner support for an Arab boycott of American companies such as Coca-Cola (at least one such image, which depicts the Dome of the Rock emblazoned with a Coca-Cola logo, has caused an uproar among Muslims who have mistaken it for a bona fide Coca-Cola advertisement), lending support to the unfounded rumor that Coca-Cola will be donating four days' worth of income to Israel. It's hard to imagine that this rumor could be anything but a deliberate lie concocted to smear an American-based company that does business in both Israel and Middle Eastern countries, as (unlike the case of the McDonald's brouhaha mentioned above) no Coke-related business is currently engaged in any sponsorship that could reasonably be misunderstood as constituting a financial "donation" to the state of Israel. As The Coca-Cola Company itself has stated: photograph Dome of the Rock The Coca-Cola Company does not support or oppose political or religious causes and does not take a stance on issues that do not directly affect the soft drink industry. The Coca-Cola Company operates worldwide in nearly 200 countries andterritories with different cultures, political systems, religions and histories. People from all around the world own shares in The Coca-Cola Company, and the company employs people from many different backgrounds and nationalities. Our partners who bottle, distribute and sell our products are local business people. They hire people in their local markets. We cannot and do not take the side of one country over another in any dispute. It's unfortunate that the incredible power of the Internet is being misused to spread false information. Moreover, since Ramallah is home to a Coca-Cola bottling facility that employs about 400 local residents (and indirectly creates employment for hundreds more), and Coca-Cola industries throughout the Middle East are operated as local businesses, any boycott of Coca-Cola in Middle Eastern countries is likely to cause more monetary harm to Arabs and Palestinians than it is to Americans or Israelis. Ramallah Unfortunately, the maxim that the first casualty in war is truth still holds sway. Last updated: 2 December 2007

true

https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2012/oct/25/jesse-ventura/jesse-ventura-says-convicted-congressmen-senators-/

Theres 21 congressmen and senators that have been convicted of felonies that still get their retirement, even in jail. They dont have to wait until theyre 65.

Caryn Shinske

10/25/2012

Jesse Ventura doesnt hold back when it comes to criticizing government.As a former governor of Minnesota, hes seen his share of politics on both sides of the aisle and details in his new book, DemoCRIPS and ReBLOODlicans: No More Gangs in Government, why he likens the two mainstream political parties to the infamous street gangs. Ventura notes that while gang activity generally affects neighborhoods, the actions of both parties affect the nation.Theres 21 congressmen and senators that have been convicted of felonies that still get their retirement, even in jail, Ventura said in an interview with MyCentralJersey.com, ahead of a Sept. 16 appearance at Rutgers University in New Brunswick. They dont have to wait until theyre 65.There are quite a few congressmen and senators who have been convicted of felonies, but multiple public databases with conflicting information about the number of convicted federal lawmakers makes it impossible to assess an exact number. We were intrigued, however, by the claim that federal lawmakers can collect taxpayer-funded pensions while incarcerated. And short of those officials being convicted of treason or espionage, its true.Lets look at how pensions work for members of Congress.Officials participate in one of two retirement systems, depending on when they were first elected to the House or Senate. But they do not forfeit their pensions or accumulated retirement income if indicted, or convicted of most felonies.That struck a nerve with the National Taxpayers Union which, in mid-2011, sent a letter to Illinois Sen. Mark Kirk, a Republican, to express support for his bill to increase the number of circumstances under which a member of Congress could lose his pension.Since the 1980s, NTU has identified lawmakers convicted on charges ranging from bribery to fraud who were each receiving pensions worth tens of thousands of dollars annually (or more) sometimes while serving prison terms, NTU Executive Vice President Pete Sepp wrote. The NTU advocates for lower taxes.But can a member of Congress simultaneously receive a taxpayer-funded pension while incarcerated?The short answer is yes, John David, a senior research fellow with the Conservative Heritage Foundation, said in an e-mail. Times have changed to some extent, but if the Member is not convicted of one of the offenses that would cost him/her the pension, it will be paid as promised -- even to prison.Congressmen and senators can lose their pensions if they are convicted of a national security offense or a crime relating to public corruption and abuse of ones official position, according to the 2008 Congressional Research Service report Status of a Senator Who Has Been Indicted for or Convicted of a Felony.So, there are circumstances in which a member of Congress cant receive pension benefits.As for the rest of Venturas claim, members dont have to be 65, either, to get their retirement.A 2007 Congressional Research Service report, Retirement Benefits for Members of Congress, states members are eligible for a pension at age 62 if they have completed at least five years of service. The age requirement drops to 50 for member with 20 years of service or any age after 25 years of service.Ventura did not return three requests for comment.Our rulingVentura claimed in an interview that theres 21 congressmen and senators convicted of felonies that still get their retirement, even in jail. They dont have to wait until theyre 65.For this fact-check, we looked only at the claim that federal lawmakers convicted of felonies and can still collect retirement benefits while in jail. We attempted to count the number of convicted national lawmakers, but there are multiple public databases with conflicting information on the number of congressmen and senators convicted of felonies.In most cases, a congressman or senator convicted of a felony can receive his pension as long as the charge is not one that violates national security or relates to public corruption and abuse of official position.Members also receive pensions based on completed years of service, not an age requirement of 65.We rate the claim Mostly True.To comment on this story, go toNJ.com.

true

https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2015/jan/13/elizabeth-warren/warren-average-family-bottom-90-percent-made-more-/

The average family not in the top 10 percent makes less money today than they were making a generation ago.

Lauren Carroll

01/13/2015

Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., believes the governments economic policies over the past few decades have cut the legs out from underneath America's middle class. At the AFL-CIO National Summit on Raising WagesJan. 7, Warren spoke about growing income inequality, particularly since the 1980s, when the trickle-down economics policies gained traction under former President Ronald Reagan. She argued that this theory -- that giving tax breaks and other economic benefits to corporations and the wealthy will benefit the poor by improving the economy overall -- hasnt worked. Warren, a former law professor and expert on the economic challenges of the middle class, cited a number of statistics to support her point, including: Well, since 1980, guess how much of the growth in income over the last 32 years -- how much of the growth in income did the 90 percent get? Zero. None. Nothing. In fact, it is worse than that. The average family not in the top 10 percent makes less money today than they were making a generation ago. We wondered if that was true -- that the bottom 90 percent of earners in America have a lower income than they had more than 30 years ago. The statistic comes from data compiled by well-known economists Thomas Piketty and Emmanuel Saez, who study income inequality. TheirWorld Top Incomes Databasespecializes in cataloging the highest level of incomes over time in more than 20 countries. To check out Warrens claim, we looked at average income data from 1979 to 2012 for the top 10 percent and bottom 90 percent of earners. (The time frame Warren used in her speech was a generation, which is vague, but in context its clear shes talking about since the 1980s.) The Saez-Piketty data comes from millions of tax returns filed over the past century. The data supports her claim. Adjusted for inflation, the top 10 percent of earners in the United States made, on average, $144,418 in 1979 and $254,449 in 2012. Thats about 76 percent growth. The bottom 90 percent of earners, on the other hand, made $33,526 in 1979 and $30,438 in 2012. Thats adecreaseof about 9 percent. This chart generated on the Saez-Piketty top income database shows the growth of the top 10 percent of earners average income over time, compared to the relatively stagnant progression of the bottom 90 percent of earners average income. Compare this to the 30 years prior, where -- according to Saez and Pikettys data -- the average income for the bottom 90 percent of earners grew alongside the top 10 percent, albeit at a slower pace. However there is some context to consider. Mainly, not everyone approves of the Saez-Piketty approach to cataloging income. Their approach uses pre-tax income and includes realized capital gains. Because the richest Americans earn a lot of capital gains and pay a lot of taxes, this arguably magnifies their income. On the other hand, the approach lowballs the income of lower-level earners -- the bottom 90 percent in this case. The income calculation does not include government payments, such as Social Security, unemployment insurance, food stamps and the earned income tax credit. Salim Furth, an economist at the conservative Heritage Foundation, also noted that the data looks at tax units -- individuals or married couples filing together -- rather than households, which may artificially lower average incomes. For example, a young adult living with his parents are two separate tax units; together they are one household or family. The Saez-Piketty data captures that the young worker has a very small income, but not the fact that he lives in a house with multiple incomes. Also, tax law has changed over the past 50 years to increase the number of units, Furth said. Of the general trend in income growth, he said, Data sources that are more widely used show solid, though not fantastic, income growth for most of the income distribution through 2007. There are big losses in the Great Recession, and then an incomplete recovery since then. TheCongressional Budget Officeproduced a report in November 2014 showing that the bottom 80 percent of earners (measured by households rather than tax units) saw income increases of about 16 percent between 1979 and 2011. The top 81-99 percent, on the other hand, saw increases of about 56 percent over the period. And the top 1 percent alone saw their household income grow 174 percent. That report also found that if it includes government benefits in its income calculation, all income brackets saw even more income growth. Still, this data shows that top earners incomes are growing at a faster pace than everyone elses -- which supports Warrens broader point. Richard Burkhauser, an economist at Cornell University, pointed us to a paper he co-wrote on income inequality that compares Saez-Piketty-style data to other income measurements. The results are consistent with the Saez-Piketty data until households are adjusted for size, and capital gains taxes and government payments are factored in. With those controls, incomes have grown across the board, and income inequality has also grown -- but not at as dramatic a rate as the Saez-Piketty data implies. Ultimately, Burkhausers report concludes that different measurements work for different policy questions. If Warrens talking specifically aboutmarket income-- that is, income earned before taxes and before government payments -- the Saez-Piketty data is appropriate, and undoubtedly income inequality has grown substantially in recent years, and the middle class is struggling. If the question is, alternatively, whether government programs are doing something to close the gap and help the middle class -- other measures show that programs like food stamps and Medicaid are helping to a certain extent, at least for people who qualify. (And of course not everyone in the bottom 90 percent of earners does qualify.) Arguably, in a speech directed at working and middle-class Americans at a summit on raising wages, the context of Warrens remarks give credence to the fact that she was referencing data that emphasizes earned income over government-provided income. In the speech, Warren wasnt advocating for new government programs that give out payments to individuals in need. She was making a policy argument against the idea of trickle-down economics and in favor of broad economic policies that she believes would improve Americans job-earned income, like raising the minimum wage and breaking up the Wall Street banks. We can make new choices, she said. And one way to make those choices is to talk openly and honestly and directly about work, about how we value work, and how we value those who do the work. Our ruling Warren said, The average family not in the top 10 percent makes less money today than they were making a generation ago. According to one measurement, the bottom 90 percent of American earners had a lower income in 2012 than they had 30 years ago. By other measurements -- mainly ones that include government payments such as Social Security -- incomes have grown across the board. However, this data still supports Warrens overall point that income inequality is growing. Additionally, given the context of her speech at a forum about wages, it makes sense that Warren would reference data that gives more weight to pre-tax income. Shes arguing that middle-class wages havent increased enough over the past couple decades. We rate Warrens claim Mostly True. Help fund PolitiFacts Kickstarter to live fact-check the 2015 State of the Union and GOP response.

true

https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2016/apr/12/ted-cruz/ted-cruz-ad-revisits-controversy-kasichs-governors/

Says a company that got tax breaks from the state later laid off 100 Ohioans, even as its CEO cut a half-million-dollar check to Kasichs super PAC.

Nadia Pflaum

04/12/2016

Presidential candidate Ted Cruzs campaign came out swinging directly at rival John Kasich for the first time in a TV ad. The attack ads are getting more direct, as the delegates in contention dwindle. This ad presents a series of facts to suggest that Kasich, as governor of Ohio, orchestrated shady deals to benefit his friends and campaign funders. Right before John Kasich was governor, he collected $611,000 from a Fortune 500 corporation, the ad says. After Kasich became governor, that same company received $619 grand in state tax breaks for job creation. But last year, the company laid off 100 Ohioans, even as its CEO cut a half-million-dollar check to Kasichs super PAC. John Kasich, not for us. To find out whether its fact or fiction, lets take each allegation one at a time. Kasich took money from a Fortune 500 company According to newsreports, in 2001 after leaving Congress, Kasich joined the board of directors of Worthington Industries, an Ohio steel processor and Fortune 500 company. Security and Exchange Commission filingsshowthat Worthington board members were paid $45,000 per year as a retainer, and $1,500 per meeting attended. Worthington also reimbursed board members for travel expenses and other out-of-pocket costs. The CantonRepositoryreportedthat Kasich quit the Worthington board upon winning the governors race in 2010, but was still owed deferred compensation from the board. Kasich received $611,000 total in deferred compensation from Worthington, and at least $103,000 of the total came after he had been sworn in as governor. That same company received $619,000 in tax breaks after Kasich took office In the first bill he signed as governor, Kasich made good on a campaign promise to attract investment to Ohio. He nixed the Ohio Department of Development and created a private, nonprofit corporation called JobsOhio, explaining that in order to lure companies to the state, government needed to move at the speed of business. Kasich designed JobsOhio to be funded by a lease on state liquor profits. He declared it exempt from public records requirements and state audits. And he made board appointments for JobsOhio a responsibility of the governor. To drum up job creation, JobsOhio reviews potential opportunities to offer incentives such as tax breaks, and sends its recommendations to the Ohio Tax Credit Authority for final determination. The tax credit authority has a five-member board, and three of its appointees, including the chair, are Kasichs. An Associated Press investigation found that, less than a year after JobsOhio was created, it recommended a series of tax incentives totalling $619,000 for Worthington Industries subsidiaries, which the state tax credit board awarded. Last year, the company laid off 100 Ohioans In March 2015, Worthingtonannouncedit was cutting 555 jobs nationwide, which included 115 in Ohio. The company blamed the loss of these jobs --manufacturing cabs for large agricultural and mining equipment -- on industry-wide downturns. Worthington spokeswoman Cathy Lyttletoldthe CantonRepositorythat any incentives the company receives are only paid when the company delivers the jobs it promised. She said that pursuing tax incentives is standard business practice, and Worthington received $400,000 in tax breaks under the previous, Democratic regime of governor Ted Strickland. Companys CEO donates half-million to Kasichs presidential bid The Center for Responsive Politicsconfirmsa $500,000 contribution from Worthington CEO John P. McConnell to the New Day 2016 PAC, via Internal Revenue Service records released November 30, 2015. Several of Kasich's board appointees stepped up with campaign donations as well. OpenSecrets.org shows that the wife of ethics committee chairman Merom Brachman, Judith, gave the maximum donation to Kasichs campaign, $2,700, in August 2015. John C. Boland, the chair of JobsOhio, donated the $2,700 max to Kasich in July 2015. JobsOhio board member Gary R. Heminger and his wife, Jane, each donated $2,700 to Kasich on the same day in October 2015. JobsOhio board member Lawrence J. Kidd and his wife, Cindy, each donated $2,700 to Kasich on the same day in August 2015. All together now Cruzs attack ad parrots a complaint filed with the Ohio Ethics Commission by Kasichs Democratic challenger in the 2014 election, Ed FitzGerald. The ethics commissionpassedon investigating FitzGeralds complaint. Chairman Brachman, who, like the other commissioners, was appointed by the governor, said that Kasich had provided enough information to conclusively rule out any conflict of interest. He added that actions by JobsOhio are not subject to the authority of the ethics commission. Rob Nichols, Kasichs spokesman, dismissed this Cruz ad as a one-hit wonder that only ran briefly in Wisconsin and is no longer airing. The ads four accurate, provable data points, arent in dispute, Nichols said. But he has a beef with the insinuation that any of the described actions were wrong, or even out of the ordinary. They didnt say, The governors corrupt, because that you could fact-check, Nichols said. Everything there is 100 percent, entirely above-board, but when you say it with a snarly voice over scary music, people think its inappropriate. Our ruling Cruzs attack ad links a series of headlines to suggest that as governor, Kasich rewarded his former business ties in exchange for political contributions. The ads tone is ominous, but the text is factual. What isnt explained is that everything in the ad has been the subject of prior complaints that did not provoke any regulatory action. Its beensuggestedthat an overhaul of state rules might preventsimilar situationsfrom arising, and similar allegations from dogging Ohio leaders. But thats a different ad, for another day. We rate these claims Mostly True.

true

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/elizabeth-warren-400k-teaching/

Did Harvard Pay Elizabeth Warren $400,000 to Teach One Class?

Dan MacGuill

01/22/2020

In January 2020, as the 2020 Democratic presidential primary progressed, we received multiple inquiries from readers about the accuracy of a widely shared claim about U.S. Sen. Elizabeth Warren's professional background. A social media meme contained the following text: meme "'As Elizabeth Warren closes the night with complaints about cost of college for students, just remember she was paid $400,000 to teach one class' -- Katie Pavlich." The meme originated in a tweet published on July 30, 2019, by Katie Pavlich, a Fox News contributor and editor of the right-leaning website Townhall. She was referring to Warren's appearance at that evening's Democratic primary debate in Detroit, Michigan. debate Critics of Warren have leveled accusations of hypocrisy against her in the past, and those claims have at times touched on the level of her pay while she taught at Harvard. In 2014, for example, Snopes addressed memes that alleged the U.S. senator "lives in a $5.4 million mansion" and was paid "$350,000 to teach one class," all while purportedly "lecturing" the public on economic inequality. addressed The allegation that Warren was paid $400,000 to teach a single course at Harvard University is one that dates back to her 2012 U.S. Senate campaign in Massachusetts. In a Senate financial-disclosure statement filed in December 2011, Warren revealed that for "2010 + 2011 to date," Harvard had paid her $429,981 in her capacity as a law professor. disclosure Regardless of one's subjective opinion of the salary paid by Harvard to Warren, it is essential to note that college professors, especially those who work at prominent and reputable institutions like Harvard, are typically expected to do more than just teach courses in return for their salaries, and those salaries can be based on several factors including the volume, quality, and influence of their published research, the level of their expertise and reputation in a particular field, and so on. Similarly, their duties typically extend beyond teaching coursework and conducting research, and can include advising and mentoring students, peer review, organizing and taking part in conferences, moderating or participating in faculty or student groups and organizations, leading or attending departmental meetings, and on occasion representing and boosting the public reputation of their respective institutions by providing expert commentary to the news media the latter a duty that Warren discharged particularly frequently, before she began her political career. Warren, long recognized as a leading expert in bankruptcy, debt, and consumer law, won several teaching awards, including at Harvard, and wrote or contributed to several dozen academic books, book chapters, and journal articles. One 2010 study found that Warren's academic research was among the most widely cited in the field of bankruptcy and commercial law, in the five years leading up to the 2010 spring semester. awards Harvard several dozen study So while the salary figure presented in Pavlich's tweet (and the subsequent meme) was accurate, it was misleading to claim Harvard was paying Warren more than $400,000 merely "to teach one class." Nonetheless, it is true that the future senator's teaching duties did taper off towards the end of her tenure at Harvard. During the fall 2009 semester, Warren taught contracts law, according to a Harvard course catalog, and she also taught a year-long "Empirical Analysis of Law" course over the fall 2009 and spring 2010 semesters. course catalog In September 2010, U.S. President Barack Obama appointed Warren as a special adviser to Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner, with responsibility for the newly created Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, an agency she helped to conceive and create. As a result, Warren stepped back completely from teaching duties during the fall 2010 and spring 2011 semesters, as reflected in a 2010/11 course catalog. However, she returned to Harvard in July 2011 and taught a course on contracts law during the fall 2011 semester. appointed course catalog taught In 2010, Warren also contributed a chapter entitled "Redesigning Regulation: A Case Study from the Consumer Credit Market" to an academic book entitled "Government and Markets: Toward a New Theory of Regulation," which was edited by David A. Moss from Harvard Business School and Duke University's Edward J. Balleisen. contributed According to Warren's May 2012 Senate financial-disclosure statements, she took unpaid leave from Harvard during the spring and fall semesters in 2012 (that is, during her Senate campaign), and according to her May 2013 disclosure, her tenure as a Harvard professor ended when she joined the U.S. Senate in January 2013. disclosure disclosure According to Warren's December 2011 financial-disclosure statement, she was paid more than $400,000 by Harvard in 2010 and 2011. During that period, she taught two courses: one in the spring 2010 semester, and another in the fall 2011 semester. From September 2010 to July 2011, Warren was on leave while helping to establish the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and therefore did not teach during that time. Katie Pavlich's July 2019 tweet, and subsequent memes, accurately described Harvard as having paid Warren around $400,000 (in fact it was closer to $430,000) but failed to specify that the salary covered 2010 and 2011. The tweet also misled readers by claiming Warren had been paid her salary simply to teach classes, because academic salaries typically take into account several factors other than the number of courses taught by a professor, and this is especially so for highly reputable academics such as Warren, at prestigious institutions such as Harvard. Finally, the tweet (and memes) also misrepresented the number of classes Warren taught during the period for which she was paid more than $400,000. It was two, not one. Taking into account that set of facts, we are issuing a rating of "Mixture." Snopes.com. "Did Elizabeth Warren Lie About Her Native American Heritage to Land a Job at Harvard?" 30 October 2014. U.S. Senate. "United States Senate Financial Disclosure Report for New Employee and Candidate Reports -- Elizabeth Warren." 22 December 2011. U.S. Senate. "United States Senate Financial Disclosure Report for New Employee and Candidate Reports -- Elizabeth Warren." 11 May 2012. Harvard Law School. "Elizabeth Warren Wins Sacks-Freund Award for Teaching." 3 June 2009. Leiter, Brian. "Top 25 Law Faculties in Scholarly Impact, 2005-2009." Accessed 22 January 2020. The Obama White House. "President Obama Names Elizabeth Warren Assistant to the President and Special Advisor to the Secretary of the Treasury on the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau." 17 September 2010. Johnson, Glen. "GOP Presses Harvard to End Pay for Warren." The Boston Globe. 21 September 2011. U.S. Senate. "United States Senate Financial Disclosure Report for New Employee and Candidate Reports -- Elizabeth Warren." 14 May 2013.

neutral

https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2013/aug/14/matt-bevin/matt-bevin-mitch-mcconnell-bank-bailout-efforts/

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

Jon Greenberg

08/14/2013

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

true

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/kidney-transplant-social-share/

Is $1 Donated for a Girl's Kidney Transplant Every Time Her Photo Is Shared on Social Media?

David Mikkelson

09/04/2018

Many social media users have encountered a post showing a picture of a little girl in what looks to be a hospital bed, along with any one of several captions indicating she is awaiting a kidney transplant and will receive $1 every time her picture is shared via social media: She gets a dollar for every pic that's shared on messenger it goes towards her kidney transplant.... you gotta share plz she is my neighbors kid The child pictured here is not awaiting the transplant of a kidney (or any other organ). According to Click Paran, she is (as of October 2017) a four-year-old Brazilian girl named Aninha who is undergoing chemotherapy for treatment of leukemia in Paran (one of Brazil's 26 states). Click Paran This item is just another iteration of a long-running online hoax/scam entreating users to share posts and photographs under the false premise that doing so will help to secure an organ transplant or money for surgery needed by a desperately ill child. transplant money Even if no money actually changes hands in connection with these posts, the sharing of them indirectly assists scammers by driving followers, shares, and likes to their social media pages, creating popular platforms from which they can launch other fraudulent schemes.

false

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/freedom-concert/

'Freedom Concert' Being Planned, But No Details Announced

Dan Evon

12/23/2016

In December 2016, an image purportedly showing a flyer for a "Freedom Concert" was widely circulated on social media: This is not a real flyer for a "Freedom Concert." The above-displayed image is a concept poster that has been circulating since at least 20 December 2016 when it was posted to Facebook by Adam Theis: Facebook Please share if you would like to see this concert happen on the same day as the inauguration. It's as simple as that. #freedomconcert. Poster design/concept by Erik Brown/ FRISK creative #freedomconcert Erik Brown FRISK creative While this image does not advertise a genuinely scheduled events, a real "Freedom Concert" to be held on Inauguration Day was discussed on social media in December 2016, with former Labor Secretary Robert Reich bringing attention to the idea when he explained the vision behind such an event in an 18 December 2016 Facebook post: explained The Trump people are upset that the only musicians willing to perform at the Trump inauguration are Kid Rock and Ted Nugent. Someone just suggested to me a televised "freedom concert" to air at the same time as the inauguration with huge celebrities like Beyonc and Jay Z, Madonna, Katy Perry, Justin Timberlake, Gaga, Bruce Springsteen, and so on. Alec Baldwin MCs the event, playing Trump as he does on SNL. Presto. The Trump inauguration loses all the TV ratings. Basically, no one watches it. Even better, the proceeds of the freedom concert go to the ACLU, Planned Parenthood, Lambda Legal, NAACP, Common Cause, CAIR, IRAP, SPLC, Environmental Defense Fund, Human Rights Campaign Fund, MoveOn, Economic Policy Institute, Inequality Media, and GLAD. What do you think? Reich's idea proved popular with some people, and at least one concert promoter was reportedly attempting to turn this idea into a real event. According to Politico's Playbook, Mark Ross, a concert promoter, was "in the process of putting together a large-scale concert called We the People to DIRECTLY compete with Donald Trumps inauguration." However, Ross has not provided any details about the event, and while a Politico source said that talent was "banging on our doors" to be involved with the event, no musical acts have officially been confirmed to play the show as of this writing. Politico's Playbook Ross confirmed that he was planning a concert in a 23 December 2016 Facebook post in which he mentioned he was "Getting together a really big show. Stay tuned," he later deleted that message. planning Although the flyer for this "Freedom Concert" is not real, a similar event called "Concert for America: Stand Up, Sing Out!" scheduled for Inauguration Day has been announced. The concert's web site states that the event will be a "star-studded benefit concert highlighting the diversity and hope that is America at its best." The lineup for this concert, however, was not the same as the promoted in the faux "Freedom Concert" flyer. announced

false

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/fox-news-saudi-megyn-kelly/

The Kelly Beguiles

Kim LaCapria

08/12/2015

MOSTLY WHAT'S : A Saudi prince owns a minority share of Twenty-First Century Fox, the parent corporation of Fox News, via an investment firm. WHAT'S : The photograph of Megyn Kelly posing is a fabrication, and the Saudi prince is not really a "co-owner" of Fox News. Example: [Collected via e-mail, August 2015] Origins: Rumors about Saudi nationals and the ownership of Fox News have been circulating online for years; and interest in the rumors was revived in August 2015 after Fox News political commentator Megyn Kelly grilled business magnate and GOP presidential hopeful Donald Trump during a Republican candidates' debate earlier that month. Fox News Kelly (to a far larger degree than her co-moderators Bret Baier and Chris Wallace) was criticized by Trump and his supporters for supposedly treating Trump unfairly during that debate, and not long afterwards the meme displayed above began circulating online, casting Kelly as the face of a purported sinister alliance between Fox News and Saudi operatives. First of all, the image used in that meme is a fake, as the unaltered original photograph of Kelly proves that her likeness was added to a scene at which she was not present: unaltered The claim that Saudi Prince Al-Waleed bin Talal is "co-owner" of Fox News is also misleading, though less a matter of Photoshop and more one stemming from the slightly complex realm of investments and holdings in relation to large media corporations. The term "co-owner" generally refers to a person who holds a 50% share in a business entity, or at least a share comparable to that of the other largest stakeholders, but Al-Waleed does not qualify on either count. According to news accounts, Prince Al-Waleed's investment firm, Kingdom Holding Company, holds a 6.6% stake in 21st Century Fox, the parent corporation of the Fox News Group (which includes the Fox News Channel and the Fox Business Network) a sizable chunk, but far from a controlling or co-controlling interest in the company. news accounts Kingdom Holding Company If such minority institutional holdings qualify as "co-ownership," then Prince Al-Waleed bin Talal would also have to be considered a "co-owner" of business entities such as Twitter and Citigroup. Twitter Citigroup

false

https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2013/feb/23/tim-knopp/did-tim-knopp-honor-his-pledge-eschew-pers/

Knopp says he upheld a campaign promise not to join the Public Employees Retirement System (PERS).

Janie Har

02/23/2013

Freshman Oregon Sen. Tim Knopp, R-Bend, is clear that lawmakers need to fix the Public Employees Retirement System this year, and that they themselves should not be part of the system. He pledged during his campaign to decline membership in PERS.Earlier this month, Knopps officeissued a press release sayingthat along with being sworn into office, he upheld a campaign promise not to join the state retirement program known as the Public Employees Retirement System (PERS).It is very important to me to honor the promises that Ive made, Knopp is quoted as saying in the release. If wedont fix PERS now there will be fewer firefighters protecting our communities, fewer police officers on the streets, and fewer teachersin the classroom.PERS is contentious.Lawmakers reformed the system in 2003, curbing benefits for new employees going forward. Some lawmakers say its still too generous. Public employee unions are firm that the benefits were bargained for and are fair.Gov. John Kitzhaber, a Democrat, wants to find savings in the system, as do Republicans;House Speaker Tina Kotek, D-Portland, is lukewarm to the idea. Public employees generally favor Democrats with campaign help and money, so its not surprising to hear that Knopp, a Republican, promised to opt out.But PolitiFact Oregon also recalled that before he joined the Senate this year, Knopp was a three-term member of the Oregon House. In fact, he was House majority leader when lawmakers tackled reform in 2003. We were pretty sure he had been a member of PERS.Knopps office confirmed what we thought to be true. He joined the system in 1999, when he was first elected to the House, and remained an active member until 2005, when he left office. As a member for six years, he was vested in the system. The money continued accruing until 2010.What happened in 2010? Knopp needed money for a family medical emergency, so he cashed out his account. The total gross amount was $8,167.07, which we acknowledge is not an astonishingly high figure. Retirement benefits are calculated based on pay, and length of service, and legislators dont earn much, about $20,000 a year.Still, we think his previous membership is a relevant detail curiously missing from an otherwise glowing press release. If PolitiFact Oregon were in office and had made public employee retirement a major part of our platform and had promised to opt out, we think wed make it explicit that we had once been part of PERS, in the interest of full and complete disclosure.In any case, Knopp had three options when he was sworn into office this year: Join the Oregon Public Service Retirement Plan, which is the pension system hes complaining about; join the Oregon Savings Growth Plan, which is like any other deferred compensation plan; or decline to join a retirement plan.Knopp chose the deferred compensation plan. The state -- his employer, the taxpayers -- contributes 6 percent to his plan. The state does not pick up the additional 6 percent of salary on behalf of employees, as it would under PERS.We had two questions for the senator from Central Oregon: One, why not publicize the fact that he was a member -- for more than a decade -- of the system he is now criticizing? And two, why take a retirement option at all?Lets take the retirement question first. Knopp told PolitiFact Oregon that hes not opposed to compensation for legislators. He just doesnt want them to vote on a system in which they have a stake. To that end, he has co-sponsored a bill toprohibit future legislators from joining PERS or the deferred compensation plan, because they shouldnt be forced to be in the system, as he was.Actual or perceived, there needs to be somebody who completely represents citizens and taxpayers, without a conflict, he said.As to the first question, Knopp said he disclosed his previous membership on the campaign trail. When his Democratic challenger said Knopp was a PERS member at an October 2012 candidates forum, he said, I closed my account years ago, honestly, to pay some medical bills when my daughter had two brain surgeries.We get that the retirement system in 1999 was not the legislative issue that it was in 2003 or that it is in 2013. But why didnt he close his account before 2003, when it was clear hed have to vote on PERS reforms? He said it wasnt clear at the time whether he could..Why not close the account in 2005, after leaving office? He saidhe co-sponsored a bill in 2003 that offered a financial incentive for peoplewith inactive accounts to close their accounts. He thought it unseemly to benefit from that legislation -- although we checked, and he wouldnt have qualified.Then why wait until 2010 to close his account? Knopp didnt have a clear answer. He acknowledges that had he not needed the money in 2010, he would have continued to be a member.Knopp has been a consistent and outspoken critic of the Public Employees Retirement System. He served as the House chairman of the committee to reform PERS in 2003. He promised voters that he would not accept PERS this year and he followed through on the promise.What Knopp failed to mention is that he was a member of PERS who closed his account in 2010 because his family needed the money. Knopp could have closed his account in 2003 -- and avoided the conflict then -- or he could have closed his account when he left office in 2005.None of that takes away from the accuracy of the statement -- he honored his pledge to stay out of PERS -- but it is additional information that we deem missing from his press releases.We rate the statement Mostly True.

true

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/warm-welcome/

Did a 1922 Article Warn of Oceans Warming?

David Mikkelson

07/01/2013

One of the key issues in the global warming debate is whether modern scientists have sufficient data and tools to determine that current warming trends are indicative of long-term climatic changes rather than relatively short-term weather pattern variability. A text widely shared online seemingly provides an example of the pitfalls of mistaking the latter for the former, purportedly reproducing a 1922 newspaper article warning that the Arctic ocean was experiencing a radical change in climatic conditions which was warming its waters, melting ice, and disrupting wildlife: The Arctic ocean is warming up, icebergs are growing scarcer and in some places the seals are finding the water too hot, according to a report to the Commerce Department yesterday from Consulafft, at Bergen, Norway. Reports from fishermen, seal hunters and explorers all point to a radical change in climate conditions and hitherto unheard-of temperatures in the Arctic zone. Exploration expeditions report that scarcely any ice has been met as far north as 81 degrees 29 minutes. Soundings to a depth of 3,100 meters showed the gulf stream still very warm. Great masses of ice have been replaced by moraines of earth and stones, the report continued, while at many points well known glaciers have entirely disappeared. Very few seals and no white fish are found in the eastern Arctic, while vast shoals of herring and smelts which have never before ventured so far north, are being encountered in the old seal fishing grounds. I apologize, I neglected to mention that this report was from November 2, 1922. As reported by the AP and published in The Washington Post 88 years ago! The text in the above example is a genuine transcription of a 1922 newspaper article, an Associated Press account which appeared on page 2 of the Washington Post on 2 November of that year: That article in turn was based on information relayed by the American consul in Norway to the U.S. State Department in October 1922 and published in the Monthly Weather Review: Monthly Weather Review The Arctic seems to be warming up. Reports from fisherman, seal hunters, and explorers who sail the seas about Spitzbergen and the eastern Arctic, all point to a radical change in climatic conditions, and hitherto underheard-of high temperatures in that part of the earth's surface. In August, 1922, the Norwegian Department of Commerce sent an expedition to Spitzbergen and Bear Island under the leadership of Dr. Adolf Hoel, lecturer on geology at the University of Christiania. Its purpose was to survey and chart the lands adjacent to the Norwegian mines on those islands, take soundings of the adjacent waters, and make other oceanographic investigations. Ice conditions were exceptional. In fact, so little ice has never before been noted. The expedition all but established a record, sailing as far north as 81 29' in ice-free water. This is the farthest north ever reached with modern oceanographic apparatus. The character of the waters of the great polar basin has heretofore been practically unknown. Dr. Hoel reports that he made a section of the Gulf Stream at 81 north latitude and took soundings to a depth of 3,100 meters. These show the Gulf Stream very warm, and it could be traced as a surface current till beyond the 81st parallel. The warmth of the waters makes it probable that the favorable ice conditions will continue for some time. In connection with Dr. Hoel's report, it is of interest to note the unusually warm summer in Arctic Norway and the observations of Capt. Martin Ingebrigsten, who has sailed the eastern Arctic for 54 years past. He says that he first noted warmer conditions in 1918, that since that time it has steadily gotten warmer, and that to-day the Arctic of that region is not recognizable as the same region of 1868 to 1917. Many old landmarks are so changed as to be unrecognizable. Where formerly great masses of ice were found, there are now often moraines, accumulations of earth and stones. At many points where glaciers formerly extended far into the sea they have entirely disappeared. As interesting as this nearly century-old article might be from a modern perspective, however, it isn't substantive evidence either for or against the concept of anthropogenic global warming. As documented elsewhere, the warming phenomena observed in 1922 proved to be indicative only of a local event in Spitzbergen, not a trend applicable to the Arctic as a whole. elsewhere Associated Press. "Arctic Ocean Getting Warm; Seals Vanish and Icebergs Melt." The Washington Post. 2 November 1922 (p. 2).

true

https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2012/oct/05/john-kasich/while-ohio-123000-jobs-2011-auto-jobs-are-down-joh/

We're up 123,000 jobs over the last year and three-quarters. We're actually, according to the Bureau of Labor statistics, down 500 ... auto jobs in Ohio.

Tom Feran

10/05/2012

Ohio's economic condition is improving. That's good news for Gov. John Kasich, but it comes with an asterisk.An improving economy is also considered good news for President Barack Obama. Kasich, a Republican, backs challenger Mitt Romney. The point came up, as it has before, during a recent Fox News interview.The Democrats are saying one of the big factors helping the president is the auto bailout, particularly in the northern part of the state, host Paul Gigot said, wondering if Kasich's boosting of jobs was helping Obama's campaign.Kasich, as he has before, downplayed the role of the auto recovery.We're up 123,000 jobs over the last year and three-quarters, he said. We're actually, according to the Bureau of Labor statistics, down 500 jobs, auto jobs in Ohio.A loss of jobs? PolitiFact Ohio was interested.We looked at figures from the federal Bureau of Labor Statistics, and we asked Kasich's office for his sourcing.First, we noted that Kasich, in talking about the last year and three-quarters, was referring to the period from January 2011, when he took office, until August 2012, the last month for which figures were available.BLS figures for Ohio show that total nonfarm employment went in that period from 5,064,600 to 5,187,600 -- an increase of 123,000 jobs, as Kasich stated.In talking about auto jobs in that period, Kasich's staff said he was referring to jobs in the BLS categories of motor vehicle manufacturing and motor vehicle parts manufacturing.The first category saw an increase of 700 jobs from January 2011 to August 2012, from 19,200 to 19,900.In the second and larger category, employment went from 56,000 to 54,800, a loss of 1,200 jobs.That's a net decrease of 500 jobs.So Kasichs numbers are correct. But additional information is needed to clarify his claim.The timeframe Kasich used is an issue in itself, as we have noted before. In talking about Ohio jobs, the governor only used figures that covered his time in office, starting in January 2011. But the first federal aid to the automakers was made in 2008 while Republican President George W. Bush was still in office. It continued in early 2009 under Obama.The auto industry hit bottom in June 2009, when vehicle manufacturing jobs in Ohio dropped to 14,200, down from 23,800 jobs one year earlier. By the time Kasich took office, after the auto bailouts, that number had increased by 5,000 jobs. That isn't reflected in the governor's tally.Parts manufacturing, down 1,200 jobs since Kasich took office, is up 3,900 jobs from the trough of June 2009.It is also worth noting that the figures the governor cited reflect only direct jobs in the auto industry. Some industry analysts, such as the Center for Automotive Research in Ann Arbor, also look at two other categories of employment in the industry -- intermediate and spin-off -- in considering the impact auto manufacturing has on the economy. Under that gauge, job growth in other businesses that have a connection to the auto industry also would be considered.On the Truth-O-Meter, a statement that is accurate but needs clarification or additional information rates Mostly True.

true

https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2019/jul/16/donald-trump/president-trump-correct-about-food-stamp-low/

Food Stamp participation hits 10 year low.

Stefanie Pousoulides

07/16/2019

Participation in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, also known as SNAP or food stamps, has been declining for the past several years largely due to an improving economy. President Donald Trump referred to the decline in a July 9 tweet, mentioning a right-wing media outlet that published anarticleabout the 10-year low hours before. Food Stamp participation hits 10 year low. Wow! @OANN, Trumpwrote. The White House and Trump campaign did not provide a comment. SNAP benefits are food vouchers issued by the government to eligible participants and families with no or low income. While the federal government oversees the program, benefits are administered monthly on the state level. When it comes to comparing SNAP participation over the past 10 years, the best way to do so is to examine the percentage of the U.S. population that is participating in the program, said Lauren Bauer, fellow in economic studies at the Brookings Institution. Its preferable to take the percentage of the population instead of a regular count because the U.S. population is growing. She pointed us to data from theU.S. Department of Agricultureand theU.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis. Since April 2009, the only month that had a lower participation percentage was February 2019. As well see, there were unusual circumstances a government shutdown that affected the February numbers. The general decline in SNAP benefits is likely due to the consequences of the very low level of unemployment and gradually rising wages, said Michael Wiseman, professor of public policy at George Washington University. Due to agovernment shutdown, February 2019 had the lowest participation percentage only 2.22% of people received SNAP benefits. As the record-breaking shutdown lasted from Dec. 22, 2018, to Jan. 25, 2019, most February benefits were distributed in January to ensure SNAP recipients would receive their February 2019 benefits in a timely manner, according to the USDA. The number of SNAP participants largely depends on the economy, said Brynne Keith-Jennings, senior research analyst of the left-leaning Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. And experts noted that policy changes havent had significant long-term effects on the decline in participation thats how strongly tied SNAP is to the economy. Because of the Great Recession, SNAP benefits were expanded at the beginning of the Obama administration in 2009 as a counter-recession effort, Wiseman said. The expansion was eliminated in 2013, so the 2009 Recovery Act had short-term if any effects, Keith-Jennings added. Another part of the 2009 stimulus was suspending a three-month limit to SNAP participation for Able-Bodied Adults without Dependents. States with high unemployment rates have the ability to waive the limit, at least for now. The Trump administration has proposed tightening standards for permitting relief from time limits, Wiseman said. In my judgment, time limits on (Able-Bodied Adults without Dependents), while questionable policy, are not the driving factor behind slowdown of SNAP enrollment. Aproposalby the U.S. Department of Agriculture would make it more difficult for states to waive the three-month limit. If the USDA rule is approved, an estimated 755,000 people would no longer be eligible for SNAP benefits, according to a USDA estimate thats part of theproposed rule. However, even if its approved, the economy would still have a larger effect on overall trends in SNAP participation due to the relatively small size of this population among SNAP participants, Keith-Jennings said. Our ruling Trump tweeted, Food Stamp participation hits 10 year low. Hes correct. The abnormally low SNAP participation in February 2019 was due to benefits for that month being distributed in January 2019 because of a government shutdown. We rate this True.

true

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/impeached-president-lose-benefits/

Does an Impeached US President Lose Benefits?

Dan Evon

01/09/2021

In the days following the pro-Trump riot at the U.S. Capitol on Jan 6. 2021, several lawmakers started calling for U.S. President Donald Trump to be impeached for a second time, this time, according to one draft of the impeachment articles, for "incitement of insurrection." one draft of the impeachment articles As the momentum for impeachment built, some social media users argued that it wasn't worth impeaching Trump again as he would be leaving office in a few days regardless. But according to a viral message from Twitter user @BenCostiloe, the potential consequences of impeachment extended further than removal from office. This message, which was shared more than 150,000 times, claimed that impeaching Trump would also strip him of several post-presidency benefits, such as a lifetime pension, security detail, and the ability to run for office in the future: viral message This message is generally accurate. However, it should be noted that a president is only stripped of these benefits if they are impeached and removed from office. As of this writing, Trump, who was impeached by the U.S. House of Representatives in December 2019, will still receive presidential benefits as he was not convicted by the Senate and removed from office. U.S. President Bill Clinton, for example, still receives the benefits bestowed on former presidents even though he, too, was impeached. impeached The benefits a president receives after leaving office are outlined in the Former Presidents Act of 1958. That law states that former presidents shall receive a lifetime pension (of approximately $200,000 annually), travel-related expenses up to $1 million each fiscal year, and protection from the Secret Service. It also notes that these benefits shall not be awarded to presidents whose service was terminated by removal "pursuant to section 4 of article II of the Constitution of the United States of America." Former Presidents Act approximately $200,000 annually) Article II of Section 4 of the Constitution, reads: "The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors." reads Mother Jones reported: reported The 1958 Former Presidents Act assures that no president leaves office without being set for lifeit guarantees a pension, access to health insurance, office space and staff. There is, however, one exception: These perks are only granted to presidents who arent removed from office in an impeachment trial. There is some debate as to whether an impeached, convicted, and removed president would also lose protection from the Secret Service. The Former Presidents Protection Act of 2012 authorizes "the Secret Service to protect former Presidents and their spouses for their lifetimes." This act does not state any exceptions for an impeached and removed president. As this is ahistorical territory, it's unclear how the term "former president" would be interpreted in this instance. We reached out to various historians for comment and will update this article accordingly. Former Presidents Protection Act The final item listed in the viral tweet "loses his ability to run in 2024" is a possibility, but not a foregone conclusion in the case of an impeachment conviction in the Senate. The U.S. Constitution states that a president "shall be removed from office if impeached and convicted. However, it is up to the Senate's judgment as to whether a removed president should be barred from holding future office. Here's an excerpt from the U.S. Senate website (emphasis ours): website In impeachment proceedings, the House of Representatives charges an official of the federal government by approving, by majority vote, articles of impeachment. A committee of representatives, called managers, acts as prosecutors before the Senate. The Senate sits as a High Court of Impeachment in which senators consider evidence, hear witnesses, and vote to acquit or convict the impeached official. In the case of presidential impeachment trials, the chief justice of the United States presides. The Constitution requires a two-thirds vote of the Senate to convict, and the penalty for an impeached official upon conviction is removal from office. In some cases, the Senate has also disqualified such officials from holding public offices in the future. There is no appeal. Since 1789, about half of Senate impeachment trials have resulted in conviction and removal from office. In short, if Trump is impeached and removed from office, he would lose many of the benefits awarded to former presidents. Updated [13 January 2021]: Article update to note that there is some debate as to whether an impeached, convicted, and removed president would also lose secret service protection.

neutral

https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2012/aug/03/george-allen/george-allen-says-tim-kaine-tried-raise-taxes-peop/

Tim Kaine, as governor, proposed tax increases on people earning as little as $17,000.

Sean Gorman

08/03/2012

Republican Senate candidate George Allen recently accused Democratic opponent Tim Kaine of being a tax hiker, even on people of modest means.During a July 21 debate in Hot Springs, Allen criticized Kaine for actually proposing tax increases that would be hitting people earning as little as $17,000 a year.We checked to see if Kaine, who was governor from 2006 to 2010, really did try to raise taxes on people at that income level.The Allen campaign, in awebsite post, backed Allens statement by citing news articles about a proposal Kaine unveiled in December 2009 as part of his farewell biennial budget proposal for 2010-2012. Kaine called for adding a 1 percent income tax surcharge and giving all proceeds to localities in return for them scrapping the car tax they levy on personal vehicles.Legislators in 1998 adopted a five-year plan to phase out the personal property tax on most cars and reimburse localities for their lost revenues. But the program was more expensive than anticipated and legislators eventually capped the state reimbursement at $950 million a year. The remaining share is paid by vehicle owners.Ending the car tax would mean the state wouldnt have to provide the annual $950 million payment to localities, Kaine said in aspeechto the General Assemblys money committees. Kaine wanted to use the savings to help balance the states recession-wracked budget.News articles from the time said Kaines policy would raise the maximum state income tax rate from 5.75 percent to 6.75 percent. That maximum rate applies to all taxable income above $17,000 after deductions and exemptions are taken into account.The state charges gradually higher income tax rates up to that level. Virginia puts a 2 percent levy on the first $3,000 of taxable income, 3 percent of the next $2,000, 5 percent on the next $12,000 and then 5.75 percent on all taxable income above $17,000.Thebilladvancing Kaines proposal did not say the added tax would only be levied on taxable income of $17,000 or more. The added 1 percent surtax would have pertained to all income levels, according to Joel Davison, a spokesman for the Virginia Department of Finance.Virginia does not require individuals with a state adjusted income below $11,950 and married couples with a state adjusted income below $23,900 to pay state income taxes. So they wouldnt have been affected by the tax increase.Kaines proposal was killed by the General Assembly.It should be noted that some people earning $17,000 would have benefitted from Kaines plan if their savings from the elimination of the car tax outstripped their increased income tax. There are no estimates of the number of Virginians who would fallen into this category, but we suspect it would be a small group. Heres why:For starters, we can eliminate those who didnt own cars.Now, lets consider those who did own vehicles. A single filer with no children earning $17,000 would have a taxable income of $13,070 after taking the standard deduction and exemption. A 1 percent income tax increase for that person would come to almost $131 a year.The car levy paid by that person would depend on where he or she lived because each locality sets it own tax rate based on the assessed value of the vehicle. In Richmond, a person wouldnt pay a $131 levy unless they had a car worth about $9,000. In rural Henry County, a vehicle would have to be valued at about $17,500 to merit a $131 tax.Our rulingAllen said that Kaine proposed a tax increase that would have affected people earning as little as $17,000 a year. Not everyone at that level would have paid more under Kaines plan, but its a safe bet that large number of them would have seen their overall tax bill rise.We rate Allens statement True.

true

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/hunter-biden-malia-obama-cocaine/

Does a Pic Show Hunter Biden Used Malia Obama's Credit Card to Snort Cocaine?

Dan Evon

10/28/2020

In October 2020, a photograph supposedly showing a credit card belonging to Malia Obama, the daughter of former U.S. President Barack Obama, was circulated on social media along with a variety of claims related to Hunter Biden, the son of 2020 presidential candidate Joe Biden. One post, for example, claimed that this photograph came from the hard drive of a laptop that supposedly belonged to Hunter Biden a controversial subject in its own right that we'll address below and that it showed how Biden had used Obama's credit card to snort lines of cocaine off the surface of the device: New picture off Hunters laptop.... this is getting worse and worse.... he was either doing cocaine with Malia Obama, or just had her card because that's what usually happens, right??? LMAOOO. WHAT A SORRY POS!! However, this picture is several months old, there's little evidence to support the claim that this credit card belongs to Malia Obama, and no evidence exists to show that this picture was taken from Biden's laptop. This photograph has been online since at least December 2019. At the time, celebrity websites circulated it in articles claiming that Obama's credit card had been stolen by hackers. MTO News, for instance, reported: MTO News Malia Obama's credit card was stolen and posted online by hackers, MTO News has learned. It's not clear how the hackers got ahold of Malia's card, or whether they used it - but a photo of the president's daughter's card showed up on Twitter this morning also conspicuously next to lines of what appears to be cocaine. However, we're skeptical that this card actually belongs to Barack Obama's daughter, and not another person perhaps named Malia Obama, as this picture appears to show that whoever owned the card had been a "member since 2011." First daughter Malia Obama was 13 years old in 2011. While some credit card companies allow minors to become authorized users under an adult's account, we don't know if that was the case here, and the minimum age to open a personal credit card is 18. minimum age The claim that this picture was pulled from Biden's laptop appears to be made out of whole cloth. In October 2020, the New York Post published an article claiming that it had obtained material from a laptop Biden owned. This story raised some immediate red flags, which included the fact that more than 50 former intelligence officials suspected the story was part of a Russian disinformation campaign; that some reporters at the news outlet refused to attach their bylines to the story; and that several news outlets, such as The Wall Street Journal and Fox News, were reportedly reluctant to report on the story because much of the information could not be verified. Russian disinformation campaign; refused to attach their bylines to the story; Wall Street Journal Fox News Regardless of whether the picture truly showed Biden's laptop and the credit card of the former president's daughter, no evidence indicates the photograph was found on the laptop hard drive. The New York Post has published several documents that it claimed came from the laptop, but this photograph was not one of them. Bertrand, Natasha. "Hunter Biden Story is Russian Disinfo, Dozens of Former Intel Officials Say." Politico. 19 October 2020. Hall, Colby. "EXCLUSIVE: Fox News Passed on Hunter Biden Laptop Story Over Credibility Concerns." Mediate. 19 October 2020. Benveniste, Alexis. "The anatomy of the New York Post's dubious Hunter Biden story." CNN. 18 October 2020. Smith, Ben. "Trump Had One Last Story to Sell. The Wall Street Journal Wouldnt Buy It." New York Times. 25 October 2020. Glueck, Katie, Schmidt, Michael, and Isaac, Mike. "Allegation on Biden Prompts Pushback From Social Media Companies." New York Times. 14 October 2020. White, Alexandria. "How Old Do You Have to be to Get a Credit Card?" CNBC. 30 August 2020. Brockworth, Tiffany. "Hackers Post Malia Obama's Credit Card Online w/ 'Cocaine'!!." MTO News. 23 December 2019. Correction [29 October 2020]: Updated article to note that some credit card companies allow minors to be authorized users on adult accounts.

false

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/pence-empty-boxes/

Did Pence Deliver Empty PPE Boxes to a Rehabilitation Center?

Dan Evon

05/08/2020

Snopes is still fighting an infodemic of rumors and misinformation surrounding the COVID-19 pandemic, and you can help. Find out what we've learned and how to inoculate yourself against COVID-19 misinformation. Read the latest fact checks about the vaccines. Submit any questionable rumors and advice you encounter. Become a Founding Member to help us hire more fact-checkers. And, please, follow the CDC or WHO for guidance on protecting your community from the disease. fighting Find out Read Submit Become a Founding Member CDC WHO In May 2020, a video supposedly showing Vice President Mike Pence delivering empty boxes that were supposed to be filled with personal protective equipment (PPE) to the Woodbine Rehabilitation and Healthcare Center in Alexandria, Virginia, was featured on the show "Jimmy Kimmel Live." A clip of this segment was later shared on social media along with the caption: "Mike Pence caught on hot mic delivering empty boxes of PPE for a PR stunt." This is genuine footage of Pence. However, it does not show him "caught on hot mic" admitting that he just delivered a bunch of empty boxes to a health care facility. This video actually shows Pence making a humorous quip after delivering boxes that were truly filled with PPE. The full video from C-Span shows Pence transporting several boxes from a truck to the door of the health care center. After unloading the boxes from his dolly, Pence returns to the truck to grab another round of boxes but is informed by someone that the remaining boxes are empty. Pence then jokes that he should carry one of the empty boxes for the cameras. The man replies with a quip of his own, saying that the empty ones are much easier to carry than the full ones, which draws laughter from the crowd. Pence then closes the van door. You can see this exchange around the 9-minute mark of the following video from C-Span: https://www.c-span.org/video/?471876-1/vice-president-pence-delivers-ppe-woodbine-rehabilitation-center We reached out to the Woodbine Rehabilitation Center to confirm that it had received PPE from the vice president. While we have yet to receive a response, the facility did post a message on Facebook to thank Pence and his team: Facebook Jon Thompson, a spokesperson for the vice president, called the claim that Pence was delivering empty boxes "absolute garbage" in a tweet: tweet Coleman, Justine. "Pence Delivers PPE to Alexandria Nursing Home." The Hill. 7 May 2020. C-Span. "Vice President Pence Delivers PPE to Woodbine Rehabilitation Center." 7 May 2020.

false

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/mar-a-lago-foreclosure-fox-news/

Did Fox News Report that Trump's Mar-a-Lago Club Received Foreclosure Notice from Deutsche Bank?

Jordan Liles

11/15/2023

On Nov. 15, 2023, a user on X with the handle @PatMaguire10 published a post (archived) that said Fox News had reported former U.S. President Donald Trump's Mar-a-Lago Club in Palm Beach, Florida had received a foreclosure notice from Deutsche Bank. We received reader mail that asked if this was true. post archived The post read, "BREAKING FOX NEWS: Deutsche Bank has filed a notice to foreclose on Mar A Lago. The Trump property is part of a larger estate lien that is 190m$ delinquent. Court documents show a 3.4b$ loan that's in default. Trump hasn't respond to repeated attempts for comment. Developing story." However, a quick check of @PatMaguire10's X bio showed that the account posts "parody" content. In other words, Fox News didn't report on any such foreclosure notice, nor was there any public record of a foreclosure of Mar-a-Lago taking place or scheduled to happen in the future. For a little more background on the subject that was referenced, on the same day that the post was created, Trump's legal team reportedly asked for a mistrial to be declared in the civil fraud trial brought against him in New York. mistrial Weeks earlier, the same trial featured testimony from retired Deutsche Bank executive Nicholas Haigh. Haigh provided information to the court about the bank's decision to loan Trump roughly $125 million for the purchase of the Trump National Doral property in Miami in 2011, according to ABC News. ABC News As for Mar-a-Lago, Miami Herald reported in August 2022 that Trump had received a loan from Chase Manhattan Bank not Deutsche Bank for his 1985 purchase of the property: Miami Herald Mar-a-Lago itself cost Trump $8 million, which he financed with an $8.5 million loan from Chase Manhattan Bank. The other parcel - oceanfront land next to the manor - cost $2 million. Trump was able to use $500,000 from the estate loan and a $1.5 million mortgage from the seller, Jack C. Massey, to cover the bill. For further reading, we previously published a report titled, "Media Literacy: How Can You Tell if a Post Is Satire/Parody?" report Bromwich, Jonah E. Trump Lawyers Call for Mistrial in Civil Fraud Case, Attacking Judge. The New York Times, 15 Nov. 2023, https://www.nytimes.com/2023/11/15/nyregion/trump-mistrial-fraud-case.html. Charalambous, Peter, et al. Bank Relied on Trumps Financial Statement to Secure Loan. ABC News, 11 Oct. 2023, https://abcnews.go.com/US/live-updates/trump-fraud-trial/bank-relied-on-trumps-financial-statement-to-secure-loan-103895871?id=103642561. ---. Deutsche Bank Executive Set to Take Stand. ABC News, 11 Oct. 2023, https://abcnews.go.com/US/live-updates/trump-fraud-trial/deutsche-bank-executive-set-to-take-stand-103889913?id=103642561. Ibrahim, Nur. Media Literacy: How Can You Tell If a Post Is Satire/Parody? Snopes, 25 Feb. 2023, https://www.snopes.com/articles/464404/media-literacy-satire-parody/. Kleinman, Jeff. How Donald Trump Changed a Palm Beach Mansion. The Story behind His Mar-a-Lago Takeover. Miami Herald, 9 Aug. 2022, https://www.miamiherald.com/news/state/florida/article264318476.html. Spencer, Terry. Is Mar-a-Lago Worth $1 Billion? Trumps Winter Home Valuations Are at the Core of His Fraud Trial. The Associated Press, 9 Oct. 2023, https://apnews.com/article/trump-maralago-lawsuit-palm-beach-51fea4e520b1901c1c045590b2a7bdc0.

false

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/mar-a-lago-foreclosure-fox-news/

Was it reported by Fox News that the Mar-a-Lago Club owned by Trump received a foreclosure notice from Deutsche Bank?

Jordan Liles

11/15/2023

On Nov. 15, 2023, a user on X with the handle @PatMaguire10 published a post (archived) that said Fox News had reported former U.S. President Donald Trump's Mar-a-Lago Club in Palm Beach, Florida had received a foreclosure notice from Deutsche Bank. We received reader mail that asked if this was true. post archived The post read, "BREAKING FOX NEWS: Deutsche Bank has filed a notice to foreclose on Mar A Lago. The Trump property is part of a larger estate lien that is 190m$ delinquent. Court documents show a 3.4b$ loan that's in default. Trump hasn't respond to repeated attempts for comment. Developing story." However, a quick check of @PatMaguire10's X bio showed that the account posts "parody" content. In other words, Fox News didn't report on any such foreclosure notice, nor was there any public record of a foreclosure of Mar-a-Lago taking place or scheduled to happen in the future. For a little more background on the subject that was referenced, on the same day that the post was created, Trump's legal team reportedly asked for a mistrial to be declared in the civil fraud trial brought against him in New York. mistrial Weeks earlier, the same trial featured testimony from retired Deutsche Bank executive Nicholas Haigh. Haigh provided information to the court about the bank's decision to loan Trump roughly $125 million for the purchase of the Trump National Doral property in Miami in 2011, according to ABC News. ABC News As for Mar-a-Lago, Miami Herald reported in August 2022 that Trump had received a loan from Chase Manhattan Bank not Deutsche Bank for his 1985 purchase of the property: Miami Herald Mar-a-Lago itself cost Trump $8 million, which he financed with an $8.5 million loan from Chase Manhattan Bank. The other parcel - oceanfront land next to the manor - cost $2 million. Trump was able to use $500,000 from the estate loan and a $1.5 million mortgage from the seller, Jack C. Massey, to cover the bill. For further reading, we previously published a report titled, "Media Literacy: How Can You Tell if a Post Is Satire/Parody?" report Bromwich, Jonah E. Trump Lawyers Call for Mistrial in Civil Fraud Case, Attacking Judge. The New York Times, 15 Nov. 2023, https://www.nytimes.com/2023/11/15/nyregion/trump-mistrial-fraud-case.html. Charalambous, Peter, et al. Bank Relied on Trumps Financial Statement to Secure Loan. ABC News, 11 Oct. 2023, https://abcnews.go.com/US/live-updates/trump-fraud-trial/bank-relied-on-trumps-financial-statement-to-secure-loan-103895871?id=103642561. ---. Deutsche Bank Executive Set to Take Stand. ABC News, 11 Oct. 2023, https://abcnews.go.com/US/live-updates/trump-fraud-trial/deutsche-bank-executive-set-to-take-stand-103889913?id=103642561. Ibrahim, Nur. Media Literacy: How Can You Tell If a Post Is Satire/Parody? Snopes, 25 Feb. 2023, https://www.snopes.com/articles/464404/media-literacy-satire-parody/. Kleinman, Jeff. How Donald Trump Changed a Palm Beach Mansion. The Story behind His Mar-a-Lago Takeover. Miami Herald, 9 Aug. 2022, https://www.miamiherald.com/news/state/florida/article264318476.html. Spencer, Terry. Is Mar-a-Lago Worth $1 Billion? Trumps Winter Home Valuations Are at the Core of His Fraud Trial. The Associated Press, 9 Oct. 2023, https://apnews.com/article/trump-maralago-lawsuit-palm-beach-51fea4e520b1901c1c045590b2a7bdc0.

false

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/mar-a-lago-foreclosure-fox-news/

Was it reported by Fox News that Trump's Mar-a-Lago Club received a foreclosure notice from Deutsche Bank?

Jordan Liles

11/15/2023

On Nov. 15, 2023, a user on X with the handle @PatMaguire10 published a post (archived) that said Fox News had reported former U.S. President Donald Trump's Mar-a-Lago Club in Palm Beach, Florida had received a foreclosure notice from Deutsche Bank. We received reader mail that asked if this was true. post archived The post read, "BREAKING FOX NEWS: Deutsche Bank has filed a notice to foreclose on Mar A Lago. The Trump property is part of a larger estate lien that is 190m$ delinquent. Court documents show a 3.4b$ loan that's in default. Trump hasn't respond to repeated attempts for comment. Developing story." However, a quick check of @PatMaguire10's X bio showed that the account posts "parody" content. In other words, Fox News didn't report on any such foreclosure notice, nor was there any public record of a foreclosure of Mar-a-Lago taking place or scheduled to happen in the future. For a little more background on the subject that was referenced, on the same day that the post was created, Trump's legal team reportedly asked for a mistrial to be declared in the civil fraud trial brought against him in New York. mistrial Weeks earlier, the same trial featured testimony from retired Deutsche Bank executive Nicholas Haigh. Haigh provided information to the court about the bank's decision to loan Trump roughly $125 million for the purchase of the Trump National Doral property in Miami in 2011, according to ABC News. ABC News As for Mar-a-Lago, Miami Herald reported in August 2022 that Trump had received a loan from Chase Manhattan Bank not Deutsche Bank for his 1985 purchase of the property: Miami Herald Mar-a-Lago itself cost Trump $8 million, which he financed with an $8.5 million loan from Chase Manhattan Bank. The other parcel - oceanfront land next to the manor - cost $2 million. Trump was able to use $500,000 from the estate loan and a $1.5 million mortgage from the seller, Jack C. Massey, to cover the bill. For further reading, we previously published a report titled, "Media Literacy: How Can You Tell if a Post Is Satire/Parody?" report Bromwich, Jonah E. Trump Lawyers Call for Mistrial in Civil Fraud Case, Attacking Judge. The New York Times, 15 Nov. 2023, https://www.nytimes.com/2023/11/15/nyregion/trump-mistrial-fraud-case.html. Charalambous, Peter, et al. Bank Relied on Trumps Financial Statement to Secure Loan. ABC News, 11 Oct. 2023, https://abcnews.go.com/US/live-updates/trump-fraud-trial/bank-relied-on-trumps-financial-statement-to-secure-loan-103895871?id=103642561. ---. Deutsche Bank Executive Set to Take Stand. ABC News, 11 Oct. 2023, https://abcnews.go.com/US/live-updates/trump-fraud-trial/deutsche-bank-executive-set-to-take-stand-103889913?id=103642561. Ibrahim, Nur. Media Literacy: How Can You Tell If a Post Is Satire/Parody? Snopes, 25 Feb. 2023, https://www.snopes.com/articles/464404/media-literacy-satire-parody/. Kleinman, Jeff. How Donald Trump Changed a Palm Beach Mansion. The Story behind His Mar-a-Lago Takeover. Miami Herald, 9 Aug. 2022, https://www.miamiherald.com/news/state/florida/article264318476.html. Spencer, Terry. Is Mar-a-Lago Worth $1 Billion? Trumps Winter Home Valuations Are at the Core of His Fraud Trial. The Associated Press, 9 Oct. 2023, https://apnews.com/article/trump-maralago-lawsuit-palm-beach-51fea4e520b1901c1c045590b2a7bdc0.

false

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/mar-a-lago-foreclosure-fox-news/

Has Fox News stated that Trump's Mar-a-Lago Club was served a foreclosure notice by Deutsche Bank?

Jordan Liles

11/15/2023

On Nov. 15, 2023, a user on X with the handle @PatMaguire10 published a post (archived) that said Fox News had reported former U.S. President Donald Trump's Mar-a-Lago Club in Palm Beach, Florida had received a foreclosure notice from Deutsche Bank. We received reader mail that asked if this was true. post archived The post read, "BREAKING FOX NEWS: Deutsche Bank has filed a notice to foreclose on Mar A Lago. The Trump property is part of a larger estate lien that is 190m$ delinquent. Court documents show a 3.4b$ loan that's in default. Trump hasn't respond to repeated attempts for comment. Developing story." However, a quick check of @PatMaguire10's X bio showed that the account posts "parody" content. In other words, Fox News didn't report on any such foreclosure notice, nor was there any public record of a foreclosure of Mar-a-Lago taking place or scheduled to happen in the future. For a little more background on the subject that was referenced, on the same day that the post was created, Trump's legal team reportedly asked for a mistrial to be declared in the civil fraud trial brought against him in New York. mistrial Weeks earlier, the same trial featured testimony from retired Deutsche Bank executive Nicholas Haigh. Haigh provided information to the court about the bank's decision to loan Trump roughly $125 million for the purchase of the Trump National Doral property in Miami in 2011, according to ABC News. ABC News As for Mar-a-Lago, Miami Herald reported in August 2022 that Trump had received a loan from Chase Manhattan Bank not Deutsche Bank for his 1985 purchase of the property: Miami Herald Mar-a-Lago itself cost Trump $8 million, which he financed with an $8.5 million loan from Chase Manhattan Bank. The other parcel - oceanfront land next to the manor - cost $2 million. Trump was able to use $500,000 from the estate loan and a $1.5 million mortgage from the seller, Jack C. Massey, to cover the bill. For further reading, we previously published a report titled, "Media Literacy: How Can You Tell if a Post Is Satire/Parody?" report Bromwich, Jonah E. Trump Lawyers Call for Mistrial in Civil Fraud Case, Attacking Judge. The New York Times, 15 Nov. 2023, https://www.nytimes.com/2023/11/15/nyregion/trump-mistrial-fraud-case.html. Charalambous, Peter, et al. Bank Relied on Trumps Financial Statement to Secure Loan. ABC News, 11 Oct. 2023, https://abcnews.go.com/US/live-updates/trump-fraud-trial/bank-relied-on-trumps-financial-statement-to-secure-loan-103895871?id=103642561. ---. Deutsche Bank Executive Set to Take Stand. ABC News, 11 Oct. 2023, https://abcnews.go.com/US/live-updates/trump-fraud-trial/deutsche-bank-executive-set-to-take-stand-103889913?id=103642561. Ibrahim, Nur. Media Literacy: How Can You Tell If a Post Is Satire/Parody? Snopes, 25 Feb. 2023, https://www.snopes.com/articles/464404/media-literacy-satire-parody/. Kleinman, Jeff. How Donald Trump Changed a Palm Beach Mansion. The Story behind His Mar-a-Lago Takeover. Miami Herald, 9 Aug. 2022, https://www.miamiherald.com/news/state/florida/article264318476.html. Spencer, Terry. Is Mar-a-Lago Worth $1 Billion? Trumps Winter Home Valuations Are at the Core of His Fraud Trial. The Associated Press, 9 Oct. 2023, https://apnews.com/article/trump-maralago-lawsuit-palm-beach-51fea4e520b1901c1c045590b2a7bdc0.

false

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/mar-a-lago-foreclosure-fox-news/

Was there a report by Fox News indicating that the Mar-a-Lago Club owned by Trump received a foreclosure notice from Deutsche Bank?

Jordan Liles

11/15/2023

On Nov. 15, 2023, a user on X with the handle @PatMaguire10 published a post (archived) that said Fox News had reported former U.S. President Donald Trump's Mar-a-Lago Club in Palm Beach, Florida had received a foreclosure notice from Deutsche Bank. We received reader mail that asked if this was true. post archived The post read, "BREAKING FOX NEWS: Deutsche Bank has filed a notice to foreclose on Mar A Lago. The Trump property is part of a larger estate lien that is 190m$ delinquent. Court documents show a 3.4b$ loan that's in default. Trump hasn't respond to repeated attempts for comment. Developing story." However, a quick check of @PatMaguire10's X bio showed that the account posts "parody" content. In other words, Fox News didn't report on any such foreclosure notice, nor was there any public record of a foreclosure of Mar-a-Lago taking place or scheduled to happen in the future. For a little more background on the subject that was referenced, on the same day that the post was created, Trump's legal team reportedly asked for a mistrial to be declared in the civil fraud trial brought against him in New York. mistrial Weeks earlier, the same trial featured testimony from retired Deutsche Bank executive Nicholas Haigh. Haigh provided information to the court about the bank's decision to loan Trump roughly $125 million for the purchase of the Trump National Doral property in Miami in 2011, according to ABC News. ABC News As for Mar-a-Lago, Miami Herald reported in August 2022 that Trump had received a loan from Chase Manhattan Bank not Deutsche Bank for his 1985 purchase of the property: Miami Herald Mar-a-Lago itself cost Trump $8 million, which he financed with an $8.5 million loan from Chase Manhattan Bank. The other parcel - oceanfront land next to the manor - cost $2 million. Trump was able to use $500,000 from the estate loan and a $1.5 million mortgage from the seller, Jack C. Massey, to cover the bill. For further reading, we previously published a report titled, "Media Literacy: How Can You Tell if a Post Is Satire/Parody?" report Bromwich, Jonah E. Trump Lawyers Call for Mistrial in Civil Fraud Case, Attacking Judge. The New York Times, 15 Nov. 2023, https://www.nytimes.com/2023/11/15/nyregion/trump-mistrial-fraud-case.html. Charalambous, Peter, et al. Bank Relied on Trumps Financial Statement to Secure Loan. ABC News, 11 Oct. 2023, https://abcnews.go.com/US/live-updates/trump-fraud-trial/bank-relied-on-trumps-financial-statement-to-secure-loan-103895871?id=103642561. ---. Deutsche Bank Executive Set to Take Stand. ABC News, 11 Oct. 2023, https://abcnews.go.com/US/live-updates/trump-fraud-trial/deutsche-bank-executive-set-to-take-stand-103889913?id=103642561. Ibrahim, Nur. Media Literacy: How Can You Tell If a Post Is Satire/Parody? Snopes, 25 Feb. 2023, https://www.snopes.com/articles/464404/media-literacy-satire-parody/. Kleinman, Jeff. How Donald Trump Changed a Palm Beach Mansion. The Story behind His Mar-a-Lago Takeover. Miami Herald, 9 Aug. 2022, https://www.miamiherald.com/news/state/florida/article264318476.html. Spencer, Terry. Is Mar-a-Lago Worth $1 Billion? Trumps Winter Home Valuations Are at the Core of His Fraud Trial. The Associated Press, 9 Oct. 2023, https://apnews.com/article/trump-maralago-lawsuit-palm-beach-51fea4e520b1901c1c045590b2a7bdc0.

false

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/peter-griffin/

Is This Man's Name Really Peter Griffin?

David Mikkelson

07/21/2005

A directory photo (perhaps a school yearbook) of a man supposedly named "Peter Griffin" bears a strong resemblance to another Peter Griffin, the "big, boisterous lovable oaf" featured in the Fox animated TV series, Family Guy. Family Guy However, the same photograph previously appeared on the internet with a legend identifying its subject as Justin Blair Spaeth. Justin Blair Spaeth is a real person (who bears a physical similarity to the Peter Griffin character but does not share his name), as evidenced by these snapshots of a Back Stage Blue (the thespian troupe of Notre Dame High School) production of "West Side Story." these snapshots Back Stage Blue The altered image has been shared on websites and social media since at least 2005, including in Twitter ads that lead to listicles and slideshows, such as this one: Spaeth's image with the words "Peter Griffin" is included in the tweet as clickbait, as it does not even appear in the long list on the advertised website.

false

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/slenderman/

The Truth About Slenderman

David Emery

01/20/2017

On 31 May 2014, three 12-year-old girls embarked on a "birdwatching" expedition in a wooded area near their homes in Waukesha, Wisconsin that ended in one of them being stabbed 19 times and left for dead. Seriously injured, the victim managed to crawl to a nearby road, where she was found and taken to a hospital. She told police her friends had attacked her. The other two girls were arrested and charged with attempted first-degree intentional homicide. The attack weapon was found among their belongings. They admitted to planning and executing the crime. Under interrogation, they claimed they did it to appease a supernatural being called Slenderman (aka Slender Man), who was described in a Newsweek article as "an evil character who lives only on the Internet," but in whom the accused attackers said they fervently believed: described According to the criminal complaint obtained by Newsweek, Morgan Geyser and Anissa Weier, both 12, discovered Slender Man on Creepypasta Wiki, a website dedicated to Internet horror stories (its tagline: Proudly hosting 12,151 of your worst nightmares since 2010). They believed he was real. In early 2014, Geyser and Weier decided to become what they called proxies of Slender Man, thereby proving their dedication to him and his existence to skeptics. To do so, theyd have to kill someone. Creepypasta Wiki Although months in the planning, their mission did not succeed. The victim, Payton Leutner, recovered, though she still lives in fear for her life, her mother says. The accused were tried as adults and pleaded guilty to the attack but argued in court they weren't responsible for their actions due to mental illness. In December 2017, Weier was sentenced to 25 years in a psychiatric institution. Geyser has yet to face sentencing. The incident was cast as a cautionary tale for parents by Waukesha police chief Russell Jack, who cited it as a consequence of allowing children unsupervised access to the Internet: cited Keeping children safe is more challenging than in years past. The Internet has changed the way we live. It is full of information and wonderful sites that teach and entertain. The Internet can also be full of dark and wicked things. But although it's true there are "dark and wicked things" to be found on the Internet (as in life, generally), and children's use of the Internet ought indeed to be supervised, to suggest that the Slenderman materials viewed by the accused are "wicked," in any deeper sense than, say, a Stephen King novel is "wicked," is to misunderstand them. The Slenderman "mythos," as the accumulated stories, images, and commentary related to the character have come to be called, is a blend of fiction and folklore. It's a crowd-sourced horror story that hearkens back to boogeyman tales of old. boogeyman The first time the name "Slender Man" appeared anywhere in print or on screen was on the entertainment web site SomethingAwful.com on 10 June 2009. Someone started a thread in a discussion forum, essentially a Photoshop contest, entitled "Create Paranormal Images." Among the early entries was one posted under the pseudonym "Victor Surge" (later identified as member Eric Knudsen), consisting of an old photograph manipulated to depict a tall, faceless human-like figure with tentacle-like arms lurking in the shadows near a children's playground: SomethingAwful.com One of two recovered photographs from the Stirling City Library blaze. Notable for being taken the day which fourteen children vanished and for what is referred to as "The Slender Man". Deformities cited as film defects by officials. Fire at library occurred one week later. Actual photograph confiscated as evidence. 1986, photographer: Mary Thomas, missing since June 13th, 1986. The effect was understated, yet creepy. Inspired by the example, others contributed photos and backstory expanding on Surge's themes, and piecemeal construction of the Slenderman mythos, a collaborative project from the start, was underway. As Surge himself suggested, it was also, from the start, a patchwork of cultural influences: Where did you get the source for Slender Man? Or was he done from a scratch? The Slender Man as an idea was made-up off the top of my head, although the concept is based on a number of things that scare me. The name I thought up on the fly when I wrote that first bit. The asset I used for a couple of the pictures was the creepy tall guy from Phantasm, which sadly I have not seen, and the others various guys in suits. All of the things that aren't the torso and legs, like the tentacles and Slender Man's face, were painted from scratch however. By the time middle-schoolers Morgan Geyser and Anissa Weier encountered the Slenderman character years later, the mythos had grown considerably and was being archived on fan sites like Creepypasta Wiki (creepypasta" being an Internet slang term for user-created horror stories and images). It's where, for example, the girls would have read that Slenderman uses fear to control people's minds, and then kills them: Creepypasta Wiki He is described as wearing a black suit strikingly similar to the visage of the notorious Men In Black, and as the name suggests, appears very thin and able to stretch his limbs and torso to inhuman lengths in order to induce fear and ensnare his prey. Once his arms are outstretched, his victims are put into something of a hypnotized state, where they are utterly helpless to stop themselves from walking into them. He is also able to create tendrils from his fingers and back that he uses to walk on in a similar fashion to Doctor Octopus. The superhuman stretching ability could also be seen as a similarity between himself and Mr. Fantastic. Whether he absorbs, kills, or merely takes his victims to an undisclosed location or dimension is also unknown as there are never any bodies or evidence left behind in his wake to deduce a definite conclusion. It's also where they would have learned what a Slenderman "proxy" is: proxy Proxy (plural: Proxies) is the term given to those who serve The Slender Man. The theory behind the name is that Proxies are entities or people who are under the influence or control of the Slender Man (or the same force that influences Slender Man), and act based on its wants and needs hence, Proxies serve as an in-between (i.e. a proxy) for Slender Man. And it's where they would have been introduced to "evidence" that Slenderman sightings date back to the 16th-century in Germany, where woodcuts documenting reports of a murderous so-called "Tall Man" (Der Gromann) with a spear-like arm and superfluous legs were allegedly found: Der Grossman According to legend, he was a fairy who lived in the Black Forest. Bad children who crept into the woods at night would be relentlessly chased by Der Gromann, who wouldn't leave them be until he either caught them or they were forced to tell their parents of their wrongdoing. Like other items purporting to constitute visual proof of Slenderman's existence, however, the woodcut is merely a doctored version of a Hans Holbein print (circa 1497, below right) depicting a knight in armor "pierced by Death's lance": print It's hard not to admire the creativity that went into Slenderman. It's equally hard at least, from our point of view to subscribe to the view that it was done for a malevolent purpose or represents a "dark and wicked" side of the Internet. It's more accurate to characterize it as an ad hoc communal art project, or, if you're a folklorist and your bailiwick includes studying the spontaneous generation of stories, an updated, Internet-savvy instance of the age-old process of legend creation. American folklorist Andrea Kitta expressed just this view in a January 2017 interview with the web site inews.co.uk: inews.co.uk The internet is certainly helping to spread modern urban myths wider and faster than before. Kitta argues, however, that they are more or less exactly like traditional folklore. The only difference in some cases is that people may include a picture with the story, which adds to its believability. But all of these forms of folklore share many similarities. They tend to be set in the local or historic past, they are believable, and they contain variation. Folklorists see such tales as imbued with deeper social meanings. Shira Chess, author of Folklore, Horror Stories and the Slender Man (2014), explored these in comments to The Washington Post: We tell ourselves stories because we (humans) are storytelling animals, she wrote in an e-mail. And, to that end, horror stories take on a specific significance and importance because they function metaphorically the horror stories that are the best are often metaphors for other issues that affect our lives on both cultural and personal levels. Slender Man, Chess says, is a metaphor for helplessness, power differentials, and anonymous forces. Hes an infinitely morphable stand-in for things we can neither understand nor control, universal fears that can drive people to great lengths even, it would appear, very scary, cold-blooded lengths. Chess seems to be saying it's the feeling of helplessness and fear underlying them, not horror stories themselves, that can drive people to "cold-blooded lengths." Andrea Kitta isn't so sure: Kitta believes that urban legends are sometimes wrongly blamed for shocking events. However, she also suggests it is possible they can exert an influence too. Sometimes people use folklore as a scapegoat, perhaps most famously in the Satanic Panic of the 1980s. But we would be remiss to assume that folklore is safe or benign. We're not in a position to judge to what extent, if any, the Slenderman materials viewed by Payton Leutner's accused attackers may have "exerted an influence" on their behavior. We would point out, however, that reports of such incidents have been very few and far between since the character was created in 2009. Perhaps, as Kitta says, folklore isn't always benign, but we should be wary when it's blamed for the bad things people do. Butler, Mark."Slender Man: How a Modern Urban Legend Came to Haunt a Generation." inews.co.uk.17 January 2017. Dewey, Caitlin."The Complete History of 'Slender Man,' the Meme That Compelled Two Girls to Stab a Friend." The Washington Post.27 July 2016. Jones, Abigail."The Girls Who Tried to Kill for Slender Man." Newsweek.13 August 2014. Vielmetti, Bruce."Girl Believed She Had to Kill or Be Killed by Slender Man, Attorney Says." Milwaukee Journal Sentinel.16 February 2015. Associated Press. "Girl Gets 25 Years in Mental Hospital in Slender Man Case." 22 December 2017. Creepypasta Wiki."The Slender Man."

false

https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2010/jul/27/marc-morial/marc-morial-correct-unemployment-rates-whites-blac/

The Latino unemployment rate is higher than the white rate and the black rate is higher than the Latino rate.

Louis Jacobson

07/27/2010

On July 25, 2010, David Gregory, the host of NBC'sMeet the Press, asked his roundtable panelists to consider Diversity and the Myth of White Privilege, aWall Street Journalop-ed column from July 22, in which Sen. James Webb, D-Va., argues against federal affirmative action laws.I have dedicated my political career to bringing fairness to America's economic system and to our work force, regardless of what people look like or where they may worship, Webb wrote. Unfortunately, present-day diversity programs work against that notion, having expanded so far beyond their original purpose that they now favor anyone who does not happen to be white. In an odd historical twist that all Americans see but few can understand, many programs allow recently arrived immigrants to move ahead of similarly situated whites whose families have been in the country for generations. These programs have damaged racial harmony. And the more they have grown, the less they have actually helped African-Americans, the intended beneficiaries of affirmative action as it was originally conceived.Marc Morial -- president of the National Urban League, a century-old civil rights organization -- was one panelist who took the challenge, arguing that non-whites continue to experience disadvantages compared to whites.I don't agree that Latinos and Asians have not suffered discrimination in this country or that Native Americans have not suffered discrimination in this country, Morial said. I think the question is, how do you target and tailor policies that are going to help all economically and socially disadvantaged people. And it's a fair debate to have, but it also needs to be positive with facts. Look at the Latino unemployment rate. It's higher than the white rate. The black rate is higher than the Latino rate. So to suggest that there are not disparities that affect the Latino community, that affect the Native American community, most in depth, the African-American community, we've got to have the discussion that Jim Webb wants to have. We have facts, real facts, that give a picture of how life is in this nation.We won't take sides on Webb's proposal to end policies that provide race-based advantages, a topic that inspires passions on both sides, but which isn't a checkable fact. Instead, we'll focus on the narrower question of whether Morial is accurate on the question of comparative unemployment rates for whites, blacks and Latinos.The Bureau of Labor Statistics calculates seasonally adjusted unemployment rates by race and ethnicity. We found that in June 2010, the white unemployment rate was 8.6 percent. The black unemployment rate was 15.4 percent, and the Hispanic/Latino rate was 12.4.So Morial is correct that the Latino unemployment rate is higher than the white rate and that the black rate is higher than the Latino rate.Though it falls beyond the boundaries of our fact-check, we'll note one other point from the statistics. Morial argued that Latinos and Asian Americans have suffered discrimination in the United States, and we think most people would agree with that at least as a historical matter. But if you look at the unemployment rate for Asians, it's 7.7 percent. That's actually lower than the rate for whites. (Technically, the BLS only calculates a non-seasonally-adjusted rate for Asians, but the comparable rate for whites is still higher at 8.7 percent. )Still, as we indicated, Morial made no specific claim about unemployment among Asian-Americans, and for the groups that he did mention -- whites, blacks and Latinos -- his numbers were accurate. So we rate his comment True.

true

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/toyota-tundra-giveaway/

450K Facebook Users Fell for This Toyota Tundra Giveaway Scam

Jordan Liles

12/15/2023

On Dec. 15, 2023, we received reader mail that asked about a purported giveaway on Facebook that promised one winner a 2023 Toyota Tundra pickup truck. The many Facebook pages that promoted the supposed giveaway were named 2023 Tundra, TRD. One of the posts read as follows and directed users to a sites.google.com website: Christmas surprise! This Toyota Tundra wasn't sold so we're giving it to someone by December 19th who $hared and Register here. Another post asked users to enter the giveaway in the comments by typing "@" and then clicking on "highlight." In the pinned comment under the post, users were directed to visit a website to "validate" their entry. post However, none of these posts hosted a genuine giveaway for a 2023 Toyota Tundra. All of this was a scam apparently designed to entice users to fill out surveys, sign up for "free trials" on websites and perform other tasks, at least partially in order for the scammers to obtain an affiliate-marketing commission. In other words, it was a waste of time and a potentially dangerous one at that for users who hoped to win a free pickup truck. Unfortunately, as of Dec. 15, over 450,000 users had commented on just one of the posts. It's unclear how many of these users continued with the scam by clicking on one of the links. The reason why the scammers asked users to type "@" in the comments and then click "highlight" was to boost the page's following. This would potentially help the scammer to sell the follower-filled page in the future, if that was the goal. (We previously reported about the "highlight" feature on Facebook.) reported about Based upon the actions of scammers over the last several years, it's likely that they will attempt the same fake giveaway strategy in the future using the makes and models of other cars. For any users who fell for these scams and gave away their financial information (e.g. a credit card number), we recommend retracing your steps and ensuring that any "free trials" that were signed up for are canceled, so that no future charges appear on your statement. Call your credit card company for further advice. For further reading, the U.S. Better Business Bureau (BBB) published an article about how to spot fake giveaways on social media. One of those tips mentioned to find out if the Facebook page that's offering the giveaway has a verified badge or not. If it has a verified badge, it's likely a legitimate giveaway. However, scammers have been known to seize on accounts with verified badges in order to advertise their scams, so bear in mind that this is not a foolproof tip. article verified badge BBB Scam Alert: How to Spot a Fake Social Media Giveaway. U.S. Better Business Bureau (BBB), 21 Dec. 2020, https://www.bbb.org/article/news-releases/23522-scam-alert-how-to-spot-a-fake-social-media-giveaway. Liles, Jordan. Does Typing @ in a Facebook Comment and Clicking Highlight Reveal Page Watchers? Snopes, 27 Nov. 2023, https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/facebook-highlight-page-watchers/.

false

https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2011/oct/09/nick-tsiongas/says-health-care-greatest-contributor-increases-rh/

Health care is the greatest contribution to spending increases in the state budget.

Edward Fitzpatrick

10/09/2011

In September, Dr. Nick Tsiongas wrote a commentary for The Providence Journal about how the federal health-care overhaul is taking shape in Rhode Island.Tsiongas, a former state legislator and past president of the Rhode Island Medical Society, is a founding board member of HealthRIght, a statewide group working for the passage and implementation of comprehensive health care reform. His piece made the case for a robust health benefits exchange, which would create a marketplace where people and businesses could buy health insurance.To frame the issue, Tsiongas began by saying, In Rhode Island, as elsewhere in America, the cost of health care threatens bankruptcy for those without insurance, individuals and businesses find premiums increasingly onerous and even unaffordable, and health care is the greatest contribution to spending increases in the state budget.The debate about the health-care exchange can extend to a range of topics, but we wanted to test one of Tsiongas underlying claims: That health care is the biggest factor driving state budget increases.We contacted Tsiongas, who said he was referring to three main categories of health-care spending: Medicaid (which includes RIte Care/Share and nursing home and long-term care costs ), state employees health insurance costs, and retiree costs.To bolster his claim, Tsiongas cited a Rhode Island Public Expenditure Council report, which said that total state spending from all sources increased by about $2 billion between fiscal years 2001 and 2011. Human services accounted for the largest share of the increase (37.5 percent), followed by general government (28.8 percent) and education (26.3 percent), the report says.Grants and benefits for human services programs represent the largest share of expenditures in the total budget and the majority of these expenditures are for medical assistance programs.The RIPEC report noted that The Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation tracks Medicaid spending by state, and in fiscal year 2009 Rhode Island ranked fourth (behind Ohio, New Hampshire and Massachusetts) in state Medicaid spending as a percentage of the general fund.Medicaid remains about a quarter of the state budget and projected increases are unsustainable without health system payment reform, Tsiongas wrote in an e-mail. One can argue that this and next years state pension contributions may dwarf other increases, but this represents a catch-up of long-standing pension underpayments by the state, whereas the states health-care costs have had a sustained role in the budget over time.Tsiongas said the states health-care costs dont just include Medicaid; they also include the cost of providing health-insurance coverage to state employees and retirees.To check Tsiongas, we turned first to RIPEC, a business-backed organization that has been analyzing the factors that drive public spending since 1932.In a chart it prepared for PolitiFact, RIPEC showed that medical assistance, which includes most Medicaid spending in the state, increased by $713.5 million between fiscal 2002 and the enacted budget for fiscal 2012 -- accounting for 28.4 percent of the spending increase from all sources of revenue during that decade.No other category of spending increased by that much, according to the RIPEC chart. A category of other grants and benefits, which includes some higher education spending and unemployment insurance, rose by $566 million, accounting for 22.6 percent of the spending increase. And salaries and benefits for state employees rose by $499 million, accounting for 19.9 percent of the increase during that decade.But it should be noted that salaries and benefits includes the employee health-care costs that Tsiongas referenced.So when you combine all three areas of health-care spending -- Medicaid, employee health care and retiree health care -- they make up the single largest category of increased spending in the state budget over that 10-year span, RIPEC officials said.During that time, those three areas have driven up the budget even more than state pension payments, RIPEC officials said. In recent months, public attention has focused on the pension system because the cost to Rhode Island taxpayers of financing the state-run pensions for public employees has more than doubled during the last seven years and actuaries say it could double again next fiscal year to more than $600 million.RIPEC officials said that those rapidly escalating pension costs could become a bigger factor than the health-care costs in the near future -- if nothing is done. But they noted the treasurer and the governor are formulating a pension proposal, and they expect the General Assembly to take action to curtail pension costs during an upcoming special session.In 2013 and in the future, pensions will become the main issue that needs to be addressed, RIPEC Executive Director John Simmons said. But, he said, historically the Medicaid and health-care issue has been the largest driver of costs.State Budget Officer Thomas A. Mullaney agreed that pension costs could become a much bigger factor in the budget, if nothing is done. But, he said, over the last several years, particularly in the area of Medicaid, health-care costs have been the largest driver in the budget, from an absolute dollar amount standpoint.So Tsiongas had the correct diagnosis when he said that health care is the greatest contribution to spending increases in the state budget. We rate his claimTrue.

true

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/chicken-lettuce-under-bacon/

Does 'Club' in 'Club Sandwich' Stand for 'Chicken Lettuce Under Bacon'?

David Emery

09/02/2022

A considerable number of people on the internet appear to believe that a food item known as the club sandwich got its name from the acronym of its most common ingredients: "Chicken and Lettuce Under Bacon." While there's a modicum of logic and precedent to this notion (after all, "BLT" is an acronym for "Bacon, Lettuce, and Tomato"), history doesn't support it. Quite the opposite. Club sandwiches have been around for a long, long time. There are references to the popular lunch item and recipes for making it in published sources dating back to the 1890s. Here, for example, is a club sandwich recipe from Janet McKenzie Hill's "Salads, Sandwiches and Chafing-Dish Dainties," published in 1899: Salads, Sandwiches and Chafing-Dish Dainties Despite the club sandwich's culinary longevity, however, the theory that it was named for its ingredients appears to be no older than the late 1990s, and may well have originated on the internet. We scoured book and periodical archives and found no references to any version of "chicken and lettuce under bacon" in any text published prior to 2018. Etymologist Barry Popik reports finding this "Chicken Lettuce Under Bacon" reference posted in a Google Groups discussion dated Dec. 8, 1998: Barry Popik reports finding posted in a Google Groups discussion As of this writing, we've not been able to find any published mentions predating this. In another blog post, Popik flatly asserts that "club" sandwich is not, in fact, an acronym, but rather a "backronym" (or "back acronym," meaning the claim was made after the fact). Based on our own research, we agree. another blog post backronym So, where did the name "club sandwich" really come from? Popik writes: writes The club sandwich probably originated at the Union Club of the City of New York in the 1880s. The World (New York, NY) printed on November 18, 1889: Have you trie[d] a Union Club sandwich yet? Two toasted slices of Graham bread, with a layer of turkey or chicken and ham between them, served warm. Union Club member Ely Goddard (1853-1910) was given credit for the sandwich in articles in the New York (NY) Herald in 1891 and 1893, but a chef at the club also could have originated it. Hill, Janet McKenzie. Salads, Sandwiches and Chafing-Dish Dainties: With Thirty-Two Illustrations of Original Dishes. Little, Brown, 1899. Martin, Gary. Club Sandwich - the Meaning and Origin of This Phrase. Phrasefinder, https://www.phrases.org.uk/meanings/club-sandwich.html. Accessed 2 Sept. 2022. Popik, Barry. "Club Sandwich (Club House Sandwich; Clubhouse Sandwich)." https://www.barrypopik.com/index.php/new_york_city/entry/club_sandwich/. Accessed 2 Sept. 2022. Popik, Barry. "Chicken Lettuce Under Bacon ("club sandwich backronym)." https://www.barrypopik.com/index.php/new_york_city/entry/chicken_lettuce_under_bacon/. Accessed 2 Sept. 2022.

false

https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2012/mar/15/robert-jacquard/rhode-island-state-rep-robert-b-jacquard-says-many/

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

Alex Kuffner

03/15/2012

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

true

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/amber-alert-shutdown/

AMBER Alert Shutdown

David Mikkelson

10/07/2013

Claim: The AMBER Alert system has been discontinued due to the federal government shutdown. Example: [Collected via Facebook, October 2013] Just saw a post on Facebook that is accusing President Obama of discontinuing internet Amber Alerts. I didn't even know there wasinternet Amber Alerts. Any truth to this? Just heard the Amber Alert system has been shut down but MichelleObama's "Lets Move" site is still up. Is this true? Origins: The AMBER Alert system for fostering widespread dissemination of bulletins about abducted children is coordinated on a nationwide basis by the Office of Justice Programs under the U.S. Department of Justice (DoJ). In the first few days of the federal government shutdown in October 2013, the federal government's AMBER alert web site was replaced by a plain white screen and a message stating that "Due to the lapse in federal funding, this Office of Justice Programs (OJP) website is unavailable": AMBER alert replaced This circumstance led to rumors that the AMBER Alert system had been shut down, while less vital federal government programs were still active. However, this was not the case. The DoJ's AMBER Alert web site only provides background information and statistics about the AMBER Alert system; it doesn't create, disseminate, or list the alerts themselves. AMBER alerts are issued locally, and they are compiled and tracked on the web site of the National Center for Missing & Exploited Children (NCMEC), which is, and has been, available throughout the federal government shutdown: National Center for Missing & Exploited Children "The Amber Alert system was never interrupted, but to eliminate any confusion, the informational site maintained by the Justice Department has been restored," Justice Department spokesman Brian Fallon [said]. The website for the Office of Justice Programs, which hosts Amber Alert information, [was] "shut down" due to funding issues, a senior Justice Department official [said]. The official [said] that the website is informational only, detailing the department's role in providing training to states on how to have an Amber Alert system, and that the alerts themselves were not affected. Amber Alerts are issued jurisdictionally, by county or state, the official said, adding that the Amber Alert system, which consists largely of press notifications, highways signs, and tweets, is functional and not affected by the shutdown. "The Office of Justice Programs had the funds to run through Friday," October 4, after which it "furloughed all of employees. So since they couldn't staff and monitor those websites, they were put behind a firewall so as to keep from hacking or security issues," said Fallon. If there isn't a Justice Department employee working to monitor the sites, Fallon said, "it's a cyber-security risk for sites to be posted but not maintained or supervised." "We had to bring in a furloughed employee to re-open the site," Fallon said, adding that it's "unclear if we will have the funds to monitor" the site. The decision was made, a senior Justice Department official said, because there was a "public safety worry because of incorrect reporting that the program itself was down," as opposed to just the federal website. NECMEC's web site now bears a notice stating that "The distribution of AMBER Alerts has not been affected by the recent government shutdown." As of 7 October 2013, the DoJ's AMBER Alert web is also back online. notice Last updated: 7 October 2013

false

https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2012/jun/27/sam-adams/does-trimet-itself-say-free-rides-high-school-stud/

Says TriMet's own analysis shows that YouthPass does not actually add to the transit agency's costs.

Janie Har

06/27/2012

The TriMet Board recently adopted a budget that does not includefree transit passes for Portland high school students. This week,Portland Mayor Sam Adams shot back with a ginormous feeincrease on TriMet benches and shelters so he can provide the free passes. The YouthPass program is a big deal to Adams, who says transit access is critical to keeping teenagers in school and connected. In a statement released Tuesday,the mayor argued that providing passes for roughly 13,000 Portland Public Schools high school studentsdoesnt add to the transit agencys operating costs.In fact, TriMet's own analysis shows that YouthPass does not actually add to the transit agency's costs. No new buses, MAX trips, additional routes or drivers are needed to accommodate YouthPass riders, he said.TriMets own analysis showed that? This we had to check.PolitiFact Oregon contacted Caryn Brooks, the mayors spokeswoman. She turned up an Oct. 25, 2011 memo from an ECONorthwest economist to Claire Potter, TriMets director of financial analysis. The memo, commissioned by TriMet, explains the economic impact to the transit agency should it provide the passes without state support.Some quick background: Portland Public Schools has long provided free transit passes for low-income students. The concept was expanded under Adams in fall 2009 to include all PPS students. The state of Oregon paid for most of the $3.4 million program through a business energy tax credit; Portland Public Schools paid $800,000 of that.The arrangement ended in December 2011, at which point the City ofPortland, Portland Public Schools and TriMetcobbled a plan to keep it running through the school year.Heres the part of the ECONorthwest report that the mayor highlights: The provision of free passes to PPS students likely did not affect TriMet's operating costs in a significant way. Discontinuing the provision of free passes is unlikely to result in operating cost savings.In other words: The report states the agency saves no money if it stops providing free rides. Adams is correct about that.But the analysis also shows that TriMet loses out on a potential $1.9 million in fare money from students in 2012-13. And thats based on a monthly pass price tag of $27, wrote TriMet spokeswoman Mary Fetsch in an email. The price is scheduled to increase to $30 a month in September.The additional cost is not what TriMet is concerned about -- it is the foregone passenger revenue, in the range of $2 million, Fetsch said.Shes right that the analysis is about the potential hit to TriMets revenue stream. And Adams knows that, because hes proposed an 8000 percent increase in shelter and bench fees to squeeze $2 million out of TriMet, which he would then use to reimburse TriMet for the cost of the student passes.The mayors statement is accurate. But we think it needs additional information. Providing free student passes will not add to TriMets operating costs in the form of more drivers or bus routes, but it will deprive the transit agency of revenue once provided by other public agencies.The statement is accurate but needs extra information. We rate his statement Mostly True.

true

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/ballots-georgia-senate/

Did 50K Ballots Suspiciously Appear at Polls Overnight in Georgia Senate Runoffs?

Jessica Lee

01/06/2021

Shortly after Democrat Raphael Warnock was announced the winner of one of Georgia's two Senate runoff races on Jan. 6, 2021, putting the Senate majority within the party's reach, U.S. President Donald Trump attempted to cast doubt on the integrity of the election by claiming poll workers mysteriously uncovered 50,000 ballots overnight. He said in a tweet: was announced Donald Trump tweet They just happened to find 50,000 ballots late last night. The USA is embarrassed by fools. Our Election Process is worse than that of third world countries. The post was part of the president's long-spanning misinformation campaign (including the above-displayed tweet) to convince Americans of an illicit, coordinated scheme by Trump's political enemies to undermine him, even though nothing of the sort was taking place. long-spanning misinformation campaign Snopes debunked similar assertions by Trump that secretive late-night vote "dumps" helped his opponent in the 2020 presidential election, Democrat Joe Biden, win key battleground states. similar assertions key battleground states As was the case then, Georgia voters' heavy reliance on mail-in voting instead of in-person polls to reduce the risk of catching COVID-19 increased the chances of voting results shifting significantly late at night, as poll workers counted more ballots. That phenomenon was not a result of a conspiracy against Trump, but rather a product of a Georgia law that prohibits poll workers from counting any ballots until after polls close. Georgia law The Associated Press reported on Jan. 4, the day before the special election: Associated Press Absentee ballots must be received by the close of polls to be counted. Military and overseas ballots postmarked by Tuesday and received by Friday will be counted, and absentee voters also have until Friday to fix any problems so their votes can be counted. No ballots, including absentee ballots received in advance of Election Day, can be counted until the polls close. [...] In a close contest, look for the Republican candidate to jump out to an early lead. That due to two factors: First, Republican areas of the state usually report their results first. Second, Republican voters have been more likely to vote in person, either on Election Day or during the early voting period. Many counties release those in-person results first. Meanwhile, heavily Democratic counties, including Fulton, DeKalb and Chatham counties, historically take longer to count votes. In regards to the president's assertion regarding a "dump" of 50,000 ballots to supposedly undermine Republican candidates Sens. Kelly Loeffler and David Perdue, specifically, Snopes found no evidence to support the allegation of voter fraud, and Georgia election officials refuted such claims. "Election Day for the Georgia Senate runoffs has progressed with few issues and almost nonexistent wait times," the Georgia Secretary of State said in a news release. news release Below is our evidence for that conclusion. Just hours after polls closed, some elections officials statewide finished processing and tabulating ballots, and the public learned which candidate received the majority of votes in those counties. Meanwhile, ballot counting in other precincts remained ongoing. The Atlanta Journal Constitution reported at 9:30 p.m.: reported Its still early, but Republicans are increasingly antsy about their chances. Early returns are showing U.S. Sen. Kelly Loeffler and David Perdue underperforming in important GOP strongholds in rural areas and the exurbs. And turnout in Democratic bastions is nearing November general election levels in some left-leaning rural counties that have already reported most of their results. By 11 p.m., the newspaper said, election workers had tallied more than 300,000 votes, and only a small number of precincts were outstanding. Shortly afterwards, as Atlanta's DeKalb County uploaded its voter tallies, some news outlets, including Vox, declared Warnock the winner. He led Loeffler by about 37,000 votes, with 97% precincts reporting, according to the AJC. "Of the outstanding votes left to count, many were expected to come in from Democratic strongholds in DeKalb and Fulton counties," the newspaper reported. At 12:49 a.m., NBC was the first major news network to announce Loeffler had no statistical chance of overcoming Warnock's margin of victory. National news outlets including The Associated Press, CNN, and ABC News quickly followed suit. At 2 a.m. the AJC reported Fulton County election officials were calling it a night and preparing to count the last rounds of ballots in the morning. In all, about 25,000 mail-in ballots remained uncounted across the state, with the bulk in the Atlanta metro area, according to preliminary estimates from the Secretary of States office. In other words, voting spikes occurred over the course of hours, late at night, for predictable reasons. Counting in multiple Democratic strongholds, as well as several smaller and more conservative-leaning counties, resumed by 6:45 a.m. on Jan. 6, according to the newspaper. Shortly after the president's tweet about poll workers nefariously "finding" 50,000 ballots, Gabriel Sterling, a Republican who oversees voting systems for the secretary of states office, highlighted evidence showing typical voter returns based on the state's estimated number of absentee voters. He said in a tweet: No Mr. President, there werent found ballots. We have known the number of advanced votes since this weekend. We saw record Election Day turnout. As of Monday 970,000 absentees had been accepted. 31k more were added in yesterdays totals. That leaves 60k that came in yesterday. In sum, considering Sterling's direct refutation of Trump's claim, as well as the fact that no evidence exists to prove the president's conspiracy theory about 50,000 ballots, and all proof showed predictable vote-counting processes in the early morning hours of Jan. 6, we rate this claim "false."

false

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/be-like-bill/

'Be Like Bill' Spreads Malware?

Kim LaCapria

01/28/2016

In January 2016, a Facebook trend most commonly referenced as "Be Like Bill" swept the social network. During that time, users initially posted comics wherein a character named "Bill" served as a reinforcer of social media etiquette, before "Be Like Bill" generators enabled users to create personalized versions of the meme: As is often the case with items like "Be Like Bill" that appear seemingly from the ether and go Facebook-wide, it wasn't long before folks became suspicious of this Bill character and his purpose on their News Feeds. Soonafter Bill became the meme of the day, a backlash against the meme was started: one that first simply decried the "scolding" nature of the trend, then followed up with rumors that the ubiquitous comic was a vector for malware, information theft, or other undesirable outcomes: scolding Bill proved so popular and omnipresent that multiple local news outlets carried reports about the potential dangers of creating a "Be Like Bill" meme. Missouri TV station KFVS, Kansas City station KCTV (clip below), and Washington, D.C., station WTTGran some concern-generatingcoverage about the specific comic, typically lumping it into the general category of "clickbait" and associating it with the risk of all unvetted apps: KFVS KCTV WTTG It's known as 'clickbait', and if you haven't read the terms and conditions on the creator's website, the details may shock you. The company originally said in its terms of privacy, "You will allow us to use, edit your content with our service permanently, no limit and no recover." KFVS-TV also says, in some cases, content can contain viruses that can damage your computer, use your Facebook profile in ways you might not know, or even attempt to steal your credit card or bank account numbers. KCTV5 KCTV5 As the above-quoted material stated, Facebook has indeed presented a handy way for bad actors to engage in all sorts of unpleasant activities using compelling content. However, the "in some cases" outcomes described apply to malicious apps in general and not specifically to any known vulnerabilities linked to the "Be Like Bill" meme. Many articles cited extantBetter Business Bureau warnings about rogue apps that antedated "Be Like Bill" and referenced "clickbait," but the term was applied exceptionally broadly and not specifically to malware. In short, whether an item is clickbait itself has no bearing on its potential to cause harm to computers or accounts, and plenty of clickbait exists just to drive traffic to various web sites. clickbait Of additional interest (in bold) was a widely-reproduced excerpt from the Terms of Service of publisher Blobla's (who offered a mechanism for customizing "Be Like Bob" memes) that purportedly stated end users agreed to "allow [Blobla] to use, edit your content with our service permanently, no limit and no recover." We were unable to verify such language ever appeared in the agreement in question, and no such wording was in the their agreement as of 27 January 2016. Blobla's On 27 January 2016, Chicago station WMAQ published an article which reported that the Better Business Bureau (BBB) didn't suggest "Be Like Bill" posed any specific threat at all to social media users and added that the President and CEO of the Better Business Bureau of Chicago and Northern Illinois Steve Bernas had confirmed only that the BBB was looking into the meme (and keeping an eye out for impostors). article According to the outlet, Blobla clarified that the generator didn't require Facebook authorizations of the sort generally associated with malware or rogue apps: However, the Better Business Bureau has not yet definitely ruled whether the generated memes pose a risk to you or your computer. The sensation's creator, Bloba, on the other hand says they don't collect any data from users and their terms are the same as any others you see on Facebook. "First, our game Be Like Bill doesn't require users to authorize a Facebook app," a spokesperson for Bloba wrote in response. "Of course if users want to share the results to Facebook, they must be logged in Facebook. However we use Facebook share dialog for users to share their results. It's a very common ... This doesn't allow us to collect any data from user's Facebook account." Blobla's creators also explained that the now-elided, widely-cited verbiage ("permanently, no limit and no recover") was poorly composed and pertained to unrelated functions which might have ended up on their web site: "Second, we do not store any information of users on our servers, as stated in our ToS," Bloba continued. "Third, the Terms about our right to users' content is about posts on our website (a post may be a game like Be Like Bill, or a quiz, a video...). Because our website has a function for normal users to create a post in other languages. We have removed that term to avoid misunderstanding." On 29 January 2016, BBB communications director Katherine Hutt clarified the bureau's stance on "Be Like Bill," due to themultiple news reports conflating their earlier "clickbait" warnings withthat particularmeme and generator: We don't issue warnings about a specific company without investigating first. Finally, outlets devoted to more detailed reporting on online security (such as Sophos' Naked Security blog) haven't issued any warnings about "Be Like Bill" or the popular comic generator. No widespread reports of adverse outcomes have substantiated news affiliate speculation, and the bulk of "Be Like Bill"-themed reports focused on the general ability for malware to spread through apps, not any reports definitively (or anecdotally) related to that meme specifically. While users might tire of seeing Bill across their feeds, he doesn't pose a threat to anything more than annoyance-free browsing. blog

false

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/be-like-bill/

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

Kim LaCapria

01/28/2016

In January 2016, a Facebook trend most commonly referenced as "Be Like Bill" swept the social network. During that time, users initially posted comics wherein a character named "Bill" served as a reinforcer of social media etiquette, before "Be Like Bill" generators enabled users to create personalized versions of the meme: As is often the case with items like "Be Like Bill" that appear seemingly from the ether and go Facebook-wide, it wasn't long before folks became suspicious of this Bill character and his purpose on their News Feeds. Soonafter Bill became the meme of the day, a backlash against the meme was started: one that first simply decried the "scolding" nature of the trend, then followed up with rumors that the ubiquitous comic was a vector for malware, information theft, or other undesirable outcomes: scolding Bill proved so popular and omnipresent that multiple local news outlets carried reports about the potential dangers of creating a "Be Like Bill" meme. Missouri TV station KFVS, Kansas City station KCTV (clip below), and Washington, D.C., station WTTGran some concern-generatingcoverage about the specific comic, typically lumping it into the general category of "clickbait" and associating it with the risk of all unvetted apps: KFVS KCTV WTTG It's known as 'clickbait', and if you haven't read the terms and conditions on the creator's website, the details may shock you. The company originally said in its terms of privacy, "You will allow us to use, edit your content with our service permanently, no limit and no recover." KFVS-TV also says, in some cases, content can contain viruses that can damage your computer, use your Facebook profile in ways you might not know, or even attempt to steal your credit card or bank account numbers. KCTV5 KCTV5 As the above-quoted material stated, Facebook has indeed presented a handy way for bad actors to engage in all sorts of unpleasant activities using compelling content. However, the "in some cases" outcomes described apply to malicious apps in general and not specifically to any known vulnerabilities linked to the "Be Like Bill" meme. Many articles cited extantBetter Business Bureau warnings about rogue apps that antedated "Be Like Bill" and referenced "clickbait," but the term was applied exceptionally broadly and not specifically to malware. In short, whether an item is clickbait itself has no bearing on its potential to cause harm to computers or accounts, and plenty of clickbait exists just to drive traffic to various web sites. clickbait Of additional interest (in bold) was a widely-reproduced excerpt from the Terms of Service of publisher Blobla's (who offered a mechanism for customizing "Be Like Bob" memes) that purportedly stated end users agreed to "allow [Blobla] to use, edit your content with our service permanently, no limit and no recover." We were unable to verify such language ever appeared in the agreement in question, and no such wording was in the their agreement as of 27 January 2016. Blobla's On 27 January 2016, Chicago station WMAQ published an article which reported that the Better Business Bureau (BBB) didn't suggest "Be Like Bill" posed any specific threat at all to social media users and added that the President and CEO of the Better Business Bureau of Chicago and Northern Illinois Steve Bernas had confirmed only that the BBB was looking into the meme (and keeping an eye out for impostors). article According to the outlet, Blobla clarified that the generator didn't require Facebook authorizations of the sort generally associated with malware or rogue apps: However, the Better Business Bureau has not yet definitely ruled whether the generated memes pose a risk to you or your computer. The sensation's creator, Bloba, on the other hand says they don't collect any data from users and their terms are the same as any others you see on Facebook. "First, our game Be Like Bill doesn't require users to authorize a Facebook app," a spokesperson for Bloba wrote in response. "Of course if users want to share the results to Facebook, they must be logged in Facebook. However we use Facebook share dialog for users to share their results. It's a very common ... This doesn't allow us to collect any data from user's Facebook account." Blobla's creators also explained that the now-elided, widely-cited verbiage ("permanently, no limit and no recover") was poorly composed and pertained to unrelated functions which might have ended up on their web site: "Second, we do not store any information of users on our servers, as stated in our ToS," Bloba continued. "Third, the Terms about our right to users' content is about posts on our website (a post may be a game like Be Like Bill, or a quiz, a video...). Because our website has a function for normal users to create a post in other languages. We have removed that term to avoid misunderstanding." On 29 January 2016, BBB communications director Katherine Hutt clarified the bureau's stance on "Be Like Bill," due to themultiple news reports conflating their earlier "clickbait" warnings withthat particularmeme and generator: We don't issue warnings about a specific company without investigating first. Finally, outlets devoted to more detailed reporting on online security (such as Sophos' Naked Security blog) haven't issued any warnings about "Be Like Bill" or the popular comic generator. No widespread reports of adverse outcomes have substantiated news affiliate speculation, and the bulk of "Be Like Bill"-themed reports focused on the general ability for malware to spread through apps, not any reports definitively (or anecdotally) related to that meme specifically. While users might tire of seeing Bill across their feeds, he doesn't pose a threat to anything more than annoyance-free browsing. blog

false

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/be-like-bill/

Bill imitators spreading malicious software?

Kim LaCapria

01/28/2016

In January 2016, a Facebook trend most commonly referenced as "Be Like Bill" swept the social network. During that time, users initially posted comics wherein a character named "Bill" served as a reinforcer of social media etiquette, before "Be Like Bill" generators enabled users to create personalized versions of the meme: As is often the case with items like "Be Like Bill" that appear seemingly from the ether and go Facebook-wide, it wasn't long before folks became suspicious of this Bill character and his purpose on their News Feeds. Soonafter Bill became the meme of the day, a backlash against the meme was started: one that first simply decried the "scolding" nature of the trend, then followed up with rumors that the ubiquitous comic was a vector for malware, information theft, or other undesirable outcomes: scolding Bill proved so popular and omnipresent that multiple local news outlets carried reports about the potential dangers of creating a "Be Like Bill" meme. Missouri TV station KFVS, Kansas City station KCTV (clip below), and Washington, D.C., station WTTGran some concern-generatingcoverage about the specific comic, typically lumping it into the general category of "clickbait" and associating it with the risk of all unvetted apps: KFVS KCTV WTTG It's known as 'clickbait', and if you haven't read the terms and conditions on the creator's website, the details may shock you. The company originally said in its terms of privacy, "You will allow us to use, edit your content with our service permanently, no limit and no recover." KFVS-TV also says, in some cases, content can contain viruses that can damage your computer, use your Facebook profile in ways you might not know, or even attempt to steal your credit card or bank account numbers. KCTV5 KCTV5 As the above-quoted material stated, Facebook has indeed presented a handy way for bad actors to engage in all sorts of unpleasant activities using compelling content. However, the "in some cases" outcomes described apply to malicious apps in general and not specifically to any known vulnerabilities linked to the "Be Like Bill" meme. Many articles cited extantBetter Business Bureau warnings about rogue apps that antedated "Be Like Bill" and referenced "clickbait," but the term was applied exceptionally broadly and not specifically to malware. In short, whether an item is clickbait itself has no bearing on its potential to cause harm to computers or accounts, and plenty of clickbait exists just to drive traffic to various web sites. clickbait Of additional interest (in bold) was a widely-reproduced excerpt from the Terms of Service of publisher Blobla's (who offered a mechanism for customizing "Be Like Bob" memes) that purportedly stated end users agreed to "allow [Blobla] to use, edit your content with our service permanently, no limit and no recover." We were unable to verify such language ever appeared in the agreement in question, and no such wording was in the their agreement as of 27 January 2016. Blobla's On 27 January 2016, Chicago station WMAQ published an article which reported that the Better Business Bureau (BBB) didn't suggest "Be Like Bill" posed any specific threat at all to social media users and added that the President and CEO of the Better Business Bureau of Chicago and Northern Illinois Steve Bernas had confirmed only that the BBB was looking into the meme (and keeping an eye out for impostors). article According to the outlet, Blobla clarified that the generator didn't require Facebook authorizations of the sort generally associated with malware or rogue apps: However, the Better Business Bureau has not yet definitely ruled whether the generated memes pose a risk to you or your computer. The sensation's creator, Bloba, on the other hand says they don't collect any data from users and their terms are the same as any others you see on Facebook. "First, our game Be Like Bill doesn't require users to authorize a Facebook app," a spokesperson for Bloba wrote in response. "Of course if users want to share the results to Facebook, they must be logged in Facebook. However we use Facebook share dialog for users to share their results. It's a very common ... This doesn't allow us to collect any data from user's Facebook account." Blobla's creators also explained that the now-elided, widely-cited verbiage ("permanently, no limit and no recover") was poorly composed and pertained to unrelated functions which might have ended up on their web site: "Second, we do not store any information of users on our servers, as stated in our ToS," Bloba continued. "Third, the Terms about our right to users' content is about posts on our website (a post may be a game like Be Like Bill, or a quiz, a video...). Because our website has a function for normal users to create a post in other languages. We have removed that term to avoid misunderstanding." On 29 January 2016, BBB communications director Katherine Hutt clarified the bureau's stance on "Be Like Bill," due to themultiple news reports conflating their earlier "clickbait" warnings withthat particularmeme and generator: We don't issue warnings about a specific company without investigating first. Finally, outlets devoted to more detailed reporting on online security (such as Sophos' Naked Security blog) haven't issued any warnings about "Be Like Bill" or the popular comic generator. No widespread reports of adverse outcomes have substantiated news affiliate speculation, and the bulk of "Be Like Bill"-themed reports focused on the general ability for malware to spread through apps, not any reports definitively (or anecdotally) related to that meme specifically. While users might tire of seeing Bill across their feeds, he doesn't pose a threat to anything more than annoyance-free browsing. blog

false

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/franked-admission/

Message Under the Stamp

Barbara Mikkelson

04/22/1999

Legend: The family of a POW are reassured by letter sent by their son until they steam off the stamp and read what's written there. Examples: [Cohen, 1993] During World War II Beth Lynn's oldest son, Robert, joined the navy. Even before the outbreak of the war the boy had dreamed of being a sailor. He was a very dutiful son, and he wrote his mother regularly, at least once a week, sometimes more often. After his ship went into combat in the war in the Pacific, Robert still wrote regularly. Sometimes he had to be very careful about what he said so as not to betray any military secrets that might then fall into the hands of the enemy. Letters often arrived with lines cut out of them by navy censors. These letters could be delayed for days, even weeks, owing to the uncertainties of mail delivery from a combat zone. But eventually they would show up in a bunch, much to the relief of Mrs. Lynn. So she was not too concerned when a couple of weeks went by without receiving the customary letters from her son. But when the weeks stretched into months, Mrs. Lynn became deeply concerned. Finally she contacted the Department of the Navy. After a long runaround and a great deal of red tape, Mrs. Lynn learned that her son's ship had been sunk off one of the Pacific islands which one she couldn't be told "for security reasons." The navy was not sure whether her son had been killed or had been captured by the Japanese. It was known that many Japanese ships had been in the vicinity when the ship went down, and it was assumed that at least some of the crewmen had been captured. Mrs. Lynn was devastated. But she took some small comfort in the possibility that Robert had not been killed but had been captured and taken to Japan and would be returned after the war. She clung to this fragile hope for many months. And then one day her prayers seem to have been answered. She received a telephone call from the navy. A letter from Robert had arrived from Japan. Naturally the government had intercepted all correspondence from the enemy and read it before passing it on. But this letter was perfectly harmless and would doubtless relieve her mind greatly. They would send it on to her. Mrs. Lynn waited anxiously for the letter to arrive from Washington. It came three days later. It was written on a thin, light blue paper. The letter didn't contain much hard information. Robert merely reported that his ship had been sunk and he had been captured and taken to Japan. He was now in a Japanese prison camp. He said that though he missed his family greatly and wanted more than anything else to be home, his captors were treating him quite well. Mrs. Lynn was almost hysterical with relief. She read the letter over and over again. then she looked at the envelope. It had a Japanese stamp. A Japanese wartime stamp would be quite rare in the United States, she reasoned. And her nephew collected stamps. He would be thrilled to add this to his collection. So Mrs. Lynn steamed the stamp off the envelope. And there, in tiny printing where the stamp had been, was this message: They've cut off my hands. [Collected on the Internet, 1997] A family in Kewanee (town of 17,000, 20 miles away) had a son in the military, in a Japanese prisoner-of-war camp. They received a letter from him, in which he asked them to be sure to save the stamp, he wanted to add it to his collection after the war. This puzzled the family; the boy had never collected stamps. They soaked off the stamp. Under the stamp he had written, "They have cut out my tongue." Origins: The blood chilling tale of the "message under the stamp" dates to 1866, when it was set during the American Civil War. In those early days the maimed serviceman was a Confederate lad held in a northern prison camp. Under the stamp on the letter home to his momma was found the first grisly message: "My God! They've cut out my tongue." Though the oldest sighting on record, it's by no means the only one. In common with a number of atrocity rumors, old tales of horror and vilification are revamped to fit new circumstances as different enemies and conflicts arise. Witness the following British telling from 1918, gathered near the end of World War I: [Jacobson, 1948] A clergyman was seated in a local restaurant. Opposite him at the table a stranger recited the rumor with all the drama and dogma of a religious fanatic. "This friend of mine's boy," the stranger at first confided, "is in a Boche prison camp. He sends a letter home and tells how things are all right with him and all that. It seems he likes everything, even the stamp on the letter. That stamp, he tells his ma, is a rare one and she ought to soak it off for little Alf's stamp collection." "Now," the stranger revealed, "they ain't got no little Alf in the whole family. But my friends does what their boy says. They steam off the stamp." The stranger's eyes glistened. His lips became thin and taut as he said, "Underneath the stamp they find a message that the boy couldn't put in the letter." The man seemed completely overcome by the emotional impact of his own story. His voice became shrill and each word was emphasized as though he wanted everyone within earshot to keep it in his mind forever. "It says," he went on, "they've torn out my tongue!" Though stunned by the story, the clergyman had the sense to realize the tale was an obvious fake. He knew prisoners' letters bore no stamps. Had the apocryphal boy sent such a message, there wouldn't have been a stamp under which to hide such a communication. Around the same time the "Little Alf" tale was being used in England to focus hatred upon the Germans, the same story was circulating in Germany about the Russians. In that version, a boy from Munich locked up in a Russian prisoner of war camp conveyed a gruesome message to his mother by hiding it under the stamp. His revelation read, "They have cut off my feet so I cannot escape." Atrocity rumors fall into disuse during times of peace but spring up like mushrooms after a rain once the clouds of war again roll in. In 1942, during WWII, this same basic story again hit the trail in Britain. Sometimes the letter was received by a father. Sometimes it had come to a wife. And the messages sometimes read, "They are starving us" or "They have cut off my ears" or "They have pierced my eyes" or "They have cut off my hands." In the United States, it was told about an American serviceman who had been captured by the Germans or the Japanese. What we have here is a typical atrocity rumor, a handy device used to vilify the guys on the other side of the battle line and thus make the idea of killing them in combat all that more palatable. By portraying the enemy as unredeemably cruel and heartless, the other guys are rendered into cartoon figures who it is okay to hate. Maybe you might not be capable of bayoneting a 28-year-old man with two small children at home, a wife he loves, and a mortgage he sweats to meet the payments on every month, but turn him into a slavering killer who chops the hands off helpless prisoners, dashes the heads of newborn babies against walls, rapes nuns, and crucifies priests, and killing him almost becomes a sacred duty. Such is the purpose of these blood-boiling tales. They help convince the army in the field to fight like the Devil, and they help convince the civilian population back home that being in this war is the right thing to do. Atrocity rumors are never new; they are merely retooled as circumstances change. In the ramp-up days towards the Gulf War, we were told Iraqi soldiers had rampaged through a Kuwaiti hospital, grabbing premature babies up out of incubators and tossing them to the floor to meet their deaths on the cold, hard tiles. Never mind that this apocryphal hospital was never pinpointed nor the grieving families of these infants located, the story spread like wildfire, inflaming passions against the Iraqis and stiffening resolve to fight them tooth and nail if it came down to that. [Columbia Journalism Review, 1992] "I saw the Iraqi soldiers come into the hospital with guns. They took the babies out of the incubators ... and left the children to die on the cold floor." This was the story told by "Nayirah," the fifteen-year-old Kuwaiti girl who shocked a public hearing of Congress's Human Rights Caucus on October 10, 1990. Nayirah's testimony came at a time when Americans were wondering how to respond to the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait on August 2. Her story was cited frequently in the congressional debate over war authority, which was approved by only five votes in the Senate. President Bush mentioned it often as a reason for taking firm action. It was a major factor in building public backing for war. As many are now aware, the incubator story was the centerpiece of a massive public relations campaign conducted by Hill and Knowlton [a PR firm] on behalf of a group called Citizens for a Free Kuwait, for a fee of $11.5 million. After the war, the group revealed that it was financed almost entirely by the Kuwaiti government. A few babies did die during that conflict, but as a result of needed supplies not reaching hospitals, not because enemy soldiers threw them to the floor and left them to die there. Only someone with a very long memory would recall that similar "soldiers kill babies" rumors had been kited during numerous conflicts in the past. For example, in the 1600s the English were likewise inflamed by lurid tales of Irish atrocities. They were told how the Irish dashed babies' heads against walls, stripped and raped wives in front of their husbands, and buried alive brave townspeople in mass graves. Each of these shockers, you see, is a common atrocity rumor and will be trotted out when a population needs to be inspired to fight. Women, children, and clerics are often cast in the victim's role in this form of rabble rousing. Which should not be all that surprising; the object is, after all, vilification, and that is best accomplished by pitting the most helpless and appealing of innocents against the most vicious and vile of oppressors. In World War I, one of the most widespread rumors of this type concerned Belgian children maimed by German soldiers. Officials of the Catholic Society were said to have seen with their own eyes members of the German soldiery chop the arms off countless babies even as the tots clung to their mothers' skirts. A horrific extension of the rumor had German soldiers afterwards feasting on these severed limbs. Sometimes the tale was presented unvarnished (as above) as a one- or two-line bit of fact, and sometimes it was spun out into a horrendous tale: [Jacobson, 1948] And in many cases, the story was enlarged upon, as for instance the harrowing anecdote of a prominent woman who was visiting a home for Belgian refugees in Paris and came upon a little girl, no more than ten years old. The room the child was in was rather warm but still the girl kept her hands in a pitifully worn little muff. "Mamma," she said, "please blow my nose for me." The prominent woman who was standing by is then supposed to have said, half laughingly but somewhat sternly, "A big girl like you can't use her handkerchief?" The sad-faced little girl made no reply. But slowly the mother turned her head toward the visitor and in a dull, matter-of-fact tone said, "She has not any hands now, ma'am." The woman visitor shuddered. "Can it be that the Germans . . .?" Tears welled from the eyes of the wretched Belgian mother. Like all the other atrocity rumors, there were no handless Belgian tots. All efforts to locate even one such child failed miserably. Yet as a rumor, it was unparalleled in the way it spread and the frissons of horror it sent clawing up the spines of all who heard it. Atrocity rumors are as old as the hills, and you should be on the lookout for them during times of international strife and lines being drawn in the sand. Yes, it's true man's inhumanity to his fellow man is boundless and that verifiable atrocities have been committed during numerous conflicts, but even so, it seldom pays to believe all the vilification tales passed wildly around during the build-up days towards a war. Whipped into a hate-filled frenzy in reaction to these tales, even the most peaceable of nations can be impelled by its outraged populace to throw itself into what it otherwise would have stayed far distanced from. War is serious business. The decision to engage in it or not cannot be taken lightly and should never be dictated by deliberate rumormongering. Though protection of the weak is a noble and worthy ideal, no one should be in favor of seeing the blood of his loved ones spilled in protection of the fictional. Barbara "cattle hymn of the republic" Mikkelson Last updated: 2 August 2007 Sources: Brunvand, Jan Harold. Curses! Broiled Again! New York: W. W. Norton, 1989. ISBN 0-393-30711-5 (pp. 73-75). Curses! Broiled Again! Cushman, John. "U.S. Offers Detail on Iraqi Atrocity." The New York Times. 6 February 1992 (p. A11). Jacobson, David J. The Affairs of Dame Rumor. New York: Rinehart & Co., 1948 (pp. 287-288, 291, 377). The Affairs of Dame Rumor Morgan, Hal and Kerry Tucker. Rumor! New York: Penguin Books, 1984. ISBN 0-14-007036-2 (pp. 17-18). Rumor! Munday, Alicia. "Is the Press Any Match for Powerhouse PR?" Columbia Journalism Review. September 1992 (p. 37). ; Also told in: Cohen, Daniel. The Beheaded Freshman and Other Nasty Rumors. New York: Avon Books, 1993. ISBN 0-380-77020-2 (pp. 109-111). The Beheaded Freshman and Other Nasty Rumors The Big Book of Urban Legends. New York: Paradox Press, 1994. ISBN 1-56389-165-4 (p. 76). The Big Book of Urban Legends

true

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/home-depot-facebook-coupon-scam/

Home Depot Facebook Coupon Scam

David Mikkelson

05/08/2015

]In May 2015, a fraudulent offer for $200 Home Depot coupons started circulating on Facebook. The message contained a link that redirected bargain hunters to a web site adorned with Home Depot's logo that has 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 around the Internet. Second, they direct people to complete a survey that extracts personal information such as email addresses, telephone numbers, dates of birth and credit card numbers. Lastly, these scams never end with a "free" rewards, because users must first agree to sign up for several costly, difficult-to-cancel "Reward Offers" hidden in the fine print to claim their coupons. Costco Amazon Kroger 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 Home Depot didn't address the 2017 Facebook coupon scam on their social media channels as of 24 April 2017, but it was nevertheless clearly not a legitimate promotion affiliated with the chain. The Better Business Bureau gave these three tips to identify scams on Facebook: Facebook Don't believe what you see. It's easy to steal the colors, logos and header of an established organization. Scammers can also make links look like they lead to legitimate websites and emails appear to come from a different sender.Legitimate businesses do not ask for credit card numbers or banking information on customer surveys. If they do ask for personal information, like an address or email, be sure there's a link to their privacy policy. Watch out for a reward that's too good to be true. If the survey is real, you may be entered in a drawing to win a gift card or receive a small discount off your next purchase. Few businesses can afford to give away $50 gift cards for completing a few questions.

false

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/home-depot-facebook-coupon-scam/

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

David Mikkelson

05/08/2015

]In May 2015, a fraudulent offer for $200 Home Depot coupons started circulating on Facebook. The message contained a link that redirected bargain hunters to a web site adorned with Home Depot's logo that has 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 around the Internet. Second, they direct people to complete a survey that extracts personal information such as email addresses, telephone numbers, dates of birth and credit card numbers. Lastly, these scams never end with a "free" rewards, because users must first agree to sign up for several costly, difficult-to-cancel "Reward Offers" hidden in the fine print to claim their coupons. Costco Amazon Kroger 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 Home Depot didn't address the 2017 Facebook coupon scam on their social media channels as of 24 April 2017, but it was nevertheless clearly not a legitimate promotion affiliated with the chain. The Better Business Bureau gave these three tips to identify scams on Facebook: Facebook Don't believe what you see. It's easy to steal the colors, logos and header of an established organization. Scammers can also make links look like they lead to legitimate websites and emails appear to come from a different sender.Legitimate businesses do not ask for credit card numbers or banking information on customer surveys. If they do ask for personal information, like an address or email, be sure there's a link to their privacy policy. Watch out for a reward that's too good to be true. If the survey is real, you may be entered in a drawing to win a gift card or receive a small discount off your next purchase. Few businesses can afford to give away $50 gift cards for completing a few questions.

false

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/home-depot-facebook-coupon-scam/

Scam involving fake Home Depot coupons on Facebook.

David Mikkelson

05/08/2015

]In May 2015, a fraudulent offer for $200 Home Depot coupons started circulating on Facebook. The message contained a link that redirected bargain hunters to a web site adorned with Home Depot's logo that has 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 around the Internet. Second, they direct people to complete a survey that extracts personal information such as email addresses, telephone numbers, dates of birth and credit card numbers. Lastly, these scams never end with a "free" rewards, because users must first agree to sign up for several costly, difficult-to-cancel "Reward Offers" hidden in the fine print to claim their coupons. Costco Amazon Kroger 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 Home Depot didn't address the 2017 Facebook coupon scam on their social media channels as of 24 April 2017, but it was nevertheless clearly not a legitimate promotion affiliated with the chain. The Better Business Bureau gave these three tips to identify scams on Facebook: Facebook Don't believe what you see. It's easy to steal the colors, logos and header of an established organization. Scammers can also make links look like they lead to legitimate websites and emails appear to come from a different sender.Legitimate businesses do not ask for credit card numbers or banking information on customer surveys. If they do ask for personal information, like an address or email, be sure there's a link to their privacy policy. Watch out for a reward that's too good to be true. If the survey is real, you may be entered in a drawing to win a gift card or receive a small discount off your next purchase. Few businesses can afford to give away $50 gift cards for completing a few questions.

false

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/cruise-ships-foreign-flags/

Are Most Cruise Ships Registered Under Foreign Flags?

David Mikkelson

03/23/2020

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 the COVID-19 coronavirus disease pandemic of March 2020 threatened to shut down businesses across America for an extended period of time, the U.S. government faced the difficult task of deciding which industries should be provided economic assistance to keep them afloat for the duration. Public sentiment in some quarters was strongly against government bailouts for businesses such as airlines and cruise companies, on the grounds that over the last several years many of the major operators had spent billions of dollars in profits buying up their own stock rather than paying down their debts. In USA Today, John M. Griffin and James M. Griffin wrote: strongly against Start with the airlines. Rather than using their profits from the past five years to pay off debts and save for a rainy day, the big four American, United, Delta and Southwest instead grew their combined liabilities to $166 billion, all while spending $39 billion on share repurchases. That number, which is only from the big four, is almost 80% of what theyre asking for now from U.S. taxpayers. Similarly, the three largest Cruise companies -- Carnival, Norwegian, and Royal Caribbean -- have liabilities of $47.5 billion and engaged in share repurchases of $8 billion. Had these companies paid down liabilities instead of using stock repurchases to bid up their stock prices, they would have been far better prepared to weather this emergency. Of course, higher share prices made their stock options more valuable. This allowed top airlines executives to pay themselves $666 million in compensation over the five-year period. The top cruise executives managed to haul in $448 million. Now, taxpayers are unwillingly being called upon to bail out their profligate behavior. A widely circulated meme on social media offered another reason why cruise lines were supposedly unworthy of government bailouts -- because although they might be headquartered in the U.S., their ships were foreign-flagged in order to put them out of reach of U.S. law: That nearly every major cruise line registers their ships somewhere outside the U.S. is hardly a disputable point. As a 2011 news report noted, only a single major cruise ship at the time was U.S.-flagged: news report [O]nly one major cruise ship -- NCL America's Pride of America -- is registered in the United States, according to data from CyberCruises.com. Most of the big boats fly Bahamian flags, but other popular registries include Panama, Bermuda, Italy, Malta and the Netherlands. In fact, according to Cruise Lines International Association, 90% of commercial vessels calling on U.S. ports fly foreign flags. The three cruise lines called out by name in the meme -- Disney, Celebrity, and Carnival -- do indeed engage in this practice. It's not difficult to verify that Disney cruise ships are registered in the Bahamas, Celebrity ships in Malta, and Carnival ships in Panama. Of course, the cruise industry and their critics offer differing reasons for why cruise ships are flagged in countries other than the U.S., with the former asserting that: Bahamas Malta Panama reasons CLIA [Cruise Lines International Association] maintains there are reasons for such policies: "There are many factors that determine where a cruise ship -- or for that matter, any maritime vessel -- is flagged. Those determinations are made by individual cruise lines and other ship operators based on varying factors including the capabilities of the flag to deliver the services needed; representation and reputation of the flag in the international shipping community; the performance of the flag state, which dictates how a ship is prioritized by port states; the pool of seafarers able to meet the needs of the flag; and the flag's fees/charges and taxes," the association said by e-mail. This can be viewed as a robust free-market debate. Some maintain burdensome U.S. regulations have forced cruise operators to plant their flags elsewhere, while others say these corporations are seeking to attract American dollars while skirting American safety and consumer protection laws. On the other hand, an academic paper by Caitlin E. Burke of the University of Florida about "Legal Issues Relevant to Cruise Ships" made no bones of observing that reflagging of ships had long been used as a means of avoiding U.S. federal taxes, labor and safety laws, environmental laws, lawsuits, criminal investigations, and other regulations: paper Aside from the majority revenue generated by U.S. passengers, cruise lines are independent of the U.S. economy. Even though nearly 75 percent of passengers are U.S. citizens, cruise line corporations and their ships are not traditionally American-owned or registered ... (Tomlinson, 2007) Cruise line companies are not concerned about increasing minimum wage, rising insurance premiums, or higher corporate taxes. Cruise lines escape federal taxes and labor laws by registering their corporations and vessels in foreign countries [such as] Panama, Liberia, and the Bahamas. In fact, employees of cruise lines are often mistreated due to lackadaisical labor laws. Worst of all, employees will find little to no recourse pursuing litigation. Likewise, a U.S. citizen passenger faces the same predicament. A vessels country of registration is commonly referred to as the "flag of convenience" (FOC). Flagging a ship under a foreign flag for the convenience of the cruise line is nothing new, nor is it rare. The majority of cruise ships today are registered to Panama, Liberia, or the Bahamas. It is important to pay close attention as many vessels within the same fleet are often registered to different countries. Carnival Corporation, for example, has flagged their cruise vessel Celebration under Panama and Destiny under the Bahamas. Cruise lines often avoid drawing attention to the FOC of by using the term "headquartered in Miami, Florida." It is important to understand that while the majority of these cruise lines have their headquarters in Miami, they are not registered in the U.S. Thus, U.S. laws do not apply and passengers are at the mercy of maritime law. That the practice of ship-reflagging is common and regular is undeniable. Whether cruise lines headquartered in the U.S. but operating ships registered in foreign countries "deserve" government bailouts in a time of pandemic is a subjective issue with no definitive answer, but certainly some critics have argued that they do not: critics Even in a crisis, companies with prudent balance sheets will survive and in time, thrive. Despite what politicians might tell you, the airplanes and ships of imprudent companies are physical property that will not suddenly disappear. They will fly or sail again under the same or different name, but hopefully with cheaper prices, better service and different executives. Like a college student sleeping off a hangover, a crisis is a time to sober up by removing debt from the system. Its not time for another drink. McGee, Bill. "What Every Cruiser Should Know Before They Book." USA Today. 26 April 2011. McGee, Bill. "Why Are Cruise Ships Registered in Foreign Countries?" USA Today. 11 December 2012. van Doorn, Philip. "Airlines and Boeing Want a Bailout But Look How Much Theyve Spent on Stock Buybacks." MarketWatch. 22 March 2020. Griffin, John M. and James M. Griffin. "Coronavirus Bailout for Airlines and Cruise lines Is Socialism for the Undeserving Rich." USA Today. 20 March 2020. Burke, Caitlin E. "A Qualitative Study of Victimization and Legal Issues Relevant to Cruise Ships." Accessed 23 March 2020.

true

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/cruise-ships-foreign-flags/

Do the majority of cruise ships operate under foreign flags?

David Mikkelson

03/23/2020

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 the COVID-19 coronavirus disease pandemic of March 2020 threatened to shut down businesses across America for an extended period of time, the U.S. government faced the difficult task of deciding which industries should be provided economic assistance to keep them afloat for the duration. Public sentiment in some quarters was strongly against government bailouts for businesses such as airlines and cruise companies, on the grounds that over the last several years many of the major operators had spent billions of dollars in profits buying up their own stock rather than paying down their debts. In USA Today, John M. Griffin and James M. Griffin wrote: strongly against Start with the airlines. Rather than using their profits from the past five years to pay off debts and save for a rainy day, the big four American, United, Delta and Southwest instead grew their combined liabilities to $166 billion, all while spending $39 billion on share repurchases. That number, which is only from the big four, is almost 80% of what theyre asking for now from U.S. taxpayers. Similarly, the three largest Cruise companies -- Carnival, Norwegian, and Royal Caribbean -- have liabilities of $47.5 billion and engaged in share repurchases of $8 billion. Had these companies paid down liabilities instead of using stock repurchases to bid up their stock prices, they would have been far better prepared to weather this emergency. Of course, higher share prices made their stock options more valuable. This allowed top airlines executives to pay themselves $666 million in compensation over the five-year period. The top cruise executives managed to haul in $448 million. Now, taxpayers are unwillingly being called upon to bail out their profligate behavior. A widely circulated meme on social media offered another reason why cruise lines were supposedly unworthy of government bailouts -- because although they might be headquartered in the U.S., their ships were foreign-flagged in order to put them out of reach of U.S. law: That nearly every major cruise line registers their ships somewhere outside the U.S. is hardly a disputable point. As a 2011 news report noted, only a single major cruise ship at the time was U.S.-flagged: news report [O]nly one major cruise ship -- NCL America's Pride of America -- is registered in the United States, according to data from CyberCruises.com. Most of the big boats fly Bahamian flags, but other popular registries include Panama, Bermuda, Italy, Malta and the Netherlands. In fact, according to Cruise Lines International Association, 90% of commercial vessels calling on U.S. ports fly foreign flags. The three cruise lines called out by name in the meme -- Disney, Celebrity, and Carnival -- do indeed engage in this practice. It's not difficult to verify that Disney cruise ships are registered in the Bahamas, Celebrity ships in Malta, and Carnival ships in Panama. Of course, the cruise industry and their critics offer differing reasons for why cruise ships are flagged in countries other than the U.S., with the former asserting that: Bahamas Malta Panama reasons CLIA [Cruise Lines International Association] maintains there are reasons for such policies: "There are many factors that determine where a cruise ship -- or for that matter, any maritime vessel -- is flagged. Those determinations are made by individual cruise lines and other ship operators based on varying factors including the capabilities of the flag to deliver the services needed; representation and reputation of the flag in the international shipping community; the performance of the flag state, which dictates how a ship is prioritized by port states; the pool of seafarers able to meet the needs of the flag; and the flag's fees/charges and taxes," the association said by e-mail. This can be viewed as a robust free-market debate. Some maintain burdensome U.S. regulations have forced cruise operators to plant their flags elsewhere, while others say these corporations are seeking to attract American dollars while skirting American safety and consumer protection laws. On the other hand, an academic paper by Caitlin E. Burke of the University of Florida about "Legal Issues Relevant to Cruise Ships" made no bones of observing that reflagging of ships had long been used as a means of avoiding U.S. federal taxes, labor and safety laws, environmental laws, lawsuits, criminal investigations, and other regulations: paper Aside from the majority revenue generated by U.S. passengers, cruise lines are independent of the U.S. economy. Even though nearly 75 percent of passengers are U.S. citizens, cruise line corporations and their ships are not traditionally American-owned or registered ... (Tomlinson, 2007) Cruise line companies are not concerned about increasing minimum wage, rising insurance premiums, or higher corporate taxes. Cruise lines escape federal taxes and labor laws by registering their corporations and vessels in foreign countries [such as] Panama, Liberia, and the Bahamas. In fact, employees of cruise lines are often mistreated due to lackadaisical labor laws. Worst of all, employees will find little to no recourse pursuing litigation. Likewise, a U.S. citizen passenger faces the same predicament. A vessels country of registration is commonly referred to as the "flag of convenience" (FOC). Flagging a ship under a foreign flag for the convenience of the cruise line is nothing new, nor is it rare. The majority of cruise ships today are registered to Panama, Liberia, or the Bahamas. It is important to pay close attention as many vessels within the same fleet are often registered to different countries. Carnival Corporation, for example, has flagged their cruise vessel Celebration under Panama and Destiny under the Bahamas. Cruise lines often avoid drawing attention to the FOC of by using the term "headquartered in Miami, Florida." It is important to understand that while the majority of these cruise lines have their headquarters in Miami, they are not registered in the U.S. Thus, U.S. laws do not apply and passengers are at the mercy of maritime law. That the practice of ship-reflagging is common and regular is undeniable. Whether cruise lines headquartered in the U.S. but operating ships registered in foreign countries "deserve" government bailouts in a time of pandemic is a subjective issue with no definitive answer, but certainly some critics have argued that they do not: critics Even in a crisis, companies with prudent balance sheets will survive and in time, thrive. Despite what politicians might tell you, the airplanes and ships of imprudent companies are physical property that will not suddenly disappear. They will fly or sail again under the same or different name, but hopefully with cheaper prices, better service and different executives. Like a college student sleeping off a hangover, a crisis is a time to sober up by removing debt from the system. Its not time for another drink. McGee, Bill. "What Every Cruiser Should Know Before They Book." USA Today. 26 April 2011. McGee, Bill. "Why Are Cruise Ships Registered in Foreign Countries?" USA Today. 11 December 2012. van Doorn, Philip. "Airlines and Boeing Want a Bailout But Look How Much Theyve Spent on Stock Buybacks." MarketWatch. 22 March 2020. Griffin, John M. and James M. Griffin. "Coronavirus Bailout for Airlines and Cruise lines Is Socialism for the Undeserving Rich." USA Today. 20 March 2020. Burke, Caitlin E. "A Qualitative Study of Victimization and Legal Issues Relevant to Cruise Ships." Accessed 23 March 2020.

true

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/cruise-ships-foreign-flags/

Are the majority of cruise ships registered under foreign flags?

David Mikkelson

03/23/2020

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 the COVID-19 coronavirus disease pandemic of March 2020 threatened to shut down businesses across America for an extended period of time, the U.S. government faced the difficult task of deciding which industries should be provided economic assistance to keep them afloat for the duration. Public sentiment in some quarters was strongly against government bailouts for businesses such as airlines and cruise companies, on the grounds that over the last several years many of the major operators had spent billions of dollars in profits buying up their own stock rather than paying down their debts. In USA Today, John M. Griffin and James M. Griffin wrote: strongly against Start with the airlines. Rather than using their profits from the past five years to pay off debts and save for a rainy day, the big four American, United, Delta and Southwest instead grew their combined liabilities to $166 billion, all while spending $39 billion on share repurchases. That number, which is only from the big four, is almost 80% of what theyre asking for now from U.S. taxpayers. Similarly, the three largest Cruise companies -- Carnival, Norwegian, and Royal Caribbean -- have liabilities of $47.5 billion and engaged in share repurchases of $8 billion. Had these companies paid down liabilities instead of using stock repurchases to bid up their stock prices, they would have been far better prepared to weather this emergency. Of course, higher share prices made their stock options more valuable. This allowed top airlines executives to pay themselves $666 million in compensation over the five-year period. The top cruise executives managed to haul in $448 million. Now, taxpayers are unwillingly being called upon to bail out their profligate behavior. A widely circulated meme on social media offered another reason why cruise lines were supposedly unworthy of government bailouts -- because although they might be headquartered in the U.S., their ships were foreign-flagged in order to put them out of reach of U.S. law: That nearly every major cruise line registers their ships somewhere outside the U.S. is hardly a disputable point. As a 2011 news report noted, only a single major cruise ship at the time was U.S.-flagged: news report [O]nly one major cruise ship -- NCL America's Pride of America -- is registered in the United States, according to data from CyberCruises.com. Most of the big boats fly Bahamian flags, but other popular registries include Panama, Bermuda, Italy, Malta and the Netherlands. In fact, according to Cruise Lines International Association, 90% of commercial vessels calling on U.S. ports fly foreign flags. The three cruise lines called out by name in the meme -- Disney, Celebrity, and Carnival -- do indeed engage in this practice. It's not difficult to verify that Disney cruise ships are registered in the Bahamas, Celebrity ships in Malta, and Carnival ships in Panama. Of course, the cruise industry and their critics offer differing reasons for why cruise ships are flagged in countries other than the U.S., with the former asserting that: Bahamas Malta Panama reasons CLIA [Cruise Lines International Association] maintains there are reasons for such policies: "There are many factors that determine where a cruise ship -- or for that matter, any maritime vessel -- is flagged. Those determinations are made by individual cruise lines and other ship operators based on varying factors including the capabilities of the flag to deliver the services needed; representation and reputation of the flag in the international shipping community; the performance of the flag state, which dictates how a ship is prioritized by port states; the pool of seafarers able to meet the needs of the flag; and the flag's fees/charges and taxes," the association said by e-mail. This can be viewed as a robust free-market debate. Some maintain burdensome U.S. regulations have forced cruise operators to plant their flags elsewhere, while others say these corporations are seeking to attract American dollars while skirting American safety and consumer protection laws. On the other hand, an academic paper by Caitlin E. Burke of the University of Florida about "Legal Issues Relevant to Cruise Ships" made no bones of observing that reflagging of ships had long been used as a means of avoiding U.S. federal taxes, labor and safety laws, environmental laws, lawsuits, criminal investigations, and other regulations: paper Aside from the majority revenue generated by U.S. passengers, cruise lines are independent of the U.S. economy. Even though nearly 75 percent of passengers are U.S. citizens, cruise line corporations and their ships are not traditionally American-owned or registered ... (Tomlinson, 2007) Cruise line companies are not concerned about increasing minimum wage, rising insurance premiums, or higher corporate taxes. Cruise lines escape federal taxes and labor laws by registering their corporations and vessels in foreign countries [such as] Panama, Liberia, and the Bahamas. In fact, employees of cruise lines are often mistreated due to lackadaisical labor laws. Worst of all, employees will find little to no recourse pursuing litigation. Likewise, a U.S. citizen passenger faces the same predicament. A vessels country of registration is commonly referred to as the "flag of convenience" (FOC). Flagging a ship under a foreign flag for the convenience of the cruise line is nothing new, nor is it rare. The majority of cruise ships today are registered to Panama, Liberia, or the Bahamas. It is important to pay close attention as many vessels within the same fleet are often registered to different countries. Carnival Corporation, for example, has flagged their cruise vessel Celebration under Panama and Destiny under the Bahamas. Cruise lines often avoid drawing attention to the FOC of by using the term "headquartered in Miami, Florida." It is important to understand that while the majority of these cruise lines have their headquarters in Miami, they are not registered in the U.S. Thus, U.S. laws do not apply and passengers are at the mercy of maritime law. That the practice of ship-reflagging is common and regular is undeniable. Whether cruise lines headquartered in the U.S. but operating ships registered in foreign countries "deserve" government bailouts in a time of pandemic is a subjective issue with no definitive answer, but certainly some critics have argued that they do not: critics Even in a crisis, companies with prudent balance sheets will survive and in time, thrive. Despite what politicians might tell you, the airplanes and ships of imprudent companies are physical property that will not suddenly disappear. They will fly or sail again under the same or different name, but hopefully with cheaper prices, better service and different executives. Like a college student sleeping off a hangover, a crisis is a time to sober up by removing debt from the system. Its not time for another drink. McGee, Bill. "What Every Cruiser Should Know Before They Book." USA Today. 26 April 2011. McGee, Bill. "Why Are Cruise Ships Registered in Foreign Countries?" USA Today. 11 December 2012. van Doorn, Philip. "Airlines and Boeing Want a Bailout But Look How Much Theyve Spent on Stock Buybacks." MarketWatch. 22 March 2020. Griffin, John M. and James M. Griffin. "Coronavirus Bailout for Airlines and Cruise lines Is Socialism for the Undeserving Rich." USA Today. 20 March 2020. Burke, Caitlin E. "A Qualitative Study of Victimization and Legal Issues Relevant to Cruise Ships." Accessed 23 March 2020.

true

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/cruise-ships-foreign-flags/

Are the majority of cruise ships registered under flags of foreign countries?

David Mikkelson

03/23/2020

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 the COVID-19 coronavirus disease pandemic of March 2020 threatened to shut down businesses across America for an extended period of time, the U.S. government faced the difficult task of deciding which industries should be provided economic assistance to keep them afloat for the duration. Public sentiment in some quarters was strongly against government bailouts for businesses such as airlines and cruise companies, on the grounds that over the last several years many of the major operators had spent billions of dollars in profits buying up their own stock rather than paying down their debts. In USA Today, John M. Griffin and James M. Griffin wrote: strongly against Start with the airlines. Rather than using their profits from the past five years to pay off debts and save for a rainy day, the big four American, United, Delta and Southwest instead grew their combined liabilities to $166 billion, all while spending $39 billion on share repurchases. That number, which is only from the big four, is almost 80% of what theyre asking for now from U.S. taxpayers. Similarly, the three largest Cruise companies -- Carnival, Norwegian, and Royal Caribbean -- have liabilities of $47.5 billion and engaged in share repurchases of $8 billion. Had these companies paid down liabilities instead of using stock repurchases to bid up their stock prices, they would have been far better prepared to weather this emergency. Of course, higher share prices made their stock options more valuable. This allowed top airlines executives to pay themselves $666 million in compensation over the five-year period. The top cruise executives managed to haul in $448 million. Now, taxpayers are unwillingly being called upon to bail out their profligate behavior. A widely circulated meme on social media offered another reason why cruise lines were supposedly unworthy of government bailouts -- because although they might be headquartered in the U.S., their ships were foreign-flagged in order to put them out of reach of U.S. law: That nearly every major cruise line registers their ships somewhere outside the U.S. is hardly a disputable point. As a 2011 news report noted, only a single major cruise ship at the time was U.S.-flagged: news report [O]nly one major cruise ship -- NCL America's Pride of America -- is registered in the United States, according to data from CyberCruises.com. Most of the big boats fly Bahamian flags, but other popular registries include Panama, Bermuda, Italy, Malta and the Netherlands. In fact, according to Cruise Lines International Association, 90% of commercial vessels calling on U.S. ports fly foreign flags. The three cruise lines called out by name in the meme -- Disney, Celebrity, and Carnival -- do indeed engage in this practice. It's not difficult to verify that Disney cruise ships are registered in the Bahamas, Celebrity ships in Malta, and Carnival ships in Panama. Of course, the cruise industry and their critics offer differing reasons for why cruise ships are flagged in countries other than the U.S., with the former asserting that: Bahamas Malta Panama reasons CLIA [Cruise Lines International Association] maintains there are reasons for such policies: "There are many factors that determine where a cruise ship -- or for that matter, any maritime vessel -- is flagged. Those determinations are made by individual cruise lines and other ship operators based on varying factors including the capabilities of the flag to deliver the services needed; representation and reputation of the flag in the international shipping community; the performance of the flag state, which dictates how a ship is prioritized by port states; the pool of seafarers able to meet the needs of the flag; and the flag's fees/charges and taxes," the association said by e-mail. This can be viewed as a robust free-market debate. Some maintain burdensome U.S. regulations have forced cruise operators to plant their flags elsewhere, while others say these corporations are seeking to attract American dollars while skirting American safety and consumer protection laws. On the other hand, an academic paper by Caitlin E. Burke of the University of Florida about "Legal Issues Relevant to Cruise Ships" made no bones of observing that reflagging of ships had long been used as a means of avoiding U.S. federal taxes, labor and safety laws, environmental laws, lawsuits, criminal investigations, and other regulations: paper Aside from the majority revenue generated by U.S. passengers, cruise lines are independent of the U.S. economy. Even though nearly 75 percent of passengers are U.S. citizens, cruise line corporations and their ships are not traditionally American-owned or registered ... (Tomlinson, 2007) Cruise line companies are not concerned about increasing minimum wage, rising insurance premiums, or higher corporate taxes. Cruise lines escape federal taxes and labor laws by registering their corporations and vessels in foreign countries [such as] Panama, Liberia, and the Bahamas. In fact, employees of cruise lines are often mistreated due to lackadaisical labor laws. Worst of all, employees will find little to no recourse pursuing litigation. Likewise, a U.S. citizen passenger faces the same predicament. A vessels country of registration is commonly referred to as the "flag of convenience" (FOC). Flagging a ship under a foreign flag for the convenience of the cruise line is nothing new, nor is it rare. The majority of cruise ships today are registered to Panama, Liberia, or the Bahamas. It is important to pay close attention as many vessels within the same fleet are often registered to different countries. Carnival Corporation, for example, has flagged their cruise vessel Celebration under Panama and Destiny under the Bahamas. Cruise lines often avoid drawing attention to the FOC of by using the term "headquartered in Miami, Florida." It is important to understand that while the majority of these cruise lines have their headquarters in Miami, they are not registered in the U.S. Thus, U.S. laws do not apply and passengers are at the mercy of maritime law. That the practice of ship-reflagging is common and regular is undeniable. Whether cruise lines headquartered in the U.S. but operating ships registered in foreign countries "deserve" government bailouts in a time of pandemic is a subjective issue with no definitive answer, but certainly some critics have argued that they do not: critics Even in a crisis, companies with prudent balance sheets will survive and in time, thrive. Despite what politicians might tell you, the airplanes and ships of imprudent companies are physical property that will not suddenly disappear. They will fly or sail again under the same or different name, but hopefully with cheaper prices, better service and different executives. Like a college student sleeping off a hangover, a crisis is a time to sober up by removing debt from the system. Its not time for another drink. McGee, Bill. "What Every Cruiser Should Know Before They Book." USA Today. 26 April 2011. McGee, Bill. "Why Are Cruise Ships Registered in Foreign Countries?" USA Today. 11 December 2012. van Doorn, Philip. "Airlines and Boeing Want a Bailout But Look How Much Theyve Spent on Stock Buybacks." MarketWatch. 22 March 2020. Griffin, John M. and James M. Griffin. "Coronavirus Bailout for Airlines and Cruise lines Is Socialism for the Undeserving Rich." USA Today. 20 March 2020. Burke, Caitlin E. "A Qualitative Study of Victimization and Legal Issues Relevant to Cruise Ships." Accessed 23 March 2020.

true

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/pail-by-comparison/

Lunch Boxes and Lead

Barbara Mikkelson

09/22/2005

Claim: Some children's vinyl lunch boxes contain unsafe levels of lead. Multiple: Tests have found some children's soft vinyl lunch boxes contain lead: . Children's lunch boxes contain levels of lead unsafe with ordinary exposure: Undetermined.Example: [Collected on the Internet, 2005] A Back to School Warning: Children's Vinyl Lunch Boxes Can Contain Dangerous Levels of Lead Oakland, CA - The Center for Environmental Health (CEH) announced it is filing lawsuits today against makers and retailers of soft vinyl lunch boxes that can expose children to harmful levels of lead. The Center has also notified several other companies of violations under California's toxics law Proposition 65 (Prop 65) for lunch boxes with high lead levels. The lawsuits and violation notices against companies including Toys "R" Us, Warner Brothers, DC Comics, Time Warner, Walgreens, and others involve many lunch boxes featuring beloved children's characters including Superman, Tweety Bird, Powerpuff Girls, and Hamtaro. The level of lead in one lunch box, an Angela Anaconda box made by Targus International, tested at 56,400 parts per million (ppm) of lead, more than 90 times the 600 ppm legal limit for lead in paint in children's products. "Lead exposure should not be on the lunch menu when kids' go back to school this fall," said Michael Green, CEH Executive Director. "There is no reason to expose children to any lead from lunch boxes. We are calling on these companies to recall these products and take action to eliminate lead from their products in the future." Initial independent laboratory testing commissioned by CEH has already found seventeen lunch boxes with high lead levels, and the group's investigation is ongoing. In addition to the testing on the Angela Anaconda lunch box, tests on other lunch boxes showed levels of lead between two and twenty-five times the legal limit for lead paint in children's products. In most cases, the highest lead levels were found in the lining of lunch boxes, where lead could come into direct contact with food. Lead is known to be harmful to children even in minute amounts, as it can impair brain development and cause other behavioral anddevelopmental problems. Children may be exposed to lead from lunch boxes when they eat food that has been stored in them. Handling the lunchboxes just before eating could also be an exposure risk. It is not possible to tell by appearance whether a vinyl lunch box may contain lead, so CEH is advising parents to avoid vinyl lunch boxes altogether. "Parents may need to seek out alternatives, since many mass produced lunch boxes are vinyl or vinyl-lined," said Green. "A reusable cloth bag would be a good alternative." Parents can find information on how to test for lead in their children's lunch boxes at home at www.cehca.org/lunchboxes. The CEH lawsuits were filed today against lunch box producers Igloo and InGear, and against retailers Toys "R" Us, Walgreens, Big Lots, and Ross Stores. Earlier this year, CEH sent notices of Prop 65 violations to Targus International, DC Comics, Time Warner, Warner Brothers, Binney & Smith (a division of Hallmark and the makers of Crayola-brand lunch boxes), Fast Forward LLC, and Holiday Fair Incorporated. Under Prop 65, companies have sixty days to respond to violation notices, after which lawsuits can be filed. CEH expects to file more notifications of lunch boxes that violate Prop 65 in the near future. Photos of the lunch boxes can be found at www.cehca.org/lunchboxes.htm. Test Your Child's Lunch Box Because it is not possible to tell by appearance whether a vinyl lunch box may contain lead, CEH is advising parents to avoid buying vinyl lunch boxes altogether as we cannot guarantee they are lead free. You can test vinyl lunch boxes you already own using a hand-held lead testing kit, often available at hardware stores. Two reliable and easy-to-use brands are PACE's Lead Alert and LeadCheck (also available online at www.leadcheck.com) If your child's lunch box tests positive, or you need assistance obtaining a testing kit please call CEH at (510) 594-9864. We can help you interpret the results and can use your product as evidence in our ongoing work get the lead out of our children's lunch boxes. Commonly Asked QuestionsWhat products did CEH test?CEH has only tested soft plastic lunch boxes. We don't know whether lead may be present in hard plastic or metal boxes at this time. In most cases the lead is in the plastic lining of the box, although some also have lead in the exterior plastic. At this time we have not found any lunch boxes by Disney, Thermos, LL Bean, Hello Kitty or California Innovations that have lead - however, we have by no means tested all lunch boxes by any of these makers. How dangerous are the lunch boxes with lead?The levels CEH found in the lunch boxes are not high enough to cause acute lead poisoning during normal use. However, if your child is exposed to lead from other sources, a leaded lunch box would add to their health risk. Because lead has been shown to cause developmental problem in young children at very low levels, CEH believes it is important to eliminate all controllable sources of lead exposure, including lunch boxes. Does my lunch box have lead?The majority of lunch boxes that CEH tested do not contain lead, so there is a good chance that your lunch box may be safe. However, because it is impossible to tell by looking, at this point the only way to know for sure is to test the lunch box yourself. How do I test my lunch box?You can test vinyl lunch boxes using a hand-held lead testing kit, available at most hardware stores. Two reliable and easy-to-use brands are PACE's Lead Alert and LeadCheck (also available online at www.leadcheck.com). They cost less than $5 a piece, and come with instructions. Both of these brands will turn a bright pink color when they are rubbed on a surface containing lead. A clear or orange swab means there is not lead. What do I do if my lunch box has lead?If your child's lunch box tests positive, we recommend that you do not use it any longer. Please send CEH your positive lunch box so that we can add it to our investigation and notify other parents. What alternatives are there to vinyl lunch boxes?CEH does not have enough information at this time to recommend any brand of soft plastic lunch boxes. Because it is not possible to tell by appearance whether a box may contain lead, CEH is advising parents to avoid buying vinyl lunch boxes altogether, and to test their lunch box if they are concerned it may contain lead. A reusable cloth bag or paper bag is a good alternative. Where is the lead from?CEH believes that the lead is intentionally added to the vinyl (PVC) plastic as either a stabilizing agent or pigment. Should my child be tested?Normal use of positive lunchboxes CEH has tested would not cause acute lead poisoning. However, if your child is also exposed to other environmental exposures to lead such as lead paint, the cumulative effect could be toxic. A blood test is the only definitive way to test for lead poisoning. A child with lead poisoning may not look sick, but may experience stomachache, poor appetite, hyperactivity and headaches. Low level chronic exposure to lead can cause hearing problems, brain and nerve damage, stunted growth, digestive problems and reproductive problems (in adults). Origins: On 31 August 2005, the Center for Environmental Health, an Oakland-based environmental group that specializes in identifying hazardous Center for Environmental Health sources of lead in the environment, announced that testing it had performed revealed the presence of that element in a variety of soft vinyl lunchboxes marketed to children. Subsequent to that discovery, this private non-profit group filed lawsuits against some of the producers and retailersinvolved. announced The CEHCA says the 27 lunchboxes that produced lead-positive results when examined with at-home lead detection kits contained anywhere from double to 90 times the legal limit for lead paint in children's products. It packed off those 27 containers to an independent laboratory for more rigorous testing; that study found 17 of the lunchboxes contained lead in excess of federal safety standards. Lara Cushing, research director for the CEHCA, said the study revealed the lead was not contained within the vinyl material itself but rather was present on the surface of the lunchboxes. "It's not bound up in the plastic," she said. "It's sloughing off. It can come off on your hand. It can rub off on your food." A reporter in Sacramento ran her own test on eight vinyl lunchboxes she collected; her examination with at-home lead testing kits showed two of the lunchboxes contained lead. How much lead was not noted. Officials for the Consumer Product Safety Commission said it was investigating the CEHCA's findings on lead in lunchboxes. In October 2005, it published a statement on the likelihood of lead found in such containers presenting a danger to children: published Q: Recent news reports have indicated that there are dangerous levels of lead in kids lunch boxes, is this correct? A: CPSC staff has tested samples of children's lunch boxes for accessible lead and found no instances of hazardous levels. The staff tested the inside and outside of each lunch box and the preliminary results were consistently below one microgram (one millionth of a gram) of lead. This is an extremely low level of lead and would not present a health hazard to children. Q: How can you be sure that children are not being exposed to hazardous levels of lead in their lunch boxes? A: One way that children can be exposed to lead is from handling objects with accessible lead and then placing their hands in their mouths. Based on the low levels of lead found in our tests, in most cases, children would have to rub their lunch box and then lick their hands upwards of 100 times a day, for about 15-30 days, in order for the lunch box to present a health hazard. Q: What is CPSC doing to prevent issues like this from coming up in the future? A: CPSC staff encourages companies to use alternatives to lead in products intended for children. CPSC staff also recommends that manufacturers and importers of vinyl lunch boxes test their products for accessible lead using the CPSC staff's laboratory test procedure. Finding and preventing lead hazards in children's products is an important part of our mission and CPSC has a proven record of working with companies to recall products that pose a lead hazard to children. While exposure to lead presents a hazard to all and poses an especial danger to children, the amounts of the element being uncovered in vinyl lunchboxes are not sufficient to cause acute lead poisoning. However, because long-term low-level lead exposure can result in serious harm to those subjected to it, lead is to be avoided whenever and wherever possible. Lead poisoning can reportedly lower intelligence, cause mental retardation, memory problems, depression, fatigue, hyperactivity, aggression, hearing loss, liver or kidney damage, osteoporosis, high blood pressure and anemia. Very high levels can damage the nervous system, kidneys and major organs and even result in seizures or death. It can also lead to infertility in men and cause spontaneous abortion in women. In the final stages of lead poisoning, the victim experiences convulsions, paralysis, blindness, delusions, and then coma. People can and have died of lead poisoning. In times long past, lead was to be found in numerous everyday items, including cisterns and aquaducts, pottery, pans, hair dyes, cosmetics, and medical nostrums. Toy soldiers were cast in it. Port wine was protected by it. Church roofs were covered with it. The presence of lead in everyday life has since been considerably reduced and our bodies are far less riddled with this deadly substance than were those of our ancestors, but this element will likely always be part of our surroundings and of us. The two major sources of lead poisoning in the United States have been lead-based paint, which was restricted in 1978, and leaded gasoline, which was phased out in the early 1990s. However, lead is still found in paint manufactured before 1978, in soil and dust (particularly next to busy roads or factories), in some imported or handmade pottery and tableware, and in imported home remedies and cosmetics. Yet most of the lead we take in comes from our diet. "The average daily diet probably contains more than 200 micrograms of lead, of which about 10 micrograms gets into the blood, where it is joined by about 5 micrograms of lead from our lungs (depending upon where we live), so that our daily intake probably comes to about 15 micrograms and the body can easily rid itself of such an amount," says John Emsley. Lead finds its way into the food chain because all plants contain some lead, although not very much. Because lead is a naturally-occurring element found in the soil, it does manage to get into things. Care therefore has to be taken by manufacturers to detect its presence in goods destined for consumer use. Various lead-laden gewgaws and foodstuffs do arrive on the market, however, especially among goods produced in other parts of the world and imported to the U.S. In 2004, California's attorney general sued dozens of companies that make or sell imported candies containing lead, and in 2005 the California Department of Health Services urged consumers to stay away from candy produced in Mexico that contained tamarind or chili powder after tests found possible lead contamination in those edibles. In 1994 an outbreak of lead poisoning in Hungary was traced to the use of that element by an unscrupulous or unknowing manufacturer as a colorant in paprika. Barbara "get the lead out" Mikkelson Update: In September 2007, families were advised by the California Department of Public Health to rid themselves of CDPH lunchboxes because three of the ones it tested produced positive results for lead. The canvas lunch boxes that showed elevated levels of the element were green with a logo reading "Eat fruits & vegetables and be active." Approximately 56,000 of these lunch boxes have been distributed throughout California at health fairs and other events. CDPH lunchboxes Additional information: Lead (Centers for Disease Control) Make Your Home a Lead-Safe Zone (Virginia Commonwealth University) Lead Poisoning (Dr. Joseph F. Smith Medical Library) Last updated: 22 September 2007 Sources: Emsley, John. The Elements of Murder. New York; Oxford University Press, 2005. ISBN 0-19-280599-1 (pp. 261-283). The Elements of Murder Griffith, Dorsey. "State Warns of Lead in Candy." Sacramento Bee. 7 July 2005 (p. A5). Lundstrom, Marjie. "Toxic Metal Found in Lunchboxes." Sacramento Bee. 17 September 2005 (p. A3). Roan, Shari. "An Unsavory Addition to Kids' Lunchboxes: Lead." Los Angeles Times. 12 September 2005 (p. F3). KABC-TV [Los Angeles]. "People Urged to Dispose of CDPH Lunch Boxes." 20 September 2007. The [Raleigh] News & Observer. "Toxic Lead Finds a New Avenue." 15 September 2005 (p. B2). United Press International. "Lead Reportedly Found in Lunchboxes." 20 September 2005.

false

https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2016/jul/27/kevin-de-leon/does-california-really-have-sixth-largest-economy-/

California has the sixth largest economy on planet Earth.

Chris Nichols

07/26/2016

UPDATE: Since publication, Californias economy moved up to the fifth largest in the world, according to data by the U.S. Department of Commerce and reported in May 2018 in theSacramento Bee. Its 2017 GDP was $2.747 trillion, surpassing the United Kingdoms $2.625 trillion GDP. State Senate leader Kevin de Len spotlighted Californias economic and social achievements during his speech this week at the Democratic National Convention in Philadelphia. The Democrat from Los Angeles touted the states newly established $15 per hour minimum wage, efforts to keep college affordable and Californias hundreds of thousands of clean energy jobs. Weve made unprecedented progress in every area, De Len told a cheering crowd. And when we elect Hillary Clinton as our next president, I know that our progress will be Americas progress. The state senator then repeated a talking point California leaders love to make on national and international stages, about the size of the states economy: These are the progressive policies that have made California the sixth largest economy on planet Earth, De Len said. We wont wade into the debate over whether progressive or other policies have positioned the states economy on such a high perch. But we will examine the provocative sixth largest economy on planet Earth claim by itself. State Senate leader Kevin de Len makes the sixth largest economy claim at the 1:45 minute mark in this video. Our research State leaders have made this hypothetical comparison for years, examining Californias gross domestic product against nations across the globe. With nearly 40 million people, the state has a larger population than many countries. It also boasts a diverse set of industries from technology to tourism and entertainment. In June, Gov. Jerry Browns administrationreleased figuresshowing California, with a GDP of more than $2.4 trillion in 2015 had jumped two spots in these unique world rankings ahead of France and Brazil and into sixth place behind the United Kingdom. First on the list is the United States, followed by China, Japan and Germany. Californias place on the list has fluctuated over time. It had been 10th as recently as 2012 due to the effects of the financial and housing slumps. The rankings use International Monetary Fund data. California is the only state on the list of nations. Experts have said Californias rise in the rankings reflects its strong economic growth compared with the rest of the world. They have cited Silicon Valleys continued tech boom as a critical factor. It speaks to California doing relatively well in a sluggish global economy, Jeff Michael, director of the University of the Pacifics Center for Business and Policy Research,told the Sacramento Beein June. A more complex picture De Lens statement, made in a short 4-minute speech, did not include much context. When adjusting for the states high cost of living, Californias GDP ranking drops to 11th in the world, according to the California Legislative Analysts Office. A tweet on June 14, 2016 from the California's nonpartisan Legislative Analyst's Office. Carson Bruno, who studies California policy at the conservative Hoover Institution, says theres a lot missing from the sixth largest economy claim. In California, housing costs more; electricity and gas cost more; and even most goods and services cost more than the national average, he wrote in apost on RealClearMarkets.com. In many respects California's cost of living is much more like a Western European nation than it is like the rest of the U.S. The widely reported global rankings ignore this reality. De Lens spokesman did not respond to a request for comment. Our rating State Senate leader Kevin de Len recently claimed at the Democratic National Convention that California has the sixth largest economy on planet Earth. This hypothetical comparison rests on Californias $2.4 trillion GDP, which moved slightly above that of France and Brazil in 2015 to sixth in the world. The ranking, and De Lens statement, however, ignore Californias sky high cost of living and Silicon Valleys role in the states economic growth. The states GDP drops several places when adjusted for cost of living. De Lens statement, while accurate, could have used this additional information or clarification. We rate his claim Mostly True. MOSTLY TRUE The statement is accurate but needs clarification or additional information. Click here formoreon the six PolitiFact ratings and how we select facts to check. Share the Facts Widget Embed

true

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/walmart-gale-receipts-are-outdated/

Walmart 'GALE' Receipts Are Outdated

Dan Evon

08/20/2021

In August 2021, an image supposedly showing a receipt from Walmart with an erroneous $30 charge for "GALE" was circulated online. Many of these posts included a "public service announcement" warning other customers about this "glitch," while some claimed that Walmart was purposefully adding this phantom charge to bilk customers out of $30. PSAHolly and I grocery shop every Saturday. 1/2 at Walmart and 1/2 at Kroger. After all of these years I know we spend between $90-110 at Walmart. Today...$144.02. I told Holly this is to high, after review of the receipt I go to the Customer Service and say " what is Gale for $32.00"? I'm told there is a glitch in the Walmart system, and that "Gale" pops up randomly.After tax... $34.24 overcharged. Check your receipts! While this appears to be a genuine picture of a receipt with an erroneous charge on it, this is not a widespread issue. Furthermore, this receipt is from 2019, not 2021. We found a couple of other reports from 2018 and 2019 of people seeing an erroneous charge for "GALE" on their receipts. These reports all included a $32 charge and the same 12-digit serial code (00000000003k). In all three examples we found, the posters included anecdotes about how they quickly received a refund after bringing this error to the cashier's attention: Facebook user Rhea Azure wrote in 2019: Rhea Azure wrote Always check your receipts!!! This was at the Walmart in Bottineau. I went to spend a certain amount of money and couldnt figure out why I didnt have enough money for all my items when I added everything up and included taxes. After paying, I looked through my receipt and found GALE for $32.00. I had no idea what that was and neither did the cashier/supervisor. She immediately reimbursed me for it. ALWAYS check your receipts!! A December 2018 Reddit post provided more information. That person said that the customer service representative said that the cashier likely entered a wrong number by mistake: December 2018 Reddit post After a 32 minute wait in the customer service line, the customer service representative said, "Nah. That's not something we sell." The immediate response was somewhat suspicious. They told me, "That's not a legitimate item code." I knew I was on to something. She called over a more senior representative of Customer Service, who told me, "Yeah, we see that sometimes. The cashier accidentally hits a number and then 'Enter', and a phantom item is rung up." Without complaint, they refunded my $32.34. (I even had to pay tax on my phantom item.) We reached out to Walmart for more information but have not yet heard back. The above-displayed explanation, however, mirrors what we heard from a Walmart spokesperson in 2019 when we examined a similar rumor. Around the same time that these "GALE" receipts started circulating on social media, a similar claim was circulated about a $10 "phantom" charge for JAJKET. In this case, too, it seemed like social media users were exaggerating the impact of an individual's mistake into a nationwide issue. $10 "phantom" charge for JAJKET A spokesperson for Walmart told us at the time: We immediately began looking into this issue when it was brought to our attention and want to assure customers at our Clinton store that they are only being charged for items they purchase. We isolated the problem our customer experienced to an incorrect product barcode that one of our cashiers entered as she was checking out. The issue was immediately resolved and as a precaution, were training the stores associates on what to look for should anything like that happen again and ensuring none of our other stores are affected. We reimbursed the customer for the incorrect charge, apologized to her and appreciate that she brought this to our attention. While the images of a Walmart receipt with a "GALE" charge are real, these were isolated incidents involving human error and not a widespread systematic glitch. Furthermore, these receipts all date back to 2019 or earlier.

neutral

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/does-biden-support-green-new-deal/

Does Biden Support the Green New Deal?

Madison Dapcevich

10/01/2020

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 During the first 2020 U.S. presidential debate held in Cleveland on Sept. 29, Democratic nominee Joe Biden said he does not support the Green New Deal, a resolution introduced in Congress by members of his own party proposing strategies for dealing with climate change, but instead backs the Biden Plan for doing so, which is laid out on his campaign website. Biden's disavowal came on the heels of an attempt by his opponent, U.S. President Donald Trump, to tie him to the Green New Deal, claiming it would cost $100 trillion if implemented. Biden's responses (which begin one hour and 20 minutes into the below video clip) were as follows: That is not my plan. The Green New Deal is not my plan. [] The Green New Deal will pay for itself as we move forward. Were not going to build plants that in fact are great polluting plants. [] No, I dont support the Green New Deal. I support the Biden Plan that I put forward. The Biden Plan, which is different than what [Trump] calls the radical Green New Deal. https://www.c-span.org/video/?475793-1/trump-biden-debate These statements sparked criticism from Republicans like Omar Navarro, who ran three unsuccessful bids for Californias 43d Congressional District in 2016, 2018, and again in 2020. On Sept. 30, Navarro shared a screenshot from Bidens website that described the Green New Deal as a crucial framework for meeting the climate challenges Omar Navarro three unsuccessful bids The language in the tweeted screenshot above was indeed found on Bidens website as of Sept. 30, but was taken out of context and doesn't reflect the differences between the Biden Plan and the Green New Deal, which we will discuss below. The Green New Deal resolution was introduced in the U.S. House of Representatives on Feb. 7, 2019, in response to Trumps 2017 announcement that the United States would withdraw from the Paris Agreement on climate change. The 14-page proposal sets forth a number of policies aimed at lowering greenhouse gas emissions produced by American companies, creating high-wage jobs for Americans, and to set an overall framework for environmental justice and resiliency against climate change-related disasters. It is important to note that the Green New Deal is nonbinding, and if it were to pass, nothing outlined within its pages would become law. 14-page proposal nonbinding Biden made climate change a cornerstone of his 2020 bid for the presidency, in turn criticizing Trump's handling of environmental affairs. It is true that the Biden Plan (archived here for reference) includes elements of the Green New Deal and is similar to it in that both plans agree that the U.S. needs to act urgently and epically to meet the scope of the climate change challenge, and that the environment and the economy are completely and totally connected. The Biden Plan addresses many of the issues outlined in the Green New Deal, with the addition of specific actions that a Biden administration would take should he be elected in November 2020. cornerstone Biden Plan here We dug through both proposals to understand the nuances between the two, where they differ, and where they are the same. Generally speaking, both policies establish a similar framework but differ in the specifics of how policymakers should go about enforcing and reaching defined goals. For example, both plans highlight the importance of clean, safe drinking water and community-driven projects that promote social and environmental justice in areas disproportionately impacted by the effects of climate change. The greatest difference between the Biden Plan and the Green New Deal lies in their stances on the Paris Agreement, an international agreement established in 2015 with the central aim of coordinating and strengthening the global response to climate change and keeping the global temperature rise in this century below 2 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels. Whereas the Biden Plan promises a recommitment to the Paris Agreement, the Green New Deal does not mention it at all. Paris Agreement When it comes to clean energy, the Green New Deal and the Biden Plan are similar in that they aim to achieve 100% clean energy and net-zero emissions, but the former sets forth a 10-year mobilization deadline, whereas the Biden Plan sets a goal of no later than 2050. Both plans establish priorities for investment in clean energy innovation and research; however, the Biden Plan is far vaguer. The Green New Deal goes into greater detail, specifying that those investments should include infrastructure and industry, sustainable farming and land-use practices, zero-emission vehicle infrastructure, manufacturing public transit, removing greenhouse gas emissions from manufacturing and industry, and the research and development of new clean and renewable energy technologies. Other key areas of overlap between the two plans include creating resiliency across the nation and committing to international policy and trade that employ strong labor and environmental protections. According to his website, the Biden plan will be paid for by rolling back Trump tax incentives and will require a federal investment of $1.7 trillion over the next decade, leveraging the additional private sector and state and local investments to total more than $5 trillion. This estimated cost is significantly lower than the $100 trillion bill that Trump claimed the U.S. would foot during the debate. However, serious disagreement exists over how much implementation of the Green New Deal might actually cost. website After its 2019 introduction by U.S. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., Republican leaders and some media publications cited research by the right-wing think tank American Action Forum that speculated the Green New Deal could cost up to $93 trillion, or an estimated $600,000 per household, in its first 10 years. (A supplementary brief from the organization outlining the projected costs can be found here.) But a number of financial experts have countered that research, suggesting that it is more likely that the Green New Deal would cost significantly less, and in some estimates half as much. In fact, a September 2020 study published in the journal Energy Research & Social Science suggested a total overall cost of just over $16 trillion over 15 years. media publications American Action Forum here financial experts estimates Energy Research & Social Science Though both the Biden Plan and the Green New Deal provide similar general frameworks for moving towards a cleaner economy and combating the effects of climate change at a national level, subtle differences exist between the two. Although Biden stated outright that he does not support the Green New Deal, it is apparent from his own policy statements that he supports elements of it that have been incorporated into his own plan. As such, we rate this claim as a "Mixture." Green New Deal Friedman, Lisa. "What Is the Green New Deal? A Climate Proposal, Explained." The New York Times. 21 Feb. 2019. 116th Congress 1st Session "Recognizing the Duty of the Federal Government to Create a Green New Deal." 7 Feb. 2019. Muyskens, John, Uhrmacher, Kevin. "Where 2020 Democrats Stand on Climate Change." The Washington Post. 8 April 2019. Relman, Eliza. "Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez Says Her Green New deal Climate Plan Would Cost At Least $10 Trillion." Business Insider. 5 June 2019. Re, Gregg. "Green New Deal Would Cost Up To $93 Trillion, Or $600G Per Household, Study Says." Business Insider. 5 June 2019. Holtz-Eakin, Douglas, et al. "The Green New Deal: Scope, Scale, and Implications." American Action Forum. 25 Feb. 2019. Holtz-Eakin, Douglas. "An Initial Analysis of the Green New Deal." American Action Forum. 25 Feb. 2019. Sherman, Amy. "The Green New Deal Would Put a $600,000 Tax Burden on Every Household." PolitiFact. 27 Sept.. 2019. McDonald, Jessica. "How Much Will the Green New Deal Cost?" FactCheck.org. 14 March 2019. Galvin, Ray and Noel Healy. "The Green New Deal in the United States: What It Is and How to Pay For It." Energy Research & Social Science . September 2020.

neutral

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/does-biden-support-green-new-deal/

Is Biden in favor of the Green New Deal?

Madison Dapcevich

10/01/2020

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 During the first 2020 U.S. presidential debate held in Cleveland on Sept. 29, Democratic nominee Joe Biden said he does not support the Green New Deal, a resolution introduced in Congress by members of his own party proposing strategies for dealing with climate change, but instead backs the Biden Plan for doing so, which is laid out on his campaign website. Biden's disavowal came on the heels of an attempt by his opponent, U.S. President Donald Trump, to tie him to the Green New Deal, claiming it would cost $100 trillion if implemented. Biden's responses (which begin one hour and 20 minutes into the below video clip) were as follows: That is not my plan. The Green New Deal is not my plan. [] The Green New Deal will pay for itself as we move forward. Were not going to build plants that in fact are great polluting plants. [] No, I dont support the Green New Deal. I support the Biden Plan that I put forward. The Biden Plan, which is different than what [Trump] calls the radical Green New Deal. https://www.c-span.org/video/?475793-1/trump-biden-debate These statements sparked criticism from Republicans like Omar Navarro, who ran three unsuccessful bids for Californias 43d Congressional District in 2016, 2018, and again in 2020. On Sept. 30, Navarro shared a screenshot from Bidens website that described the Green New Deal as a crucial framework for meeting the climate challenges Omar Navarro three unsuccessful bids The language in the tweeted screenshot above was indeed found on Bidens website as of Sept. 30, but was taken out of context and doesn't reflect the differences between the Biden Plan and the Green New Deal, which we will discuss below. The Green New Deal resolution was introduced in the U.S. House of Representatives on Feb. 7, 2019, in response to Trumps 2017 announcement that the United States would withdraw from the Paris Agreement on climate change. The 14-page proposal sets forth a number of policies aimed at lowering greenhouse gas emissions produced by American companies, creating high-wage jobs for Americans, and to set an overall framework for environmental justice and resiliency against climate change-related disasters. It is important to note that the Green New Deal is nonbinding, and if it were to pass, nothing outlined within its pages would become law. 14-page proposal nonbinding Biden made climate change a cornerstone of his 2020 bid for the presidency, in turn criticizing Trump's handling of environmental affairs. It is true that the Biden Plan (archived here for reference) includes elements of the Green New Deal and is similar to it in that both plans agree that the U.S. needs to act urgently and epically to meet the scope of the climate change challenge, and that the environment and the economy are completely and totally connected. The Biden Plan addresses many of the issues outlined in the Green New Deal, with the addition of specific actions that a Biden administration would take should he be elected in November 2020. cornerstone Biden Plan here We dug through both proposals to understand the nuances between the two, where they differ, and where they are the same. Generally speaking, both policies establish a similar framework but differ in the specifics of how policymakers should go about enforcing and reaching defined goals. For example, both plans highlight the importance of clean, safe drinking water and community-driven projects that promote social and environmental justice in areas disproportionately impacted by the effects of climate change. The greatest difference between the Biden Plan and the Green New Deal lies in their stances on the Paris Agreement, an international agreement established in 2015 with the central aim of coordinating and strengthening the global response to climate change and keeping the global temperature rise in this century below 2 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels. Whereas the Biden Plan promises a recommitment to the Paris Agreement, the Green New Deal does not mention it at all. Paris Agreement When it comes to clean energy, the Green New Deal and the Biden Plan are similar in that they aim to achieve 100% clean energy and net-zero emissions, but the former sets forth a 10-year mobilization deadline, whereas the Biden Plan sets a goal of no later than 2050. Both plans establish priorities for investment in clean energy innovation and research; however, the Biden Plan is far vaguer. The Green New Deal goes into greater detail, specifying that those investments should include infrastructure and industry, sustainable farming and land-use practices, zero-emission vehicle infrastructure, manufacturing public transit, removing greenhouse gas emissions from manufacturing and industry, and the research and development of new clean and renewable energy technologies. Other key areas of overlap between the two plans include creating resiliency across the nation and committing to international policy and trade that employ strong labor and environmental protections. According to his website, the Biden plan will be paid for by rolling back Trump tax incentives and will require a federal investment of $1.7 trillion over the next decade, leveraging the additional private sector and state and local investments to total more than $5 trillion. This estimated cost is significantly lower than the $100 trillion bill that Trump claimed the U.S. would foot during the debate. However, serious disagreement exists over how much implementation of the Green New Deal might actually cost. website After its 2019 introduction by U.S. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., Republican leaders and some media publications cited research by the right-wing think tank American Action Forum that speculated the Green New Deal could cost up to $93 trillion, or an estimated $600,000 per household, in its first 10 years. (A supplementary brief from the organization outlining the projected costs can be found here.) But a number of financial experts have countered that research, suggesting that it is more likely that the Green New Deal would cost significantly less, and in some estimates half as much. In fact, a September 2020 study published in the journal Energy Research & Social Science suggested a total overall cost of just over $16 trillion over 15 years. media publications American Action Forum here financial experts estimates Energy Research & Social Science Though both the Biden Plan and the Green New Deal provide similar general frameworks for moving towards a cleaner economy and combating the effects of climate change at a national level, subtle differences exist between the two. Although Biden stated outright that he does not support the Green New Deal, it is apparent from his own policy statements that he supports elements of it that have been incorporated into his own plan. As such, we rate this claim as a "Mixture." Green New Deal Friedman, Lisa. "What Is the Green New Deal? A Climate Proposal, Explained." The New York Times. 21 Feb. 2019. 116th Congress 1st Session "Recognizing the Duty of the Federal Government to Create a Green New Deal." 7 Feb. 2019. Muyskens, John, Uhrmacher, Kevin. "Where 2020 Democrats Stand on Climate Change." The Washington Post. 8 April 2019. Relman, Eliza. "Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez Says Her Green New deal Climate Plan Would Cost At Least $10 Trillion." Business Insider. 5 June 2019. Re, Gregg. "Green New Deal Would Cost Up To $93 Trillion, Or $600G Per Household, Study Says." Business Insider. 5 June 2019. Holtz-Eakin, Douglas, et al. "The Green New Deal: Scope, Scale, and Implications." American Action Forum. 25 Feb. 2019. Holtz-Eakin, Douglas. "An Initial Analysis of the Green New Deal." American Action Forum. 25 Feb. 2019. Sherman, Amy. "The Green New Deal Would Put a $600,000 Tax Burden on Every Household." PolitiFact. 27 Sept.. 2019. McDonald, Jessica. "How Much Will the Green New Deal Cost?" FactCheck.org. 14 March 2019. Galvin, Ray and Noel Healy. "The Green New Deal in the United States: What It Is and How to Pay For It." Energy Research & Social Science . September 2020.

neutral

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/delta-unions/

Did Delta Air Lines Encourage Employees to Buy Video Game Consoles Instead of Joining a Union?

Dan MacGuill

05/10/2019

In May 2019, Delta Air Lines came under scrutiny after a photograph emerged on social media that appeared to show a poster encouraging Delta employees to spend their money on video game consoles rather than union dues. Eoin Higgins, an editor and writer at the left-leaning web site Common Dreams, tweeted the photograph on 9 May. The poster contained the following text: "Union dues cost around $700 a year. A new video game system with the latest hits sounds like fun. Put your money towards that instead of paying dues to the union." The poster featured the Delta logo and the URL of the website Don'tRiskItDon'tSignIt.com: lol fuck off @Delta pic.twitter.com/fMNOeW9uFG @Delta pic.twitter.com/fMNOeW9uFG Eoin Higgins (@EoinHiggins_) May 9, 2019 May 9, 2019 The union in question, the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers (IAM), posted photographs of similar fliers encouraging Delta employees to spend their money on watching baseball and football instead of becoming union members: Oh wow. Theres another one. And its just as bad. Really, @Delta? #GameOverDelta pic.twitter.com/JsSMg1aBRb @Delta #GameOverDelta pic.twitter.com/JsSMg1aBRb Machinists Union (@MachinistsUnion) May 9, 2019 May 9, 2019 Safe to say @Delta didnt hit a home run with this one either. Three strikes and youre out. Let em have it, Twitter. #GameOverDelta pic.twitter.com/veEk8rvtXY @Delta #GameOverDelta pic.twitter.com/veEk8rvtXY Machinists Union (@MachinistsUnion) May 10, 2019 May 10, 2019 These photographs prompted multiple inquiries from Snopes readers about whether the fliers were authentic and whether Delta was itself responsible for producing them. A spokesperson for Delta confirmed to Snopes that the airline had indeed created all of the flyers mentioned above, including the "video game" one, and that Delta was also behind the website Don'tRiskItDon'tSignIt.com, which discourages employees at times in provocative terms from becoming IAM members: Don'tRiskItDon'tSignIt.com In a statement, the Delta spokesperson wrote: "The direct relationship we have with our employees is at the very core of our strong culture and it has enabled continuous investments in Delta people. Our employees have the best total compensation in the industry, including the most lucrative profit sharing program in the world. They want and deserve the facts and we respect our employees right to decide if a union is right for them. Delta has shared many communications, which on the whole make clear that deciding whether or not to unionize should not be taken lightly." In a press release on 9 May, the IAM criticized what it called Delta's "union-busting propaganda," writing: press release "Delta Air Lines all-out assault on their employees legally-protected right to unionize with the Machinists Union is confirmation that our campaign to bring the benefits of IAM-representation to more than 40,000 Delta ground workers and flight attendants is succeeding ... Delta has resorted to defaming and spewing lies and misrepresentations about the IAM. They also continually display anti-IAM propaganda in the workplace. These are all hallmark signs of how well the IAM campaigns are doing and how scared Delta is of their employees having a voice in their careers." International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers. "Press Release -- IAM Campaigns Strike a Nerve With Delta Bosses." 9 May 2019.

true

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/delta-unions/

Was Delta Air Lines promoting the purchase of video game consoles to its employees instead of encouraging them to join a union?

Dan MacGuill

05/10/2019

In May 2019, Delta Air Lines came under scrutiny after a photograph emerged on social media that appeared to show a poster encouraging Delta employees to spend their money on video game consoles rather than union dues. Eoin Higgins, an editor and writer at the left-leaning web site Common Dreams, tweeted the photograph on 9 May. The poster contained the following text: "Union dues cost around $700 a year. A new video game system with the latest hits sounds like fun. Put your money towards that instead of paying dues to the union." The poster featured the Delta logo and the URL of the website Don'tRiskItDon'tSignIt.com: lol fuck off @Delta pic.twitter.com/fMNOeW9uFG @Delta pic.twitter.com/fMNOeW9uFG Eoin Higgins (@EoinHiggins_) May 9, 2019 May 9, 2019 The union in question, the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers (IAM), posted photographs of similar fliers encouraging Delta employees to spend their money on watching baseball and football instead of becoming union members: Oh wow. Theres another one. And its just as bad. Really, @Delta? #GameOverDelta pic.twitter.com/JsSMg1aBRb @Delta #GameOverDelta pic.twitter.com/JsSMg1aBRb Machinists Union (@MachinistsUnion) May 9, 2019 May 9, 2019 Safe to say @Delta didnt hit a home run with this one either. Three strikes and youre out. Let em have it, Twitter. #GameOverDelta pic.twitter.com/veEk8rvtXY @Delta #GameOverDelta pic.twitter.com/veEk8rvtXY Machinists Union (@MachinistsUnion) May 10, 2019 May 10, 2019 These photographs prompted multiple inquiries from Snopes readers about whether the fliers were authentic and whether Delta was itself responsible for producing them. A spokesperson for Delta confirmed to Snopes that the airline had indeed created all of the flyers mentioned above, including the "video game" one, and that Delta was also behind the website Don'tRiskItDon'tSignIt.com, which discourages employees at times in provocative terms from becoming IAM members: Don'tRiskItDon'tSignIt.com In a statement, the Delta spokesperson wrote: "The direct relationship we have with our employees is at the very core of our strong culture and it has enabled continuous investments in Delta people. Our employees have the best total compensation in the industry, including the most lucrative profit sharing program in the world. They want and deserve the facts and we respect our employees right to decide if a union is right for them. Delta has shared many communications, which on the whole make clear that deciding whether or not to unionize should not be taken lightly." In a press release on 9 May, the IAM criticized what it called Delta's "union-busting propaganda," writing: press release "Delta Air Lines all-out assault on their employees legally-protected right to unionize with the Machinists Union is confirmation that our campaign to bring the benefits of IAM-representation to more than 40,000 Delta ground workers and flight attendants is succeeding ... Delta has resorted to defaming and spewing lies and misrepresentations about the IAM. They also continually display anti-IAM propaganda in the workplace. These are all hallmark signs of how well the IAM campaigns are doing and how scared Delta is of their employees having a voice in their careers." International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers. "Press Release -- IAM Campaigns Strike a Nerve With Delta Bosses." 9 May 2019.

true

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/delta-unions/

Did Delta Air Lines incentivize employees to purchase video game consoles as an alternative to participating in a union?

Dan MacGuill

05/10/2019

In May 2019, Delta Air Lines came under scrutiny after a photograph emerged on social media that appeared to show a poster encouraging Delta employees to spend their money on video game consoles rather than union dues. Eoin Higgins, an editor and writer at the left-leaning web site Common Dreams, tweeted the photograph on 9 May. The poster contained the following text: "Union dues cost around $700 a year. A new video game system with the latest hits sounds like fun. Put your money towards that instead of paying dues to the union." The poster featured the Delta logo and the URL of the website Don'tRiskItDon'tSignIt.com: lol fuck off @Delta pic.twitter.com/fMNOeW9uFG @Delta pic.twitter.com/fMNOeW9uFG Eoin Higgins (@EoinHiggins_) May 9, 2019 May 9, 2019 The union in question, the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers (IAM), posted photographs of similar fliers encouraging Delta employees to spend their money on watching baseball and football instead of becoming union members: Oh wow. Theres another one. And its just as bad. Really, @Delta? #GameOverDelta pic.twitter.com/JsSMg1aBRb @Delta #GameOverDelta pic.twitter.com/JsSMg1aBRb Machinists Union (@MachinistsUnion) May 9, 2019 May 9, 2019 Safe to say @Delta didnt hit a home run with this one either. Three strikes and youre out. Let em have it, Twitter. #GameOverDelta pic.twitter.com/veEk8rvtXY @Delta #GameOverDelta pic.twitter.com/veEk8rvtXY Machinists Union (@MachinistsUnion) May 10, 2019 May 10, 2019 These photographs prompted multiple inquiries from Snopes readers about whether the fliers were authentic and whether Delta was itself responsible for producing them. A spokesperson for Delta confirmed to Snopes that the airline had indeed created all of the flyers mentioned above, including the "video game" one, and that Delta was also behind the website Don'tRiskItDon'tSignIt.com, which discourages employees at times in provocative terms from becoming IAM members: Don'tRiskItDon'tSignIt.com In a statement, the Delta spokesperson wrote: "The direct relationship we have with our employees is at the very core of our strong culture and it has enabled continuous investments in Delta people. Our employees have the best total compensation in the industry, including the most lucrative profit sharing program in the world. They want and deserve the facts and we respect our employees right to decide if a union is right for them. Delta has shared many communications, which on the whole make clear that deciding whether or not to unionize should not be taken lightly." In a press release on 9 May, the IAM criticized what it called Delta's "union-busting propaganda," writing: press release "Delta Air Lines all-out assault on their employees legally-protected right to unionize with the Machinists Union is confirmation that our campaign to bring the benefits of IAM-representation to more than 40,000 Delta ground workers and flight attendants is succeeding ... Delta has resorted to defaming and spewing lies and misrepresentations about the IAM. They also continually display anti-IAM propaganda in the workplace. These are all hallmark signs of how well the IAM campaigns are doing and how scared Delta is of their employees having a voice in their careers." International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers. "Press Release -- IAM Campaigns Strike a Nerve With Delta Bosses." 9 May 2019.

true

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/devos-family-campaign-contributions/

DeVos Family Campaign Contributions

Dan Evon

02/08/2017

On 7 February 2017, Betsy DeVos was confirmed as Secretary of Education in the new Trump administration by a narrow 51-50 margin, with the tie-breaking vote being cast by Vice President Mike Pence. All of the votes approving DeVos were cast by Republican senators, leading some of her detractors to posit the theory that she had essentially paid for her position via campaign contributions. That theory was illustrated by several charts circulated online that allegedly documented the amount of money DeVos had contributed to various senators: The above-displayed chart first appeared on Reddit, but the data it incorporates was taken from a report published by the Center for American Progress. That report included another chart showing the DeVos family's campaign contributions: Reddit A similar report filed by the Center for Responsive Politics stated that "Betsy DeVos and her relatives have given at least $20.2 million to Republican candidates, party committees, PACs and super PACs" since 1989: report In the 2016 cycle alone, the family had given at least $10 million as of late October to a host of GOP candidates and committees. Much of that $4.4 million went to super PACs: those supporting the White House bids of Sens. Marco Rubio and Ted Cruz as well as former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush and businesswoman Carly Fiorina, and the Koch brothers-backed Freedom Partners Action Fund and the super PAC started by Republican strategist Karl Rove, American Crossroads; the latter two groups helped support numerous Republicans in tight House and Senate races. However, these charts don't show how much Betsy DeVos personally contributed to Republican campaigns. A second chart from the Center for Responsive Politics documented that Betsy DeVos herself was only responsible for about 7% of these contributions: It should also be noted that these charts tally cumulative donations made over the span of two and a half decades (although the 2016 campaign cycle comprised the bulk of those donations). None of this information in itself establishes that the contributions were made with the intent of gaining office for Betsy DeVos, or that they had that effect (intended or not). Republican senator Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, for example, received $43,200 from the DeVos family but voted "No" during Betsy DeVos' confirmation hearing. And although nearly all the Republican senators who had received contributions from the DeVos family voted "Yes," so did all the Republican senators who had not received any contributions from the DeVos family. The Washington Post posited a much more likely explanation for the confirmation vote breakdown partisanship: posited If Democrats controlled the Senate, DeVos would have lost her confirmation. Theres every reason to believe that [Senate Majority Leader Mitch] McConnell let [Susan] Collins and Murkowski vote no on DeVos for political reasons, holding enough votes in reserve to assure shed win. The motivation was partisan support for a Republican nominee, not that a small fraction of his past campaign financing depended on DeVoss generosity. The Washington Post also noted that while the DeVos family contributed millions of dollars to Republican candidates, their contributions constituted only a sliver of the total money raised by those campaigns: It's no secret that DeVos and her family have been major donors to the Republican Party over the last few decades. In 1997, DeVos wrote that her family was the "largest single contributor of soft money" to the Republicans: I know a little something about soft money, as my family is the largest single contributor of soft money to the national Republican party. Occasionally a wayward reporter will try to make the charge that we are giving this money to get something in return, or that we must be purchasing influence in some way. [...] They are right. We do expect some things in return. We expect to foster a conservative governing philosophy consisting of limited government and respect for traditional American virtues. We expect a return on our investment; we expect a good and honest government. Furthermore, we expect the Republican party to use the money to promote these policies, and yes, to win elections. During DeVos' confirmation hearing in January 2017, Senator Bernie Sanders asked her about how much her family had contributed to the Republican Party over the years, and she averred that an estimate of about $200 million might be accurate: confirmation hearing Sanders: Mrs. DeVos, there is a growing fear, I think, in this country that we are moving toward what some would call an oligarchic form of society, where a small number of very, very wealthy billionaires control, to a significant degree, our economic and political life. Would you be so kind as to tell us how much your family has contributed to the Republican Party over the years? DeVos: Senator, first of all thank you for that question. I again was pleased to meet you in your office last week. I wish I could give you that number. I dont know. Sanders: I have heard the number was $200 million. Does that sound in the ballpark? DeVos: Collectively? Between my entire family? Sanders: Yeah, over the years. DeVos: Thats possible Sanders: Okay. My question is, and I dont mean to be rude. Do you think, if you were not a multi-billionaire, if your family has not made hundreds of millions of dollars of contributions to the Republican Party, that you would be sitting here today? DeVos: Senator, as a matter of fact, I do think that there would be that possibility. Ive worked very hard on behalf of parents and children for the last almost 30 years to be a voice for students and to empower parents to make decisions on behalf of their children, primarily low-income children. Senate education committee Chairman Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.) told Politico that the DeVos family's contributions were made legally and were properly disclosed: Politico All of that is disclosed, Alexander said. You can ask those senators and evaluate it yourself. Thats the reason we have limits on campaign contributions and we have disclosures of those things. A spokesperson for Florida senator Marco Rubio, who was singled out for having received nearly $100,000 from the DeVos family, defended his acceptance of those contributions: singled "People contribute to Senator Rubio's campaign because they support his agenda. Ms. DeVos is a strong supporter of empowering parents and providing educational opportunity for all, policies Senator Rubio has supported for over a decade. Her nomination was opposed by Democrats who take millions of dollars from the big unions obsessed with denying school choice to low-income children. Brown, Emma. "With Historic Tiebreaker from Pence, DeVos Confirmed as Education Secretary." The Washington Post. 7 February 2017. Alexander, Dan. "Betsy DeVos Says It's 'Possible' Her Family Has Donated $200M to Republicans." Forbes. 17 January 2017. Bump, Phillip. "The DeVos Vote Is a Bad Case Study for the Power of Campaign Contributions." The Washington Post. 7 February 2017. Stratford, Michael. "DeVos Heads Into Confirmation with a Megadonor's Advantage." Politico. 20 December 2016. Noland, Jack. "Betsy DeVos and Her Big-Giving Relatives: Family Qualifies as GOP Royalty." Center for Responsive Politics. 1 December 2016. Boser, Ulrich. "Conflicts of DeVos." Center for American Progress. 12 January 2017.

true

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/devos-family-campaign-contributions/

Political donations from the DeVos family

Dan Evon

02/08/2017

On 7 February 2017, Betsy DeVos was confirmed as Secretary of Education in the new Trump administration by a narrow 51-50 margin, with the tie-breaking vote being cast by Vice President Mike Pence. All of the votes approving DeVos were cast by Republican senators, leading some of her detractors to posit the theory that she had essentially paid for her position via campaign contributions. That theory was illustrated by several charts circulated online that allegedly documented the amount of money DeVos had contributed to various senators: The above-displayed chart first appeared on Reddit, but the data it incorporates was taken from a report published by the Center for American Progress. That report included another chart showing the DeVos family's campaign contributions: Reddit A similar report filed by the Center for Responsive Politics stated that "Betsy DeVos and her relatives have given at least $20.2 million to Republican candidates, party committees, PACs and super PACs" since 1989: report In the 2016 cycle alone, the family had given at least $10 million as of late October to a host of GOP candidates and committees. Much of that $4.4 million went to super PACs: those supporting the White House bids of Sens. Marco Rubio and Ted Cruz as well as former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush and businesswoman Carly Fiorina, and the Koch brothers-backed Freedom Partners Action Fund and the super PAC started by Republican strategist Karl Rove, American Crossroads; the latter two groups helped support numerous Republicans in tight House and Senate races. However, these charts don't show how much Betsy DeVos personally contributed to Republican campaigns. A second chart from the Center for Responsive Politics documented that Betsy DeVos herself was only responsible for about 7% of these contributions: It should also be noted that these charts tally cumulative donations made over the span of two and a half decades (although the 2016 campaign cycle comprised the bulk of those donations). None of this information in itself establishes that the contributions were made with the intent of gaining office for Betsy DeVos, or that they had that effect (intended or not). Republican senator Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, for example, received $43,200 from the DeVos family but voted "No" during Betsy DeVos' confirmation hearing. And although nearly all the Republican senators who had received contributions from the DeVos family voted "Yes," so did all the Republican senators who had not received any contributions from the DeVos family. The Washington Post posited a much more likely explanation for the confirmation vote breakdown partisanship: posited If Democrats controlled the Senate, DeVos would have lost her confirmation. Theres every reason to believe that [Senate Majority Leader Mitch] McConnell let [Susan] Collins and Murkowski vote no on DeVos for political reasons, holding enough votes in reserve to assure shed win. The motivation was partisan support for a Republican nominee, not that a small fraction of his past campaign financing depended on DeVoss generosity. The Washington Post also noted that while the DeVos family contributed millions of dollars to Republican candidates, their contributions constituted only a sliver of the total money raised by those campaigns: It's no secret that DeVos and her family have been major donors to the Republican Party over the last few decades. In 1997, DeVos wrote that her family was the "largest single contributor of soft money" to the Republicans: I know a little something about soft money, as my family is the largest single contributor of soft money to the national Republican party. Occasionally a wayward reporter will try to make the charge that we are giving this money to get something in return, or that we must be purchasing influence in some way. [...] They are right. We do expect some things in return. We expect to foster a conservative governing philosophy consisting of limited government and respect for traditional American virtues. We expect a return on our investment; we expect a good and honest government. Furthermore, we expect the Republican party to use the money to promote these policies, and yes, to win elections. During DeVos' confirmation hearing in January 2017, Senator Bernie Sanders asked her about how much her family had contributed to the Republican Party over the years, and she averred that an estimate of about $200 million might be accurate: confirmation hearing Sanders: Mrs. DeVos, there is a growing fear, I think, in this country that we are moving toward what some would call an oligarchic form of society, where a small number of very, very wealthy billionaires control, to a significant degree, our economic and political life. Would you be so kind as to tell us how much your family has contributed to the Republican Party over the years? DeVos: Senator, first of all thank you for that question. I again was pleased to meet you in your office last week. I wish I could give you that number. I dont know. Sanders: I have heard the number was $200 million. Does that sound in the ballpark? DeVos: Collectively? Between my entire family? Sanders: Yeah, over the years. DeVos: Thats possible Sanders: Okay. My question is, and I dont mean to be rude. Do you think, if you were not a multi-billionaire, if your family has not made hundreds of millions of dollars of contributions to the Republican Party, that you would be sitting here today? DeVos: Senator, as a matter of fact, I do think that there would be that possibility. Ive worked very hard on behalf of parents and children for the last almost 30 years to be a voice for students and to empower parents to make decisions on behalf of their children, primarily low-income children. Senate education committee Chairman Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.) told Politico that the DeVos family's contributions were made legally and were properly disclosed: Politico All of that is disclosed, Alexander said. You can ask those senators and evaluate it yourself. Thats the reason we have limits on campaign contributions and we have disclosures of those things. A spokesperson for Florida senator Marco Rubio, who was singled out for having received nearly $100,000 from the DeVos family, defended his acceptance of those contributions: singled "People contribute to Senator Rubio's campaign because they support his agenda. Ms. DeVos is a strong supporter of empowering parents and providing educational opportunity for all, policies Senator Rubio has supported for over a decade. Her nomination was opposed by Democrats who take millions of dollars from the big unions obsessed with denying school choice to low-income children. Brown, Emma. "With Historic Tiebreaker from Pence, DeVos Confirmed as Education Secretary." The Washington Post. 7 February 2017. Alexander, Dan. "Betsy DeVos Says It's 'Possible' Her Family Has Donated $200M to Republicans." Forbes. 17 January 2017. Bump, Phillip. "The DeVos Vote Is a Bad Case Study for the Power of Campaign Contributions." The Washington Post. 7 February 2017. Stratford, Michael. "DeVos Heads Into Confirmation with a Megadonor's Advantage." Politico. 20 December 2016. Noland, Jack. "Betsy DeVos and Her Big-Giving Relatives: Family Qualifies as GOP Royalty." Center for Responsive Politics. 1 December 2016. Boser, Ulrich. "Conflicts of DeVos." Center for American Progress. 12 January 2017.

true

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/devos-family-campaign-contributions/

Political donations made by the DeVos family.

Dan Evon

02/08/2017

On 7 February 2017, Betsy DeVos was confirmed as Secretary of Education in the new Trump administration by a narrow 51-50 margin, with the tie-breaking vote being cast by Vice President Mike Pence. All of the votes approving DeVos were cast by Republican senators, leading some of her detractors to posit the theory that she had essentially paid for her position via campaign contributions. That theory was illustrated by several charts circulated online that allegedly documented the amount of money DeVos had contributed to various senators: The above-displayed chart first appeared on Reddit, but the data it incorporates was taken from a report published by the Center for American Progress. That report included another chart showing the DeVos family's campaign contributions: Reddit A similar report filed by the Center for Responsive Politics stated that "Betsy DeVos and her relatives have given at least $20.2 million to Republican candidates, party committees, PACs and super PACs" since 1989: report In the 2016 cycle alone, the family had given at least $10 million as of late October to a host of GOP candidates and committees. Much of that $4.4 million went to super PACs: those supporting the White House bids of Sens. Marco Rubio and Ted Cruz as well as former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush and businesswoman Carly Fiorina, and the Koch brothers-backed Freedom Partners Action Fund and the super PAC started by Republican strategist Karl Rove, American Crossroads; the latter two groups helped support numerous Republicans in tight House and Senate races. However, these charts don't show how much Betsy DeVos personally contributed to Republican campaigns. A second chart from the Center for Responsive Politics documented that Betsy DeVos herself was only responsible for about 7% of these contributions: It should also be noted that these charts tally cumulative donations made over the span of two and a half decades (although the 2016 campaign cycle comprised the bulk of those donations). None of this information in itself establishes that the contributions were made with the intent of gaining office for Betsy DeVos, or that they had that effect (intended or not). Republican senator Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, for example, received $43,200 from the DeVos family but voted "No" during Betsy DeVos' confirmation hearing. And although nearly all the Republican senators who had received contributions from the DeVos family voted "Yes," so did all the Republican senators who had not received any contributions from the DeVos family. The Washington Post posited a much more likely explanation for the confirmation vote breakdown partisanship: posited If Democrats controlled the Senate, DeVos would have lost her confirmation. Theres every reason to believe that [Senate Majority Leader Mitch] McConnell let [Susan] Collins and Murkowski vote no on DeVos for political reasons, holding enough votes in reserve to assure shed win. The motivation was partisan support for a Republican nominee, not that a small fraction of his past campaign financing depended on DeVoss generosity. The Washington Post also noted that while the DeVos family contributed millions of dollars to Republican candidates, their contributions constituted only a sliver of the total money raised by those campaigns: It's no secret that DeVos and her family have been major donors to the Republican Party over the last few decades. In 1997, DeVos wrote that her family was the "largest single contributor of soft money" to the Republicans: I know a little something about soft money, as my family is the largest single contributor of soft money to the national Republican party. Occasionally a wayward reporter will try to make the charge that we are giving this money to get something in return, or that we must be purchasing influence in some way. [...] They are right. We do expect some things in return. We expect to foster a conservative governing philosophy consisting of limited government and respect for traditional American virtues. We expect a return on our investment; we expect a good and honest government. Furthermore, we expect the Republican party to use the money to promote these policies, and yes, to win elections. During DeVos' confirmation hearing in January 2017, Senator Bernie Sanders asked her about how much her family had contributed to the Republican Party over the years, and she averred that an estimate of about $200 million might be accurate: confirmation hearing Sanders: Mrs. DeVos, there is a growing fear, I think, in this country that we are moving toward what some would call an oligarchic form of society, where a small number of very, very wealthy billionaires control, to a significant degree, our economic and political life. Would you be so kind as to tell us how much your family has contributed to the Republican Party over the years? DeVos: Senator, first of all thank you for that question. I again was pleased to meet you in your office last week. I wish I could give you that number. I dont know. Sanders: I have heard the number was $200 million. Does that sound in the ballpark? DeVos: Collectively? Between my entire family? Sanders: Yeah, over the years. DeVos: Thats possible Sanders: Okay. My question is, and I dont mean to be rude. Do you think, if you were not a multi-billionaire, if your family has not made hundreds of millions of dollars of contributions to the Republican Party, that you would be sitting here today? DeVos: Senator, as a matter of fact, I do think that there would be that possibility. Ive worked very hard on behalf of parents and children for the last almost 30 years to be a voice for students and to empower parents to make decisions on behalf of their children, primarily low-income children. Senate education committee Chairman Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.) told Politico that the DeVos family's contributions were made legally and were properly disclosed: Politico All of that is disclosed, Alexander said. You can ask those senators and evaluate it yourself. Thats the reason we have limits on campaign contributions and we have disclosures of those things. A spokesperson for Florida senator Marco Rubio, who was singled out for having received nearly $100,000 from the DeVos family, defended his acceptance of those contributions: singled "People contribute to Senator Rubio's campaign because they support his agenda. Ms. DeVos is a strong supporter of empowering parents and providing educational opportunity for all, policies Senator Rubio has supported for over a decade. Her nomination was opposed by Democrats who take millions of dollars from the big unions obsessed with denying school choice to low-income children. Brown, Emma. "With Historic Tiebreaker from Pence, DeVos Confirmed as Education Secretary." The Washington Post. 7 February 2017. Alexander, Dan. "Betsy DeVos Says It's 'Possible' Her Family Has Donated $200M to Republicans." Forbes. 17 January 2017. Bump, Phillip. "The DeVos Vote Is a Bad Case Study for the Power of Campaign Contributions." The Washington Post. 7 February 2017. Stratford, Michael. "DeVos Heads Into Confirmation with a Megadonor's Advantage." Politico. 20 December 2016. Noland, Jack. "Betsy DeVos and Her Big-Giving Relatives: Family Qualifies as GOP Royalty." Center for Responsive Politics. 1 December 2016. Boser, Ulrich. "Conflicts of DeVos." Center for American Progress. 12 January 2017.

true

https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2015/nov/18/jennifer-shilling/jennifer-shilling-71-state-roads-rated-poor-or-med/

71% of WIs roads are in poor or mediocre condition and 14% of WIs bridges are structurally deficient or functionally obsolete.

Sarah Hauer

11/18/2015

In early November 2015, potholes prompted some crossing of party lines when theLegislatures Joint Finance Committeeapproved Republican Gov. Scott Walkers plan to borrow $350 million over the next two years for road projects. Democrats offered key support. Even before that, Senate Minority Leader Jennifer Shilling (D-La Crosse) was arguing more spending was needed. On Oct. 1, 2015 shetweeted this: 71% of WIs roads are in poor or mediocre condition and 14% of WIs bridges are structurally deficient or functionally obsolete. #JustFixIt In Wisconsins budget battles over infrastructure, few deny the need for road maintenance. But is Shilling right about how bad the situation is? Digging into the numbers Shillings team directed us toa reportfrom the U.S. Department of Transportation that cited the same statistics as the tweet -- that 71 percent of roads in Wisconsin are in poor or mediocre condition and 14 percent of bridges are classified as structurally deficient or functionally obsolete. So, the report is quoted accurately. But what about the numbers themselves? The two statistics were drawn from different sources of data. The data on road conditions came from the2013 Report Card for Americas Infrastructure. The report, the most recent available, is put out by the American Society of Civil Engineers, a trade and advocacy organization. By the groups tally, Wisconsin is one of just six states with at least 70 percent of roads rated in poor or mediocre condition, meaning our roads are in worse shape than the national average. But experts caution that the report card can overstate the amount of need for road repairs. First, the report uses a small source of data for each state and then extrapolates that data to the entire state roadway system. Ashwat Anandanarayanan, director of transportation policy for the environmental group 1000 Friends of Wisconsin, said the civil engineers reports also conflate new roadway construction and maintenance, resulting in what appears to be greater need. Lots of roads need to be fixed, he said. Not a lot need to be expanded. So then, what is a better measuring stick? The Wisconsin Department of Transportation collects its own data on road conditions that is used in the Highway Performance Monitoring System by the Federal Highway Administration, which is considered the gold standard of transportation information. According to these figures, the percentage of Wisconsin roads in poor or mediocre condition is much lower -- 38 percent of the state highway system falls into those categories. That doesnt mean the state will fare better in a national comparison by that measure. In fact, the state lags behind the U.S. average in most indicators of roadway quality. As for bridges, Shilling said 14 percent of Wisconsins bridges were in disrepair or functionally obsolete. This statistic, which is accurate, came from WisDOT data submitted to the Federal Highway Administration. But while Shilling cites the number as evidence of the state being behind, Wisconsin does pretty well here in a national comparison. Only three states Arizona, Minnesota and Nevada reported a smaller percentage of bridges in disrepair. Our rating Shilling said 71 % of WIs roads are in poor or mediocre condition and 14% of WIs bridges are structurally deficient or functionally obsolete. The report she cited from the federal Department of Transportation backed up her figures, but the numbers used for her road statistic arent the most accurate available. By another measure, the percentage of roads in poor or mediocre condition is far smaller. There was no dispute on the bridge number, though on that front the state actually fares better than most others. We rate the claim Mostly True.

true

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/trumps-name-stimulus-checks/

Will Trump's Name Appear on COVID-19 Stimulus Checks?

Dan Evon

04/15/2020

Snopes is still fighting an infodemic of rumors and misinformation surrounding the COVID-19 pandemic, and you can help. Find out what we've learned and how to inoculate yourself against COVID-19 misinformation. Read the latest fact checks about the vaccines. Submit any questionable rumors and advice you encounter. Become a Founding Member to help us hire more fact-checkers. And, please, follow the CDC or WHO for guidance on protecting your community from the disease. fighting Find out Read Submit Become a Founding Member CDC WHO In April 2020, millions of Americans who lost income due to circumstances related to the COVID-19 pandemic were waiting on promised relief payments from the United States government. So when news broke that U.S. President Donald Trump was making the "unprecedented" move of having his name added to these stimulus checks, a decision that could potentially delay the arrival of these checks by several days, many citizens took to social media to voice their displeasure, as in the example below: millions of Americans social media Trump's name is truly being added to the COVID-19 stimulus checks, otherwise known as Economic Impact Payments. As of this writing, however, officials at the U.S. Treasury Department insist this will not result in any delays. The Washington Post first reported on Trump's decision on April 14, 2020. According to the news outlet, Trump's name is expected to appear in the memo line of the check, not as the payment's official signatory, and that this will be the "first time that a president's name appears on an IRS disbursement": reported The Treasury Department has ordered President Trumps name printed on stimulus checks the Internal Revenue Service is rushing to send to tens of millions of Americans, a process that could slow their delivery by a few days, senior IRS officials said. The unprecedented decision, finalized late Monday, means that when recipients open the $1,200 paper checks the IRS is scheduled to begin sending to 70 million Americans in coming days, President Donald J. Trump will appear on the left side of the payment. It will be the first time a presidents name appears on an IRS disbursement, whether a routine refund or one of the handful of checks the government has issued to taxpayers in recent decades either to stimulate a down economy or share the dividends of a strong one. Treasury officials disputed that the checks would be delayed. While Trump's name will appear on these stimulus checks, we can't predict whether these payments will be delayed or go out on time. A Treasury Department official said in a statement that "absolutely no delay whatsoever" would occur: statement "Economic Impact Payment checks are scheduled to go out on time and exactly as planned there is absolutely no delay whatsoever ... In fact, we expect the first checks to be in the mail early next week which is well in advance of when the first checks went out in 2008 and well in advance of initial estimates." It should also be noted that many Americans will be receiving their stimulus payments via a direct deposit. It's unclear how many people will receive hard paper checks bearing Trump's name and how many will receive a digital payment. An IRS official told Fox News that the number of people who will receive paper checks was subject to a "number of variables, including how much info the IRS obtains through the Non-Filers Enter Payment Info web portal and the Get My Payment portal launching [April 15] at IRS.gov. Fox News These Economic Impact Payments were included in the $2.2 trillion stimulus package that Trump signed in late March 2020. According to the IRS, direct-deposit payments had already started going out as of the second week in April. Those waiting on a paper check, however, may not see their payments for several weeks. (If you're waiting on a payment, you can check the status of your check on a recently launched web app from the IRS.) several weeks web app To sum up: It is true that in April 2020, the U.S. government made the unprecedented move of adding the president's name to stimulus checks issued by the IRS in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Although an IRS official said this could slow the process and delay the delivery of checks, Treasury officials insisted that the checks would still go out on schedule. Paine, Neil. "More Than 16 Million Americans Have Lost Their Jobs In The Past Three Weeks." Five Thirty Eight. 9 April 2020. Raju, Manu; Fox, Lauren; Klein, Betsy. "Some Americans Could Wait 20 Weeks to Receive Stimulus Checks, IRS Tells House Democrats." CNN. 2 April 2020. Olson, Tyler and John Roberts. "Trump's Name Will be Added to Stimulus Checks." Fox News. 15 April 2020. Acosta, Jim and Caroline Kelly. "Trump's Name Will be Added to Stimulus Checks." CNN. 15 April 2020. Acosta, Jim and Caroline Kelly. "Trump's Name Will be Added to Stimulus Checks." CNN. 15 April 2020. Lederman, Josh Phil Helsel. "Trump's Name Will Appear on Coronavirus Relief Checks." NBC News. 14 April 2020.

true

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/trumps-name-stimulus-checks/

Will Trump's name be included on COVID-19 stimulus checks?

Dan Evon

04/15/2020

Snopes is still fighting an infodemic of rumors and misinformation surrounding the COVID-19 pandemic, and you can help. Find out what we've learned and how to inoculate yourself against COVID-19 misinformation. Read the latest fact checks about the vaccines. Submit any questionable rumors and advice you encounter. Become a Founding Member to help us hire more fact-checkers. And, please, follow the CDC or WHO for guidance on protecting your community from the disease. fighting Find out Read Submit Become a Founding Member CDC WHO In April 2020, millions of Americans who lost income due to circumstances related to the COVID-19 pandemic were waiting on promised relief payments from the United States government. So when news broke that U.S. President Donald Trump was making the "unprecedented" move of having his name added to these stimulus checks, a decision that could potentially delay the arrival of these checks by several days, many citizens took to social media to voice their displeasure, as in the example below: millions of Americans social media Trump's name is truly being added to the COVID-19 stimulus checks, otherwise known as Economic Impact Payments. As of this writing, however, officials at the U.S. Treasury Department insist this will not result in any delays. The Washington Post first reported on Trump's decision on April 14, 2020. According to the news outlet, Trump's name is expected to appear in the memo line of the check, not as the payment's official signatory, and that this will be the "first time that a president's name appears on an IRS disbursement": reported The Treasury Department has ordered President Trumps name printed on stimulus checks the Internal Revenue Service is rushing to send to tens of millions of Americans, a process that could slow their delivery by a few days, senior IRS officials said. The unprecedented decision, finalized late Monday, means that when recipients open the $1,200 paper checks the IRS is scheduled to begin sending to 70 million Americans in coming days, President Donald J. Trump will appear on the left side of the payment. It will be the first time a presidents name appears on an IRS disbursement, whether a routine refund or one of the handful of checks the government has issued to taxpayers in recent decades either to stimulate a down economy or share the dividends of a strong one. Treasury officials disputed that the checks would be delayed. While Trump's name will appear on these stimulus checks, we can't predict whether these payments will be delayed or go out on time. A Treasury Department official said in a statement that "absolutely no delay whatsoever" would occur: statement "Economic Impact Payment checks are scheduled to go out on time and exactly as planned there is absolutely no delay whatsoever ... In fact, we expect the first checks to be in the mail early next week which is well in advance of when the first checks went out in 2008 and well in advance of initial estimates." It should also be noted that many Americans will be receiving their stimulus payments via a direct deposit. It's unclear how many people will receive hard paper checks bearing Trump's name and how many will receive a digital payment. An IRS official told Fox News that the number of people who will receive paper checks was subject to a "number of variables, including how much info the IRS obtains through the Non-Filers Enter Payment Info web portal and the Get My Payment portal launching [April 15] at IRS.gov. Fox News These Economic Impact Payments were included in the $2.2 trillion stimulus package that Trump signed in late March 2020. According to the IRS, direct-deposit payments had already started going out as of the second week in April. Those waiting on a paper check, however, may not see their payments for several weeks. (If you're waiting on a payment, you can check the status of your check on a recently launched web app from the IRS.) several weeks web app To sum up: It is true that in April 2020, the U.S. government made the unprecedented move of adding the president's name to stimulus checks issued by the IRS in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Although an IRS official said this could slow the process and delay the delivery of checks, Treasury officials insisted that the checks would still go out on schedule. Paine, Neil. "More Than 16 Million Americans Have Lost Their Jobs In The Past Three Weeks." Five Thirty Eight. 9 April 2020. Raju, Manu; Fox, Lauren; Klein, Betsy. "Some Americans Could Wait 20 Weeks to Receive Stimulus Checks, IRS Tells House Democrats." CNN. 2 April 2020. Olson, Tyler and John Roberts. "Trump's Name Will be Added to Stimulus Checks." Fox News. 15 April 2020. Acosta, Jim and Caroline Kelly. "Trump's Name Will be Added to Stimulus Checks." CNN. 15 April 2020. Acosta, Jim and Caroline Kelly. "Trump's Name Will be Added to Stimulus Checks." CNN. 15 April 2020. Lederman, Josh Phil Helsel. "Trump's Name Will Appear on Coronavirus Relief Checks." NBC News. 14 April 2020.

true

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/trumps-name-stimulus-checks/

Will the name of Trump be displayed on COVID-19 stimulus checks?

Dan Evon

04/15/2020

Snopes is still fighting an infodemic of rumors and misinformation surrounding the COVID-19 pandemic, and you can help. Find out what we've learned and how to inoculate yourself against COVID-19 misinformation. Read the latest fact checks about the vaccines. Submit any questionable rumors and advice you encounter. Become a Founding Member to help us hire more fact-checkers. And, please, follow the CDC or WHO for guidance on protecting your community from the disease. fighting Find out Read Submit Become a Founding Member CDC WHO In April 2020, millions of Americans who lost income due to circumstances related to the COVID-19 pandemic were waiting on promised relief payments from the United States government. So when news broke that U.S. President Donald Trump was making the "unprecedented" move of having his name added to these stimulus checks, a decision that could potentially delay the arrival of these checks by several days, many citizens took to social media to voice their displeasure, as in the example below: millions of Americans social media Trump's name is truly being added to the COVID-19 stimulus checks, otherwise known as Economic Impact Payments. As of this writing, however, officials at the U.S. Treasury Department insist this will not result in any delays. The Washington Post first reported on Trump's decision on April 14, 2020. According to the news outlet, Trump's name is expected to appear in the memo line of the check, not as the payment's official signatory, and that this will be the "first time that a president's name appears on an IRS disbursement": reported The Treasury Department has ordered President Trumps name printed on stimulus checks the Internal Revenue Service is rushing to send to tens of millions of Americans, a process that could slow their delivery by a few days, senior IRS officials said. The unprecedented decision, finalized late Monday, means that when recipients open the $1,200 paper checks the IRS is scheduled to begin sending to 70 million Americans in coming days, President Donald J. Trump will appear on the left side of the payment. It will be the first time a presidents name appears on an IRS disbursement, whether a routine refund or one of the handful of checks the government has issued to taxpayers in recent decades either to stimulate a down economy or share the dividends of a strong one. Treasury officials disputed that the checks would be delayed. While Trump's name will appear on these stimulus checks, we can't predict whether these payments will be delayed or go out on time. A Treasury Department official said in a statement that "absolutely no delay whatsoever" would occur: statement "Economic Impact Payment checks are scheduled to go out on time and exactly as planned there is absolutely no delay whatsoever ... In fact, we expect the first checks to be in the mail early next week which is well in advance of when the first checks went out in 2008 and well in advance of initial estimates." It should also be noted that many Americans will be receiving their stimulus payments via a direct deposit. It's unclear how many people will receive hard paper checks bearing Trump's name and how many will receive a digital payment. An IRS official told Fox News that the number of people who will receive paper checks was subject to a "number of variables, including how much info the IRS obtains through the Non-Filers Enter Payment Info web portal and the Get My Payment portal launching [April 15] at IRS.gov. Fox News These Economic Impact Payments were included in the $2.2 trillion stimulus package that Trump signed in late March 2020. According to the IRS, direct-deposit payments had already started going out as of the second week in April. Those waiting on a paper check, however, may not see their payments for several weeks. (If you're waiting on a payment, you can check the status of your check on a recently launched web app from the IRS.) several weeks web app To sum up: It is true that in April 2020, the U.S. government made the unprecedented move of adding the president's name to stimulus checks issued by the IRS in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Although an IRS official said this could slow the process and delay the delivery of checks, Treasury officials insisted that the checks would still go out on schedule. Paine, Neil. "More Than 16 Million Americans Have Lost Their Jobs In The Past Three Weeks." Five Thirty Eight. 9 April 2020. Raju, Manu; Fox, Lauren; Klein, Betsy. "Some Americans Could Wait 20 Weeks to Receive Stimulus Checks, IRS Tells House Democrats." CNN. 2 April 2020. Olson, Tyler and John Roberts. "Trump's Name Will be Added to Stimulus Checks." Fox News. 15 April 2020. Acosta, Jim and Caroline Kelly. "Trump's Name Will be Added to Stimulus Checks." CNN. 15 April 2020. Acosta, Jim and Caroline Kelly. "Trump's Name Will be Added to Stimulus Checks." CNN. 15 April 2020. Lederman, Josh Phil Helsel. "Trump's Name Will Appear on Coronavirus Relief Checks." NBC News. 14 April 2020.

true

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/trumps-name-stimulus-checks/

Is Trump's Name Set to Feature on COVID-19 Stimulus Checks?

Dan Evon

04/15/2020

Snopes is still fighting an infodemic of rumors and misinformation surrounding the COVID-19 pandemic, and you can help. Find out what we've learned and how to inoculate yourself against COVID-19 misinformation. Read the latest fact checks about the vaccines. Submit any questionable rumors and advice you encounter. Become a Founding Member to help us hire more fact-checkers. And, please, follow the CDC or WHO for guidance on protecting your community from the disease. fighting Find out Read Submit Become a Founding Member CDC WHO In April 2020, millions of Americans who lost income due to circumstances related to the COVID-19 pandemic were waiting on promised relief payments from the United States government. So when news broke that U.S. President Donald Trump was making the "unprecedented" move of having his name added to these stimulus checks, a decision that could potentially delay the arrival of these checks by several days, many citizens took to social media to voice their displeasure, as in the example below: millions of Americans social media Trump's name is truly being added to the COVID-19 stimulus checks, otherwise known as Economic Impact Payments. As of this writing, however, officials at the U.S. Treasury Department insist this will not result in any delays. The Washington Post first reported on Trump's decision on April 14, 2020. According to the news outlet, Trump's name is expected to appear in the memo line of the check, not as the payment's official signatory, and that this will be the "first time that a president's name appears on an IRS disbursement": reported The Treasury Department has ordered President Trumps name printed on stimulus checks the Internal Revenue Service is rushing to send to tens of millions of Americans, a process that could slow their delivery by a few days, senior IRS officials said. The unprecedented decision, finalized late Monday, means that when recipients open the $1,200 paper checks the IRS is scheduled to begin sending to 70 million Americans in coming days, President Donald J. Trump will appear on the left side of the payment. It will be the first time a presidents name appears on an IRS disbursement, whether a routine refund or one of the handful of checks the government has issued to taxpayers in recent decades either to stimulate a down economy or share the dividends of a strong one. Treasury officials disputed that the checks would be delayed. While Trump's name will appear on these stimulus checks, we can't predict whether these payments will be delayed or go out on time. A Treasury Department official said in a statement that "absolutely no delay whatsoever" would occur: statement "Economic Impact Payment checks are scheduled to go out on time and exactly as planned there is absolutely no delay whatsoever ... In fact, we expect the first checks to be in the mail early next week which is well in advance of when the first checks went out in 2008 and well in advance of initial estimates." It should also be noted that many Americans will be receiving their stimulus payments via a direct deposit. It's unclear how many people will receive hard paper checks bearing Trump's name and how many will receive a digital payment. An IRS official told Fox News that the number of people who will receive paper checks was subject to a "number of variables, including how much info the IRS obtains through the Non-Filers Enter Payment Info web portal and the Get My Payment portal launching [April 15] at IRS.gov. Fox News These Economic Impact Payments were included in the $2.2 trillion stimulus package that Trump signed in late March 2020. According to the IRS, direct-deposit payments had already started going out as of the second week in April. Those waiting on a paper check, however, may not see their payments for several weeks. (If you're waiting on a payment, you can check the status of your check on a recently launched web app from the IRS.) several weeks web app To sum up: It is true that in April 2020, the U.S. government made the unprecedented move of adding the president's name to stimulus checks issued by the IRS in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Although an IRS official said this could slow the process and delay the delivery of checks, Treasury officials insisted that the checks would still go out on schedule. Paine, Neil. "More Than 16 Million Americans Have Lost Their Jobs In The Past Three Weeks." Five Thirty Eight. 9 April 2020. Raju, Manu; Fox, Lauren; Klein, Betsy. "Some Americans Could Wait 20 Weeks to Receive Stimulus Checks, IRS Tells House Democrats." CNN. 2 April 2020. Olson, Tyler and John Roberts. "Trump's Name Will be Added to Stimulus Checks." Fox News. 15 April 2020. Acosta, Jim and Caroline Kelly. "Trump's Name Will be Added to Stimulus Checks." CNN. 15 April 2020. Acosta, Jim and Caroline Kelly. "Trump's Name Will be Added to Stimulus Checks." CNN. 15 April 2020. Lederman, Josh Phil Helsel. "Trump's Name Will Appear on Coronavirus Relief Checks." NBC News. 14 April 2020.

true

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/trumps-name-stimulus-checks/

Will the name of Trump be printed on COVID-19 stimulus checks?

Dan Evon

04/15/2020

Snopes is still fighting an infodemic of rumors and misinformation surrounding the COVID-19 pandemic, and you can help. Find out what we've learned and how to inoculate yourself against COVID-19 misinformation. Read the latest fact checks about the vaccines. Submit any questionable rumors and advice you encounter. Become a Founding Member to help us hire more fact-checkers. And, please, follow the CDC or WHO for guidance on protecting your community from the disease. fighting Find out Read Submit Become a Founding Member CDC WHO In April 2020, millions of Americans who lost income due to circumstances related to the COVID-19 pandemic were waiting on promised relief payments from the United States government. So when news broke that U.S. President Donald Trump was making the "unprecedented" move of having his name added to these stimulus checks, a decision that could potentially delay the arrival of these checks by several days, many citizens took to social media to voice their displeasure, as in the example below: millions of Americans social media Trump's name is truly being added to the COVID-19 stimulus checks, otherwise known as Economic Impact Payments. As of this writing, however, officials at the U.S. Treasury Department insist this will not result in any delays. The Washington Post first reported on Trump's decision on April 14, 2020. According to the news outlet, Trump's name is expected to appear in the memo line of the check, not as the payment's official signatory, and that this will be the "first time that a president's name appears on an IRS disbursement": reported The Treasury Department has ordered President Trumps name printed on stimulus checks the Internal Revenue Service is rushing to send to tens of millions of Americans, a process that could slow their delivery by a few days, senior IRS officials said. The unprecedented decision, finalized late Monday, means that when recipients open the $1,200 paper checks the IRS is scheduled to begin sending to 70 million Americans in coming days, President Donald J. Trump will appear on the left side of the payment. It will be the first time a presidents name appears on an IRS disbursement, whether a routine refund or one of the handful of checks the government has issued to taxpayers in recent decades either to stimulate a down economy or share the dividends of a strong one. Treasury officials disputed that the checks would be delayed. While Trump's name will appear on these stimulus checks, we can't predict whether these payments will be delayed or go out on time. A Treasury Department official said in a statement that "absolutely no delay whatsoever" would occur: statement "Economic Impact Payment checks are scheduled to go out on time and exactly as planned there is absolutely no delay whatsoever ... In fact, we expect the first checks to be in the mail early next week which is well in advance of when the first checks went out in 2008 and well in advance of initial estimates." It should also be noted that many Americans will be receiving their stimulus payments via a direct deposit. It's unclear how many people will receive hard paper checks bearing Trump's name and how many will receive a digital payment. An IRS official told Fox News that the number of people who will receive paper checks was subject to a "number of variables, including how much info the IRS obtains through the Non-Filers Enter Payment Info web portal and the Get My Payment portal launching [April 15] at IRS.gov. Fox News These Economic Impact Payments were included in the $2.2 trillion stimulus package that Trump signed in late March 2020. According to the IRS, direct-deposit payments had already started going out as of the second week in April. Those waiting on a paper check, however, may not see their payments for several weeks. (If you're waiting on a payment, you can check the status of your check on a recently launched web app from the IRS.) several weeks web app To sum up: It is true that in April 2020, the U.S. government made the unprecedented move of adding the president's name to stimulus checks issued by the IRS in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Although an IRS official said this could slow the process and delay the delivery of checks, Treasury officials insisted that the checks would still go out on schedule. Paine, Neil. "More Than 16 Million Americans Have Lost Their Jobs In The Past Three Weeks." Five Thirty Eight. 9 April 2020. Raju, Manu; Fox, Lauren; Klein, Betsy. "Some Americans Could Wait 20 Weeks to Receive Stimulus Checks, IRS Tells House Democrats." CNN. 2 April 2020. Olson, Tyler and John Roberts. "Trump's Name Will be Added to Stimulus Checks." Fox News. 15 April 2020. Acosta, Jim and Caroline Kelly. "Trump's Name Will be Added to Stimulus Checks." CNN. 15 April 2020. Acosta, Jim and Caroline Kelly. "Trump's Name Will be Added to Stimulus Checks." CNN. 15 April 2020. Lederman, Josh Phil Helsel. "Trump's Name Will Appear on Coronavirus Relief Checks." NBC News. 14 April 2020.

true

https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2016/oct/23/donald-trump/donald-trump-says-ford-moving-all-small-car-produc/

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

Louis Jacobson

10/23/2016

One of Donald Trumps signature issues in his 2016 presidential bid has been stopping the outflow of American jobs to other countries. During avisitto Delaware, Ohio, heciteda 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 their 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? Well take a closer look. On Sept. 14, 2016, Ford CEO Mark Fields announced at an event with Wall Street analysts that we will have migrated all of our small-car production to Mexico and out of the United States over the next two to three years, according toReuters. 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 than in the United States. That's what it takes to compete in that (small car) segment, Fields toldCNN. 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 into 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 their employees in the United States and move to Mexico. The company aggressively countered that allegation. In an interview withCNN, 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. Thats 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. https://www.sharethefacts.co/share/0f5ed3db-289b-4d1c-a1d6-4c03ac61e82e

true

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/everything-donald-trump-accomplished/

Everything Donald Trump Has Accomplished in Just Four Months?

David Emery

05/24/2017

In May 2017, a Reddit user posted a graphic that purported to list all of President Trump's accomplishments during his first four months in office. It was then widely shared on social media: Reddit TRUMP ACCOMPLISHMENTS ..Retweet the hell out of this to annoy @ABC @CBS @cnn @cnbc @MSNBC @nbc @nytimes @washingtonpost #dishonestmedia. pic.twitter.com/ITArBQgcmJ @ABC @CBS @cnn @cnbc @MSNBC @nbc @nytimes @washingtonpost #dishonestmedia pic.twitter.com/ITArBQgcmJ Small Biz for Trump (@SmallBiz4Trump) May 15, 2017 May 15, 2017 Creating homebrew visual aids touting the accomplishments (or failures) of top politicians is a popular online pastime, not least because it's a cheap and easy way to propagandize, and because there are no pesky standards of fairness and accuracy to meet. As we've noted with regard to previous specimens (for example, a late-2016 meme touting the alleged economic achievements of President Obama), the graphic format lends itself to the display of cherry-picked facts to make a simplistic case with no semblance of context or nuance. achievements In this case, the claim is that, despite all the carping in the mainstream press about "chaos" and "ineptitude" in the Oval Office, President Trump has actually accomplished quite a lot during his first four months as chief executive, and thus you will not find mention of major campaign promises Trump has had difficulty keeping so far, such as instituting a Muslim immigration ban and building a wall on the Mexican border. Also, since it's very much a partisan case being made, there will be disagreement over what constitutes an "accomplishment." Some feats, such as reducing unemployment, are uncontroversial, while others, such as dismantling entire government agencies, aren't likely to be regarded as accomplishments by those who find the functions of those agencies critical. Here are the claims: 4.4 percent - lowest since May 2007 As reported in the Washington Post, government data released on 5 May 2017 indicated that the national unemployment rate hit a new low in April: reported The U.S. job market rebounded strongly last month and the unemployment rate fell to the lowest level seen in a decade, government data released Friday morning showed, calming fears that had bubbled up in the past month about the state of the economy. Employers added 211,000 jobs in April as the unemployment rate ticked down to 4.4 percent, the lowest level since May 2007. It bears pointing out that the jobless rate had already been on a steady decline since 2010. Further, unemployment hit a previous nine-year low of 4.6 percent in December 2016 when President Obama was still in office. It climbed back up to 4.8 percent in January, dipped to 4.7 percent in February, and to 4.5 percent in March 2017. unemployment To what degree short-term improvements in the economy since January can be attributed to a new chief executive whose economic policies remain nascent is perennially up for debate, though according to The New York Times' senior economic correspondent Neil Irwin, a "Trump effect" that is buoying corporate hiring policies after the election cannot be ruled out: according So does Mr. Trump deserve any credit for solid economic results? If you think the economy is driven by concrete, specific policies around taxes, spending, monetary policy and regulation, the answer is no. If you think that what really matters is the mood in the executive suite, then just maybe. SoftBank $50B Exxon $20B Hyundai $3.1B Apple $1B Chrysler $1B GM $1B Bayer AG $1BToyota $600M LG $250M This is a mostly-accurate, partial list of corporations who have announced investments in American facilities and/or jobs since the election of Donald Trump. With the exception of Bayer AG (which announced $8 billion in new investments, not $1 billion as claimed), the dollar amounts match those cited in press reports between January and April 2017 (sources: Softbank, Exxon Mobil Corp., Hyundai-Kia, Apple, Fiat Chrysler, General Motors, Bayer AG, Toyota, LG Electronics). Softbank Exxon Mobil Corp. Hyundai-Kia Apple Fiat Chrysler General Motors Bayer AG Toyota LG Electronics It's not necessarily accurate to characterize all of these commitments as "accomplishments" of President Trump, however. As CBS Moneywatch's Irina Ivanova reported in January 2017: reported Few of the jobs companies are promising to create in the U.S. can be attributed to a sudden renewed commitment to USA Inc. inspired by Trumps America First policies. Indeed, the businesses Trump has been quick to praise have been careful not to characterize their recent hiring announcements as new. And as usual with corporate investments of this scale, such plans are typically months or even years in the making, suggesting they long predate the presidential election. For example, Fiat Chrysler said their promise of a $1 billion investment in Michigan and Ohio plants, projected to create 2,000 jobs, was the "second phase" of an industrialization plan announced in 2016. GM's $1 billion investment was "several years in the making," according to sources cited by CBS. promise The largest of all the announced commitments, SoftBank's pledge of $50 billion, was also in the works long before Trump won the election: Another widely publicized corporate initiative that Trump trumpeted a promise by SoftBank to create 50,000 high-tech jobs in the U.S. was the result of a tech fund the company announced on Oct. 14 three weeks before the election. Given the massive tech industry in the U.S., economists say much of the planned $50 billion investment would have found its way to the states regardless of who occupied the White House. You dont just decide overnight to invest $3 billion, said Nathan Jensen, a professor at the University of Texas who studies interactions between government and corporations. Bayer AG's commitment to an $8 billion investment and the creation of 3,000 U.S. jobs was announced by the Trump transition team after the president-elect met in January 2017 with the CEOs of Bayer AG and Monsanto, who are planning a merger. Transition spokesman Sean Spicer credited Trump's negotiating skills for the pledge, but some analysts were skeptical that the companies had actually promised anything that wasn't already on the table when plans for the merger were first revealed in September 2016: commitment analysts Bayer and Monsanto said in a joint statement after Spicer's remarks that the "combined company expects to spend approximately $16 billion in R&D in agriculture over the next six years with at least half of this investment made in the United States." That amounts to about $2.7 billion a year, which roughly equates to what the combined companies already spend in that area globally, [Wall Street analyst Jeremy] Redenius said. As for the U.S. breakdown, he estimates it's likely close to half already; Monsanto spends $1.5 billion a year, the majority of which is in the U.S., he said, and Bayer already invests in R&D here as well. "Not an increase, but not substantially cutting," he said of the global figure. The merger, which awaits U.S. regulatory approval, is not likely to be completed until 2018, CNBC reported. reported $182B in April 2017 It is true that the U.S. Treasury reported a $182 billion budget surplus in April 2017, the largest April surplus since 2001 (and the second-largest in history), according to MarketWatch. It's unclear exactly how that surplus is attributable to President Trump, however. April is typically a surplus month because of tax receipts. In addition, citing a Congressional Budget Office (CBO) review as its source, Associated Press reported that the April 2017 surplus was "inflated" because of a tax deadline change allowing corporations to pay federal taxes in April that in previous years were paid in March. MarketWatch review inflated It remains to be seen what effect Tump's policies will have on the budget deficit for 2017 as a whole (the fiscal year ends on 30 September). The CBO projects a 4.6 percent drop in the deficit from what it was in 2016, but that is based on laws and policies already in effect when Trump took office. DOW at 20,896 The stock market can be fickle. As of April 29, the Dow Jones Industrial Average was at 20,940.51, 6.12 percent higher than when Trump took office positive movement, unquestionably. That number had risen to 20,981.94 by 16 May, then plummeted 372 points the next day as the market was shaken by news that Trump had shared classified information with Russian diplomats in the White House and attempted to divert FBI Director James Comey from an investigation of Trump's alleged ties to Russia before he fired him. 20,940.51 20,981.94 news Currently at 125.6 It's true that the Consumer Confidence Index, a metric assessing how ordinary consumers feel about the strength of the economy, hit 125.6 in March 2017, its highest point since 2000. It is also true that it fell five points to 120.3 the following month. Even so, it showed that consumers (as of April) had more confidence in the economy under Trump than under Obama, during whose administration the index never exceeded 113.7 (although it did manage to rise to that point after bottoming out in 2009 at 25). fell Passed 32 bills through Congress As of 17 May 2017, President Trump had signed 34 bills passed by Congress, a comparatively high number in such a short period of time (since Franklin Delano Roosevelt, who signed 76 pieces of legislation in his first 100 days, only Harry Truman, at 55, signed more). signed number That's not to say that all of the legislation signed by Trump between January and May 2017 was necessarily noteworthy, however. One bill changed the name of a Veterans Affairs outpatient clinic in Pago Pago, American Samoa; another renamed a VA health center in Pennsylvania; another approves the location of a memorial honoring Desert Storm and Desert Shield veterans; three appointed citizen regents to the board of the Smithsonian Institution. changed renamed Nor should it be assumed that Trump's signing of a given bill meant he or his administration was actively involved in its passage. Thirteen such bills nullifying federal regulations enacted during the Obama administration (such as H.J. Res. 69, reversing a U.S. Fish and Wildlife rule pertaining to Alaska's National Wildlife Refuges and S.J. Res. 34, reversing FCC Internet privacy rules) were rushed through Congress and quickly signed because they made use of the Congressional Review Act of 1996, which imposes a 60-day limit on the time allowed to overrule previously passed laws. Appointed constitutionalist Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch This is true. Gorsuch was confirmed by the U.S. Senate on 7 April 2017. true After 8 years of inaction This is true. Trump fulfilled a campaign promise by signing an executive order withdrawing the U.S. from the Trans-Pacific Partnership international trade agreement on 23 January 2017, one day after announcing he would renegotiate it. Despite President Obama's fervent support for the deal, many groups, including labor unions, were critical of the TPP, and CNN reported that its chances of approval by Congress were already "bleak." signing 40 percent fewer illegal border crossings and deportation of violent and repeat offenders The number of illegal border crossings from Mexico into the U.S. in February 2017 were indeed down 40 percent from the previous month, according to statistics provided by the Department of Homeland Security, and that downward trend, which had actually started the previous November, continued in March and April 2017. This U.S. Customs and Border Protection chart shows how striking the change was compared to the previous five years: statistics CNN Water contamination crisis started in April 2014 It's true that in March 2017, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) awarded a $100 million grant to the state of Michigan to upgrade the drinking water infrastructure in Flint, which experienced a lead pollution crisis potentially affecting as many as 100,000 people beginning in 2014. There has been some dispute, however, over whether this ought to be labeled a "Trump accomplishment" or an "Obama accomplishment." awarded crisis As we noted in a previous article, funding for the grant came from a bill signed by President Obama in 2016, though the monies weren't officially awarded until after he left office, hence some prefer to credit it to Trump. article Strengthening relationships China Japan Russia UK Tough on North Korea Tough on Syria Freed Humanitarian Workers from Egypt Although President Trump pledged to "strengthen" overseas relationships going into office and he had already met with several important foreign leaders by mid-May 2017, it is too soon to tell to what degree his promise will bear fruit. China: The president-elect got off to a rocky start with China in December by accepting a congratulatory call from the leader of Taiwan, which China views as a province,not an independent nation, and with which the U.S. does not have diplomatic relations. China lodged a formal complaint. In April, Trump met with Chinese President Xi Jinping, with whom he said he made "tremendous progress" but no breakthroughs. A trade deal negotiated by the Trump administration with China in May was rated "pretty good" by The Wall Street Journal. call met rated Japan: Japanese Prime Minister Abe, who has met twice with Trump, issued a joint statement with him reaffirming the "unshakable alliance" between the U.S. and Japan. That is despite Trump having called Japan a "currency manipulator" during the presidential campaign and pulling out of the TPP, which Abe supported. Whether the "very, very good chemistry" Trump says he has with Abe will improve the relationship between the two countries over the long haul remains to be seen. Russia: U.S.-Russia relations have been strained for many years, a situation not improved by Russia's attempts to meddle in the U.S. presidential election, nor by the fact that Trump associates are under investigation for possible collusion in that effort. A U.S. missile strike by Trump against Syria, with whose government Russia is closely allied, were strongly condemned by Russian leaders, who warned there could be "extremely serious" consequences. U.K.: British Prime Minister Theresa May was the first foreign leader to visit the Trump White House, and their cordial meeting was portrayed by both countries as a renewal of the "special relationship" between the U.S and the U.K. According to the BBC, Obama was seen by many Britons as more interested in the European Union as a whole than in the U.K. itself, while Trump, who was in favor of Brexit, is perceived as the opposite. BBC Tough on Korea? President Trump has employed what the Washington Post calls "hard-line rhetoric" against North Korea, including threats of force, in hopes of squelching that county's increasing militarism, a strategy some experts dismiss as "macho posturing" that could escalate into a Cuban Missile Crisis-like confrontation. calls experts Tough on Syria? In April 2017, Trump ordered U.S. missile strikes against an air base in Syria in response to an alleged chemical weapons attack on civilians by the Syrian government, which has been known to brutalize its own people during the ongoing civil war there. Trump's gesture came up short, however, in that the Syrian Air Force was able to launch a new attack against rebel forces from that same base just hours later. attack Humanitarian workers in Egypt: In April 2017 President Trump negotiated the release of U.S.. citizen Aya Hijazi, her Egyptian husband, and four other humanitarian workers from a prison in Cairo, Egypt, where they had been locked up since 2014, without evidence or trial, on charges of child abuse and trafficking. negotiated Trimming the fat at many overblown government agencies and promoting small business growth by reigning in the EPA Although it is true that President Trump signed an executive order on 13 March 2017 directing the heads of executive branch departments to eliminate all "unnecessary" agencies and reorganize those that remain to improve their "efficiency, effectiveness, and accountability," the order gave said department heads six months from the date of signing to come up with suggestions for this process, so not much fat has been trimmed thus far despite the groundwork being laid. signed Regarding efforts to "reign in" the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), a CNN report confirms that's been among Trump's top priorities from the start: priorities President Donald Trump made a campaign trail promise to eliminate the Environmental Protection Agency a department once looked to as an important national force tackling climate change and during his first 100 days in office has held true to his word, taking swift strides towards dismantling the agency and rolling back regulations. Alongside EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt, a former Oklahoma attorney general who once worked tangentially with the fossil fuel industry to oppose Obama-era regulations, the Trump administration has so far issued a flurry of EPA-focused executive orders, proposed employee buyouts, handed down a social media gag order and is proposing significant cuts to the EPA budget. The National Federation of Independent Business (NFIB), a small business advocacy group, has hailed Trump's commitment to cutting "burdensome regulations," while environmental protection groups see it as a threat to public health and the future of the planet. hailed threat Finished Dakota Access Pipeline & reversed Obama's "Land Grab" EO, freeing US to use our own natural resources The controversial Dakota Access Pipeline project, halted under President Obama, was revived by President Trump and will begin commercial operations on 1 June 2017. Trump also issued an executive order directing a review of lands designated as national monuments: halted revived directing Specifically, the review will consider all national monument designations of federal public lands since 1996 that are 100,000 acres or larger. Mr Trump singled out former President Barack Obamas egregious use of federal power in using the Antiquities Act to unilaterally place swaths of American land and water under federal control, adding, its time we ended this abusive practice. Antiquities Act As with many of the other items discussed above, whether or not one regards this as an "accomplishment" (as opposed, say, to a travesty) will depend almost entirely on one's political views going in. Baker, Peter and Davenport, Coral. "Trump Revives Keystone Pipeline Rejected by Obama." The New York Times. 24 January 2017. Bradner, Eric. "Trump's TPP Withdrawal: 5 Things to Know." CNN. 23 January 2017. Bunge, Jacob and Alessi, Christopher. "Bayer, After Trump Meeting, Pledges to Add Thousands of U.S. Jobs." The Wall Street Journal. 18 January 2017. Carroll, Lauren. "Trump Has Signed More Bills in 100 Days than Any President Since Truman, Spicer Says." Politifact.com. 27 April 2017. Crutsinger, Martin. "Federal Government Records $182.4 Billion Budget Surplus." Associated Press. 10 May 2017. DeCambre, Mark. "How Trump's Stock Market Ranks During His First 100 Days in Office." MarketWatch. 30 April 2017. Green, Miranda. "Trump's EPA: Cuts, Infighting and No Talk of Climate Change." CNN. 4 May 2017. Greene, Leonard. "Stock Market Suffers Biggest Blow Since President Trump Took Office." New York Daily News. 17 May 2017. Ivanova, Irina. "Trump Isn't the Reason Corporate America Is Investing in the U.S." CBS News. 18 January 2017. Kopan, Tal. "Does Border Drop Mean Trump's Tough Talk Is Working?" CNN. 9 March 2017. Kulish, Nicholas and Santos, Fernanda. "Illegal Border Crossings Appear to Drop Under Trump. The New York Times. 8 March 2017. Liptak, Adam and Flegenheimer, Matt. "Neil Gorsuch Confirmed by Senate as Supreme Court Justice." The New York Times. 7 April 2017. McKelvey, Tara. "Special Relationship Gets a New Lease on Life." BBC. 27 January 2017. Robb, Greg. "U.S. April Budget Surplus Rises to $182 Billion." MarketWatch. 10 May 2017. Rucker, Philip and DeYoung, Karen. "Freed Egyptian American Prisoner Returns Home Following Trump Intervention." The Washington Post. 20 April 2017. Ryan, Missy, Denyer, Simon and Rauhala, Emily. "On North Korea, Trump Administration Talks Tough but Hopes to Avoid War." The Washington Post. 19 April 2017. Ryan, Tim. "Trump Directs Department Heads to Trim Agency Fat." Courthouse News. 14 March 2017. Savransky, Rebecca. "Tillerson: U.S.-Russia Relationship 'At an All-Time Low Point' Since End of Cold War." The Hill. 14 May 2017. Thomas, Lauren. "Consumer Confidence Lags in April as Americans Are Less Optimistic About Economy." CNBC. 25 April 2017. Watson, Kathryn. "Trump Executive Order Calls for Review of 'Egregious' Federal Land Grab." CBS News. 26 April 2017. Boston Herald. "Editorial: Getting Tough in Syria." 20 May 2017. CBO.gov. "Monthly Budget Review for April 2017." 5 May 2017. Democracy Now. "Trump's Proposed EPA Cuts Threaten Health & Lives of Tens of Millions of Americans." 3 March 2017. NFIB.com. "In Targeting the Waters of the United States Rule, President Trump Looks to Dismantle Another Burdensome Regulation." 3 March 2017. PRNewsWire.com. "The Conference Board Consumer Confidence Index Declined in April." 25 April 2017. TradingEconomics.com. "United States Unemployment Rate." 5 May 2017. U.S. Customs and Border Protection. "Southwest Border Migration." 1 May 2017. The Wall Street Journal. "Japan's Abe Talks Trump." 22 May 2017. The Wall Street Journal. "Trump's Pretty Good China Deal." 14 May 2017.

neutral

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/everything-donald-trump-accomplished/

All of Donald Trump's achievements within a mere four months?

David Emery

05/24/2017

In May 2017, a Reddit user posted a graphic that purported to list all of President Trump's accomplishments during his first four months in office. It was then widely shared on social media: Reddit TRUMP ACCOMPLISHMENTS ..Retweet the hell out of this to annoy @ABC @CBS @cnn @cnbc @MSNBC @nbc @nytimes @washingtonpost #dishonestmedia. pic.twitter.com/ITArBQgcmJ @ABC @CBS @cnn @cnbc @MSNBC @nbc @nytimes @washingtonpost #dishonestmedia pic.twitter.com/ITArBQgcmJ Small Biz for Trump (@SmallBiz4Trump) May 15, 2017 May 15, 2017 Creating homebrew visual aids touting the accomplishments (or failures) of top politicians is a popular online pastime, not least because it's a cheap and easy way to propagandize, and because there are no pesky standards of fairness and accuracy to meet. As we've noted with regard to previous specimens (for example, a late-2016 meme touting the alleged economic achievements of President Obama), the graphic format lends itself to the display of cherry-picked facts to make a simplistic case with no semblance of context or nuance. achievements In this case, the claim is that, despite all the carping in the mainstream press about "chaos" and "ineptitude" in the Oval Office, President Trump has actually accomplished quite a lot during his first four months as chief executive, and thus you will not find mention of major campaign promises Trump has had difficulty keeping so far, such as instituting a Muslim immigration ban and building a wall on the Mexican border. Also, since it's very much a partisan case being made, there will be disagreement over what constitutes an "accomplishment." Some feats, such as reducing unemployment, are uncontroversial, while others, such as dismantling entire government agencies, aren't likely to be regarded as accomplishments by those who find the functions of those agencies critical. Here are the claims: 4.4 percent - lowest since May 2007 As reported in the Washington Post, government data released on 5 May 2017 indicated that the national unemployment rate hit a new low in April: reported The U.S. job market rebounded strongly last month and the unemployment rate fell to the lowest level seen in a decade, government data released Friday morning showed, calming fears that had bubbled up in the past month about the state of the economy. Employers added 211,000 jobs in April as the unemployment rate ticked down to 4.4 percent, the lowest level since May 2007. It bears pointing out that the jobless rate had already been on a steady decline since 2010. Further, unemployment hit a previous nine-year low of 4.6 percent in December 2016 when President Obama was still in office. It climbed back up to 4.8 percent in January, dipped to 4.7 percent in February, and to 4.5 percent in March 2017. unemployment To what degree short-term improvements in the economy since January can be attributed to a new chief executive whose economic policies remain nascent is perennially up for debate, though according to The New York Times' senior economic correspondent Neil Irwin, a "Trump effect" that is buoying corporate hiring policies after the election cannot be ruled out: according So does Mr. Trump deserve any credit for solid economic results? If you think the economy is driven by concrete, specific policies around taxes, spending, monetary policy and regulation, the answer is no. If you think that what really matters is the mood in the executive suite, then just maybe. SoftBank $50B Exxon $20B Hyundai $3.1B Apple $1B Chrysler $1B GM $1B Bayer AG $1BToyota $600M LG $250M This is a mostly-accurate, partial list of corporations who have announced investments in American facilities and/or jobs since the election of Donald Trump. With the exception of Bayer AG (which announced $8 billion in new investments, not $1 billion as claimed), the dollar amounts match those cited in press reports between January and April 2017 (sources: Softbank, Exxon Mobil Corp., Hyundai-Kia, Apple, Fiat Chrysler, General Motors, Bayer AG, Toyota, LG Electronics). Softbank Exxon Mobil Corp. Hyundai-Kia Apple Fiat Chrysler General Motors Bayer AG Toyota LG Electronics It's not necessarily accurate to characterize all of these commitments as "accomplishments" of President Trump, however. As CBS Moneywatch's Irina Ivanova reported in January 2017: reported Few of the jobs companies are promising to create in the U.S. can be attributed to a sudden renewed commitment to USA Inc. inspired by Trumps America First policies. Indeed, the businesses Trump has been quick to praise have been careful not to characterize their recent hiring announcements as new. And as usual with corporate investments of this scale, such plans are typically months or even years in the making, suggesting they long predate the presidential election. For example, Fiat Chrysler said their promise of a $1 billion investment in Michigan and Ohio plants, projected to create 2,000 jobs, was the "second phase" of an industrialization plan announced in 2016. GM's $1 billion investment was "several years in the making," according to sources cited by CBS. promise The largest of all the announced commitments, SoftBank's pledge of $50 billion, was also in the works long before Trump won the election: Another widely publicized corporate initiative that Trump trumpeted a promise by SoftBank to create 50,000 high-tech jobs in the U.S. was the result of a tech fund the company announced on Oct. 14 three weeks before the election. Given the massive tech industry in the U.S., economists say much of the planned $50 billion investment would have found its way to the states regardless of who occupied the White House. You dont just decide overnight to invest $3 billion, said Nathan Jensen, a professor at the University of Texas who studies interactions between government and corporations. Bayer AG's commitment to an $8 billion investment and the creation of 3,000 U.S. jobs was announced by the Trump transition team after the president-elect met in January 2017 with the CEOs of Bayer AG and Monsanto, who are planning a merger. Transition spokesman Sean Spicer credited Trump's negotiating skills for the pledge, but some analysts were skeptical that the companies had actually promised anything that wasn't already on the table when plans for the merger were first revealed in September 2016: commitment analysts Bayer and Monsanto said in a joint statement after Spicer's remarks that the "combined company expects to spend approximately $16 billion in R&D in agriculture over the next six years with at least half of this investment made in the United States." That amounts to about $2.7 billion a year, which roughly equates to what the combined companies already spend in that area globally, [Wall Street analyst Jeremy] Redenius said. As for the U.S. breakdown, he estimates it's likely close to half already; Monsanto spends $1.5 billion a year, the majority of which is in the U.S., he said, and Bayer already invests in R&D here as well. "Not an increase, but not substantially cutting," he said of the global figure. The merger, which awaits U.S. regulatory approval, is not likely to be completed until 2018, CNBC reported. reported $182B in April 2017 It is true that the U.S. Treasury reported a $182 billion budget surplus in April 2017, the largest April surplus since 2001 (and the second-largest in history), according to MarketWatch. It's unclear exactly how that surplus is attributable to President Trump, however. April is typically a surplus month because of tax receipts. In addition, citing a Congressional Budget Office (CBO) review as its source, Associated Press reported that the April 2017 surplus was "inflated" because of a tax deadline change allowing corporations to pay federal taxes in April that in previous years were paid in March. MarketWatch review inflated It remains to be seen what effect Tump's policies will have on the budget deficit for 2017 as a whole (the fiscal year ends on 30 September). The CBO projects a 4.6 percent drop in the deficit from what it was in 2016, but that is based on laws and policies already in effect when Trump took office. DOW at 20,896 The stock market can be fickle. As of April 29, the Dow Jones Industrial Average was at 20,940.51, 6.12 percent higher than when Trump took office positive movement, unquestionably. That number had risen to 20,981.94 by 16 May, then plummeted 372 points the next day as the market was shaken by news that Trump had shared classified information with Russian diplomats in the White House and attempted to divert FBI Director James Comey from an investigation of Trump's alleged ties to Russia before he fired him. 20,940.51 20,981.94 news Currently at 125.6 It's true that the Consumer Confidence Index, a metric assessing how ordinary consumers feel about the strength of the economy, hit 125.6 in March 2017, its highest point since 2000. It is also true that it fell five points to 120.3 the following month. Even so, it showed that consumers (as of April) had more confidence in the economy under Trump than under Obama, during whose administration the index never exceeded 113.7 (although it did manage to rise to that point after bottoming out in 2009 at 25). fell Passed 32 bills through Congress As of 17 May 2017, President Trump had signed 34 bills passed by Congress, a comparatively high number in such a short period of time (since Franklin Delano Roosevelt, who signed 76 pieces of legislation in his first 100 days, only Harry Truman, at 55, signed more). signed number That's not to say that all of the legislation signed by Trump between January and May 2017 was necessarily noteworthy, however. One bill changed the name of a Veterans Affairs outpatient clinic in Pago Pago, American Samoa; another renamed a VA health center in Pennsylvania; another approves the location of a memorial honoring Desert Storm and Desert Shield veterans; three appointed citizen regents to the board of the Smithsonian Institution. changed renamed Nor should it be assumed that Trump's signing of a given bill meant he or his administration was actively involved in its passage. Thirteen such bills nullifying federal regulations enacted during the Obama administration (such as H.J. Res. 69, reversing a U.S. Fish and Wildlife rule pertaining to Alaska's National Wildlife Refuges and S.J. Res. 34, reversing FCC Internet privacy rules) were rushed through Congress and quickly signed because they made use of the Congressional Review Act of 1996, which imposes a 60-day limit on the time allowed to overrule previously passed laws. Appointed constitutionalist Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch This is true. Gorsuch was confirmed by the U.S. Senate on 7 April 2017. true After 8 years of inaction This is true. Trump fulfilled a campaign promise by signing an executive order withdrawing the U.S. from the Trans-Pacific Partnership international trade agreement on 23 January 2017, one day after announcing he would renegotiate it. Despite President Obama's fervent support for the deal, many groups, including labor unions, were critical of the TPP, and CNN reported that its chances of approval by Congress were already "bleak." signing 40 percent fewer illegal border crossings and deportation of violent and repeat offenders The number of illegal border crossings from Mexico into the U.S. in February 2017 were indeed down 40 percent from the previous month, according to statistics provided by the Department of Homeland Security, and that downward trend, which had actually started the previous November, continued in March and April 2017. This U.S. Customs and Border Protection chart shows how striking the change was compared to the previous five years: statistics CNN Water contamination crisis started in April 2014 It's true that in March 2017, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) awarded a $100 million grant to the state of Michigan to upgrade the drinking water infrastructure in Flint, which experienced a lead pollution crisis potentially affecting as many as 100,000 people beginning in 2014. There has been some dispute, however, over whether this ought to be labeled a "Trump accomplishment" or an "Obama accomplishment." awarded crisis As we noted in a previous article, funding for the grant came from a bill signed by President Obama in 2016, though the monies weren't officially awarded until after he left office, hence some prefer to credit it to Trump. article Strengthening relationships China Japan Russia UK Tough on North Korea Tough on Syria Freed Humanitarian Workers from Egypt Although President Trump pledged to "strengthen" overseas relationships going into office and he had already met with several important foreign leaders by mid-May 2017, it is too soon to tell to what degree his promise will bear fruit. China: The president-elect got off to a rocky start with China in December by accepting a congratulatory call from the leader of Taiwan, which China views as a province,not an independent nation, and with which the U.S. does not have diplomatic relations. China lodged a formal complaint. In April, Trump met with Chinese President Xi Jinping, with whom he said he made "tremendous progress" but no breakthroughs. A trade deal negotiated by the Trump administration with China in May was rated "pretty good" by The Wall Street Journal. call met rated Japan: Japanese Prime Minister Abe, who has met twice with Trump, issued a joint statement with him reaffirming the "unshakable alliance" between the U.S. and Japan. That is despite Trump having called Japan a "currency manipulator" during the presidential campaign and pulling out of the TPP, which Abe supported. Whether the "very, very good chemistry" Trump says he has with Abe will improve the relationship between the two countries over the long haul remains to be seen. Russia: U.S.-Russia relations have been strained for many years, a situation not improved by Russia's attempts to meddle in the U.S. presidential election, nor by the fact that Trump associates are under investigation for possible collusion in that effort. A U.S. missile strike by Trump against Syria, with whose government Russia is closely allied, were strongly condemned by Russian leaders, who warned there could be "extremely serious" consequences. U.K.: British Prime Minister Theresa May was the first foreign leader to visit the Trump White House, and their cordial meeting was portrayed by both countries as a renewal of the "special relationship" between the U.S and the U.K. According to the BBC, Obama was seen by many Britons as more interested in the European Union as a whole than in the U.K. itself, while Trump, who was in favor of Brexit, is perceived as the opposite. BBC Tough on Korea? President Trump has employed what the Washington Post calls "hard-line rhetoric" against North Korea, including threats of force, in hopes of squelching that county's increasing militarism, a strategy some experts dismiss as "macho posturing" that could escalate into a Cuban Missile Crisis-like confrontation. calls experts Tough on Syria? In April 2017, Trump ordered U.S. missile strikes against an air base in Syria in response to an alleged chemical weapons attack on civilians by the Syrian government, which has been known to brutalize its own people during the ongoing civil war there. Trump's gesture came up short, however, in that the Syrian Air Force was able to launch a new attack against rebel forces from that same base just hours later. attack Humanitarian workers in Egypt: In April 2017 President Trump negotiated the release of U.S.. citizen Aya Hijazi, her Egyptian husband, and four other humanitarian workers from a prison in Cairo, Egypt, where they had been locked up since 2014, without evidence or trial, on charges of child abuse and trafficking. negotiated Trimming the fat at many overblown government agencies and promoting small business growth by reigning in the EPA Although it is true that President Trump signed an executive order on 13 March 2017 directing the heads of executive branch departments to eliminate all "unnecessary" agencies and reorganize those that remain to improve their "efficiency, effectiveness, and accountability," the order gave said department heads six months from the date of signing to come up with suggestions for this process, so not much fat has been trimmed thus far despite the groundwork being laid. signed Regarding efforts to "reign in" the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), a CNN report confirms that's been among Trump's top priorities from the start: priorities President Donald Trump made a campaign trail promise to eliminate the Environmental Protection Agency a department once looked to as an important national force tackling climate change and during his first 100 days in office has held true to his word, taking swift strides towards dismantling the agency and rolling back regulations. Alongside EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt, a former Oklahoma attorney general who once worked tangentially with the fossil fuel industry to oppose Obama-era regulations, the Trump administration has so far issued a flurry of EPA-focused executive orders, proposed employee buyouts, handed down a social media gag order and is proposing significant cuts to the EPA budget. The National Federation of Independent Business (NFIB), a small business advocacy group, has hailed Trump's commitment to cutting "burdensome regulations," while environmental protection groups see it as a threat to public health and the future of the planet. hailed threat Finished Dakota Access Pipeline & reversed Obama's "Land Grab" EO, freeing US to use our own natural resources The controversial Dakota Access Pipeline project, halted under President Obama, was revived by President Trump and will begin commercial operations on 1 June 2017. Trump also issued an executive order directing a review of lands designated as national monuments: halted revived directing Specifically, the review will consider all national monument designations of federal public lands since 1996 that are 100,000 acres or larger. Mr Trump singled out former President Barack Obamas egregious use of federal power in using the Antiquities Act to unilaterally place swaths of American land and water under federal control, adding, its time we ended this abusive practice. Antiquities Act As with many of the other items discussed above, whether or not one regards this as an "accomplishment" (as opposed, say, to a travesty) will depend almost entirely on one's political views going in. Baker, Peter and Davenport, Coral. "Trump Revives Keystone Pipeline Rejected by Obama." The New York Times. 24 January 2017. Bradner, Eric. "Trump's TPP Withdrawal: 5 Things to Know." CNN. 23 January 2017. Bunge, Jacob and Alessi, Christopher. "Bayer, After Trump Meeting, Pledges to Add Thousands of U.S. Jobs." The Wall Street Journal. 18 January 2017. Carroll, Lauren. "Trump Has Signed More Bills in 100 Days than Any President Since Truman, Spicer Says." Politifact.com. 27 April 2017. Crutsinger, Martin. "Federal Government Records $182.4 Billion Budget Surplus." Associated Press. 10 May 2017. DeCambre, Mark. "How Trump's Stock Market Ranks During His First 100 Days in Office." MarketWatch. 30 April 2017. Green, Miranda. "Trump's EPA: Cuts, Infighting and No Talk of Climate Change." CNN. 4 May 2017. Greene, Leonard. "Stock Market Suffers Biggest Blow Since President Trump Took Office." New York Daily News. 17 May 2017. Ivanova, Irina. "Trump Isn't the Reason Corporate America Is Investing in the U.S." CBS News. 18 January 2017. Kopan, Tal. "Does Border Drop Mean Trump's Tough Talk Is Working?" CNN. 9 March 2017. Kulish, Nicholas and Santos, Fernanda. "Illegal Border Crossings Appear to Drop Under Trump. The New York Times. 8 March 2017. Liptak, Adam and Flegenheimer, Matt. "Neil Gorsuch Confirmed by Senate as Supreme Court Justice." The New York Times. 7 April 2017. McKelvey, Tara. "Special Relationship Gets a New Lease on Life." BBC. 27 January 2017. Robb, Greg. "U.S. April Budget Surplus Rises to $182 Billion." MarketWatch. 10 May 2017. Rucker, Philip and DeYoung, Karen. "Freed Egyptian American Prisoner Returns Home Following Trump Intervention." The Washington Post. 20 April 2017. Ryan, Missy, Denyer, Simon and Rauhala, Emily. "On North Korea, Trump Administration Talks Tough but Hopes to Avoid War." The Washington Post. 19 April 2017. Ryan, Tim. "Trump Directs Department Heads to Trim Agency Fat." Courthouse News. 14 March 2017. Savransky, Rebecca. "Tillerson: U.S.-Russia Relationship 'At an All-Time Low Point' Since End of Cold War." The Hill. 14 May 2017. Thomas, Lauren. "Consumer Confidence Lags in April as Americans Are Less Optimistic About Economy." CNBC. 25 April 2017. Watson, Kathryn. "Trump Executive Order Calls for Review of 'Egregious' Federal Land Grab." CBS News. 26 April 2017. Boston Herald. "Editorial: Getting Tough in Syria." 20 May 2017. CBO.gov. "Monthly Budget Review for April 2017." 5 May 2017. Democracy Now. "Trump's Proposed EPA Cuts Threaten Health & Lives of Tens of Millions of Americans." 3 March 2017. NFIB.com. "In Targeting the Waters of the United States Rule, President Trump Looks to Dismantle Another Burdensome Regulation." 3 March 2017. PRNewsWire.com. "The Conference Board Consumer Confidence Index Declined in April." 25 April 2017. TradingEconomics.com. "United States Unemployment Rate." 5 May 2017. U.S. Customs and Border Protection. "Southwest Border Migration." 1 May 2017. The Wall Street Journal. "Japan's Abe Talks Trump." 22 May 2017. The Wall Street Journal. "Trump's Pretty Good China Deal." 14 May 2017.

neutral

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/everything-donald-trump-accomplished/

All of Donald Trump's achievements in only four months?

David Emery

05/24/2017

In May 2017, a Reddit user posted a graphic that purported to list all of President Trump's accomplishments during his first four months in office. It was then widely shared on social media: Reddit TRUMP ACCOMPLISHMENTS ..Retweet the hell out of this to annoy @ABC @CBS @cnn @cnbc @MSNBC @nbc @nytimes @washingtonpost #dishonestmedia. pic.twitter.com/ITArBQgcmJ @ABC @CBS @cnn @cnbc @MSNBC @nbc @nytimes @washingtonpost #dishonestmedia pic.twitter.com/ITArBQgcmJ Small Biz for Trump (@SmallBiz4Trump) May 15, 2017 May 15, 2017 Creating homebrew visual aids touting the accomplishments (or failures) of top politicians is a popular online pastime, not least because it's a cheap and easy way to propagandize, and because there are no pesky standards of fairness and accuracy to meet. As we've noted with regard to previous specimens (for example, a late-2016 meme touting the alleged economic achievements of President Obama), the graphic format lends itself to the display of cherry-picked facts to make a simplistic case with no semblance of context or nuance. achievements In this case, the claim is that, despite all the carping in the mainstream press about "chaos" and "ineptitude" in the Oval Office, President Trump has actually accomplished quite a lot during his first four months as chief executive, and thus you will not find mention of major campaign promises Trump has had difficulty keeping so far, such as instituting a Muslim immigration ban and building a wall on the Mexican border. Also, since it's very much a partisan case being made, there will be disagreement over what constitutes an "accomplishment." Some feats, such as reducing unemployment, are uncontroversial, while others, such as dismantling entire government agencies, aren't likely to be regarded as accomplishments by those who find the functions of those agencies critical. Here are the claims: 4.4 percent - lowest since May 2007 As reported in the Washington Post, government data released on 5 May 2017 indicated that the national unemployment rate hit a new low in April: reported The U.S. job market rebounded strongly last month and the unemployment rate fell to the lowest level seen in a decade, government data released Friday morning showed, calming fears that had bubbled up in the past month about the state of the economy. Employers added 211,000 jobs in April as the unemployment rate ticked down to 4.4 percent, the lowest level since May 2007. It bears pointing out that the jobless rate had already been on a steady decline since 2010. Further, unemployment hit a previous nine-year low of 4.6 percent in December 2016 when President Obama was still in office. It climbed back up to 4.8 percent in January, dipped to 4.7 percent in February, and to 4.5 percent in March 2017. unemployment To what degree short-term improvements in the economy since January can be attributed to a new chief executive whose economic policies remain nascent is perennially up for debate, though according to The New York Times' senior economic correspondent Neil Irwin, a "Trump effect" that is buoying corporate hiring policies after the election cannot be ruled out: according So does Mr. Trump deserve any credit for solid economic results? If you think the economy is driven by concrete, specific policies around taxes, spending, monetary policy and regulation, the answer is no. If you think that what really matters is the mood in the executive suite, then just maybe. SoftBank $50B Exxon $20B Hyundai $3.1B Apple $1B Chrysler $1B GM $1B Bayer AG $1BToyota $600M LG $250M This is a mostly-accurate, partial list of corporations who have announced investments in American facilities and/or jobs since the election of Donald Trump. With the exception of Bayer AG (which announced $8 billion in new investments, not $1 billion as claimed), the dollar amounts match those cited in press reports between January and April 2017 (sources: Softbank, Exxon Mobil Corp., Hyundai-Kia, Apple, Fiat Chrysler, General Motors, Bayer AG, Toyota, LG Electronics). Softbank Exxon Mobil Corp. Hyundai-Kia Apple Fiat Chrysler General Motors Bayer AG Toyota LG Electronics It's not necessarily accurate to characterize all of these commitments as "accomplishments" of President Trump, however. As CBS Moneywatch's Irina Ivanova reported in January 2017: reported Few of the jobs companies are promising to create in the U.S. can be attributed to a sudden renewed commitment to USA Inc. inspired by Trumps America First policies. Indeed, the businesses Trump has been quick to praise have been careful not to characterize their recent hiring announcements as new. And as usual with corporate investments of this scale, such plans are typically months or even years in the making, suggesting they long predate the presidential election. For example, Fiat Chrysler said their promise of a $1 billion investment in Michigan and Ohio plants, projected to create 2,000 jobs, was the "second phase" of an industrialization plan announced in 2016. GM's $1 billion investment was "several years in the making," according to sources cited by CBS. promise The largest of all the announced commitments, SoftBank's pledge of $50 billion, was also in the works long before Trump won the election: Another widely publicized corporate initiative that Trump trumpeted a promise by SoftBank to create 50,000 high-tech jobs in the U.S. was the result of a tech fund the company announced on Oct. 14 three weeks before the election. Given the massive tech industry in the U.S., economists say much of the planned $50 billion investment would have found its way to the states regardless of who occupied the White House. You dont just decide overnight to invest $3 billion, said Nathan Jensen, a professor at the University of Texas who studies interactions between government and corporations. Bayer AG's commitment to an $8 billion investment and the creation of 3,000 U.S. jobs was announced by the Trump transition team after the president-elect met in January 2017 with the CEOs of Bayer AG and Monsanto, who are planning a merger. Transition spokesman Sean Spicer credited Trump's negotiating skills for the pledge, but some analysts were skeptical that the companies had actually promised anything that wasn't already on the table when plans for the merger were first revealed in September 2016: commitment analysts Bayer and Monsanto said in a joint statement after Spicer's remarks that the "combined company expects to spend approximately $16 billion in R&D in agriculture over the next six years with at least half of this investment made in the United States." That amounts to about $2.7 billion a year, which roughly equates to what the combined companies already spend in that area globally, [Wall Street analyst Jeremy] Redenius said. As for the U.S. breakdown, he estimates it's likely close to half already; Monsanto spends $1.5 billion a year, the majority of which is in the U.S., he said, and Bayer already invests in R&D here as well. "Not an increase, but not substantially cutting," he said of the global figure. The merger, which awaits U.S. regulatory approval, is not likely to be completed until 2018, CNBC reported. reported $182B in April 2017 It is true that the U.S. Treasury reported a $182 billion budget surplus in April 2017, the largest April surplus since 2001 (and the second-largest in history), according to MarketWatch. It's unclear exactly how that surplus is attributable to President Trump, however. April is typically a surplus month because of tax receipts. In addition, citing a Congressional Budget Office (CBO) review as its source, Associated Press reported that the April 2017 surplus was "inflated" because of a tax deadline change allowing corporations to pay federal taxes in April that in previous years were paid in March. MarketWatch review inflated It remains to be seen what effect Tump's policies will have on the budget deficit for 2017 as a whole (the fiscal year ends on 30 September). The CBO projects a 4.6 percent drop in the deficit from what it was in 2016, but that is based on laws and policies already in effect when Trump took office. DOW at 20,896 The stock market can be fickle. As of April 29, the Dow Jones Industrial Average was at 20,940.51, 6.12 percent higher than when Trump took office positive movement, unquestionably. That number had risen to 20,981.94 by 16 May, then plummeted 372 points the next day as the market was shaken by news that Trump had shared classified information with Russian diplomats in the White House and attempted to divert FBI Director James Comey from an investigation of Trump's alleged ties to Russia before he fired him. 20,940.51 20,981.94 news Currently at 125.6 It's true that the Consumer Confidence Index, a metric assessing how ordinary consumers feel about the strength of the economy, hit 125.6 in March 2017, its highest point since 2000. It is also true that it fell five points to 120.3 the following month. Even so, it showed that consumers (as of April) had more confidence in the economy under Trump than under Obama, during whose administration the index never exceeded 113.7 (although it did manage to rise to that point after bottoming out in 2009 at 25). fell Passed 32 bills through Congress As of 17 May 2017, President Trump had signed 34 bills passed by Congress, a comparatively high number in such a short period of time (since Franklin Delano Roosevelt, who signed 76 pieces of legislation in his first 100 days, only Harry Truman, at 55, signed more). signed number That's not to say that all of the legislation signed by Trump between January and May 2017 was necessarily noteworthy, however. One bill changed the name of a Veterans Affairs outpatient clinic in Pago Pago, American Samoa; another renamed a VA health center in Pennsylvania; another approves the location of a memorial honoring Desert Storm and Desert Shield veterans; three appointed citizen regents to the board of the Smithsonian Institution. changed renamed Nor should it be assumed that Trump's signing of a given bill meant he or his administration was actively involved in its passage. Thirteen such bills nullifying federal regulations enacted during the Obama administration (such as H.J. Res. 69, reversing a U.S. Fish and Wildlife rule pertaining to Alaska's National Wildlife Refuges and S.J. Res. 34, reversing FCC Internet privacy rules) were rushed through Congress and quickly signed because they made use of the Congressional Review Act of 1996, which imposes a 60-day limit on the time allowed to overrule previously passed laws. Appointed constitutionalist Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch This is true. Gorsuch was confirmed by the U.S. Senate on 7 April 2017. true After 8 years of inaction This is true. Trump fulfilled a campaign promise by signing an executive order withdrawing the U.S. from the Trans-Pacific Partnership international trade agreement on 23 January 2017, one day after announcing he would renegotiate it. Despite President Obama's fervent support for the deal, many groups, including labor unions, were critical of the TPP, and CNN reported that its chances of approval by Congress were already "bleak." signing 40 percent fewer illegal border crossings and deportation of violent and repeat offenders The number of illegal border crossings from Mexico into the U.S. in February 2017 were indeed down 40 percent from the previous month, according to statistics provided by the Department of Homeland Security, and that downward trend, which had actually started the previous November, continued in March and April 2017. This U.S. Customs and Border Protection chart shows how striking the change was compared to the previous five years: statistics CNN Water contamination crisis started in April 2014 It's true that in March 2017, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) awarded a $100 million grant to the state of Michigan to upgrade the drinking water infrastructure in Flint, which experienced a lead pollution crisis potentially affecting as many as 100,000 people beginning in 2014. There has been some dispute, however, over whether this ought to be labeled a "Trump accomplishment" or an "Obama accomplishment." awarded crisis As we noted in a previous article, funding for the grant came from a bill signed by President Obama in 2016, though the monies weren't officially awarded until after he left office, hence some prefer to credit it to Trump. article Strengthening relationships China Japan Russia UK Tough on North Korea Tough on Syria Freed Humanitarian Workers from Egypt Although President Trump pledged to "strengthen" overseas relationships going into office and he had already met with several important foreign leaders by mid-May 2017, it is too soon to tell to what degree his promise will bear fruit. China: The president-elect got off to a rocky start with China in December by accepting a congratulatory call from the leader of Taiwan, which China views as a province,not an independent nation, and with which the U.S. does not have diplomatic relations. China lodged a formal complaint. In April, Trump met with Chinese President Xi Jinping, with whom he said he made "tremendous progress" but no breakthroughs. A trade deal negotiated by the Trump administration with China in May was rated "pretty good" by The Wall Street Journal. call met rated Japan: Japanese Prime Minister Abe, who has met twice with Trump, issued a joint statement with him reaffirming the "unshakable alliance" between the U.S. and Japan. That is despite Trump having called Japan a "currency manipulator" during the presidential campaign and pulling out of the TPP, which Abe supported. Whether the "very, very good chemistry" Trump says he has with Abe will improve the relationship between the two countries over the long haul remains to be seen. Russia: U.S.-Russia relations have been strained for many years, a situation not improved by Russia's attempts to meddle in the U.S. presidential election, nor by the fact that Trump associates are under investigation for possible collusion in that effort. A U.S. missile strike by Trump against Syria, with whose government Russia is closely allied, were strongly condemned by Russian leaders, who warned there could be "extremely serious" consequences. U.K.: British Prime Minister Theresa May was the first foreign leader to visit the Trump White House, and their cordial meeting was portrayed by both countries as a renewal of the "special relationship" between the U.S and the U.K. According to the BBC, Obama was seen by many Britons as more interested in the European Union as a whole than in the U.K. itself, while Trump, who was in favor of Brexit, is perceived as the opposite. BBC Tough on Korea? President Trump has employed what the Washington Post calls "hard-line rhetoric" against North Korea, including threats of force, in hopes of squelching that county's increasing militarism, a strategy some experts dismiss as "macho posturing" that could escalate into a Cuban Missile Crisis-like confrontation. calls experts Tough on Syria? In April 2017, Trump ordered U.S. missile strikes against an air base in Syria in response to an alleged chemical weapons attack on civilians by the Syrian government, which has been known to brutalize its own people during the ongoing civil war there. Trump's gesture came up short, however, in that the Syrian Air Force was able to launch a new attack against rebel forces from that same base just hours later. attack Humanitarian workers in Egypt: In April 2017 President Trump negotiated the release of U.S.. citizen Aya Hijazi, her Egyptian husband, and four other humanitarian workers from a prison in Cairo, Egypt, where they had been locked up since 2014, without evidence or trial, on charges of child abuse and trafficking. negotiated Trimming the fat at many overblown government agencies and promoting small business growth by reigning in the EPA Although it is true that President Trump signed an executive order on 13 March 2017 directing the heads of executive branch departments to eliminate all "unnecessary" agencies and reorganize those that remain to improve their "efficiency, effectiveness, and accountability," the order gave said department heads six months from the date of signing to come up with suggestions for this process, so not much fat has been trimmed thus far despite the groundwork being laid. signed Regarding efforts to "reign in" the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), a CNN report confirms that's been among Trump's top priorities from the start: priorities President Donald Trump made a campaign trail promise to eliminate the Environmental Protection Agency a department once looked to as an important national force tackling climate change and during his first 100 days in office has held true to his word, taking swift strides towards dismantling the agency and rolling back regulations. Alongside EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt, a former Oklahoma attorney general who once worked tangentially with the fossil fuel industry to oppose Obama-era regulations, the Trump administration has so far issued a flurry of EPA-focused executive orders, proposed employee buyouts, handed down a social media gag order and is proposing significant cuts to the EPA budget. The National Federation of Independent Business (NFIB), a small business advocacy group, has hailed Trump's commitment to cutting "burdensome regulations," while environmental protection groups see it as a threat to public health and the future of the planet. hailed threat Finished Dakota Access Pipeline & reversed Obama's "Land Grab" EO, freeing US to use our own natural resources The controversial Dakota Access Pipeline project, halted under President Obama, was revived by President Trump and will begin commercial operations on 1 June 2017. Trump also issued an executive order directing a review of lands designated as national monuments: halted revived directing Specifically, the review will consider all national monument designations of federal public lands since 1996 that are 100,000 acres or larger. Mr Trump singled out former President Barack Obamas egregious use of federal power in using the Antiquities Act to unilaterally place swaths of American land and water under federal control, adding, its time we ended this abusive practice. Antiquities Act As with many of the other items discussed above, whether or not one regards this as an "accomplishment" (as opposed, say, to a travesty) will depend almost entirely on one's political views going in. Baker, Peter and Davenport, Coral. "Trump Revives Keystone Pipeline Rejected by Obama." The New York Times. 24 January 2017. Bradner, Eric. "Trump's TPP Withdrawal: 5 Things to Know." CNN. 23 January 2017. Bunge, Jacob and Alessi, Christopher. "Bayer, After Trump Meeting, Pledges to Add Thousands of U.S. Jobs." The Wall Street Journal. 18 January 2017. Carroll, Lauren. "Trump Has Signed More Bills in 100 Days than Any President Since Truman, Spicer Says." Politifact.com. 27 April 2017. Crutsinger, Martin. "Federal Government Records $182.4 Billion Budget Surplus." Associated Press. 10 May 2017. DeCambre, Mark. "How Trump's Stock Market Ranks During His First 100 Days in Office." MarketWatch. 30 April 2017. Green, Miranda. "Trump's EPA: Cuts, Infighting and No Talk of Climate Change." CNN. 4 May 2017. Greene, Leonard. "Stock Market Suffers Biggest Blow Since President Trump Took Office." New York Daily News. 17 May 2017. Ivanova, Irina. "Trump Isn't the Reason Corporate America Is Investing in the U.S." CBS News. 18 January 2017. Kopan, Tal. "Does Border Drop Mean Trump's Tough Talk Is Working?" CNN. 9 March 2017. Kulish, Nicholas and Santos, Fernanda. "Illegal Border Crossings Appear to Drop Under Trump. The New York Times. 8 March 2017. Liptak, Adam and Flegenheimer, Matt. "Neil Gorsuch Confirmed by Senate as Supreme Court Justice." The New York Times. 7 April 2017. McKelvey, Tara. "Special Relationship Gets a New Lease on Life." BBC. 27 January 2017. Robb, Greg. "U.S. April Budget Surplus Rises to $182 Billion." MarketWatch. 10 May 2017. Rucker, Philip and DeYoung, Karen. "Freed Egyptian American Prisoner Returns Home Following Trump Intervention." The Washington Post. 20 April 2017. Ryan, Missy, Denyer, Simon and Rauhala, Emily. "On North Korea, Trump Administration Talks Tough but Hopes to Avoid War." The Washington Post. 19 April 2017. Ryan, Tim. "Trump Directs Department Heads to Trim Agency Fat." Courthouse News. 14 March 2017. Savransky, Rebecca. "Tillerson: U.S.-Russia Relationship 'At an All-Time Low Point' Since End of Cold War." The Hill. 14 May 2017. Thomas, Lauren. "Consumer Confidence Lags in April as Americans Are Less Optimistic About Economy." CNBC. 25 April 2017. Watson, Kathryn. "Trump Executive Order Calls for Review of 'Egregious' Federal Land Grab." CBS News. 26 April 2017. Boston Herald. "Editorial: Getting Tough in Syria." 20 May 2017. CBO.gov. "Monthly Budget Review for April 2017." 5 May 2017. Democracy Now. "Trump's Proposed EPA Cuts Threaten Health & Lives of Tens of Millions of Americans." 3 March 2017. NFIB.com. "In Targeting the Waters of the United States Rule, President Trump Looks to Dismantle Another Burdensome Regulation." 3 March 2017. PRNewsWire.com. "The Conference Board Consumer Confidence Index Declined in April." 25 April 2017. TradingEconomics.com. "United States Unemployment Rate." 5 May 2017. U.S. Customs and Border Protection. "Southwest Border Migration." 1 May 2017. The Wall Street Journal. "Japan's Abe Talks Trump." 22 May 2017. The Wall Street Journal. "Trump's Pretty Good China Deal." 14 May 2017.

neutral

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/everything-donald-trump-accomplished/

All of Donald Trump's achievements in a mere four months?

David Emery

05/24/2017

In May 2017, a Reddit user posted a graphic that purported to list all of President Trump's accomplishments during his first four months in office. It was then widely shared on social media: Reddit TRUMP ACCOMPLISHMENTS ..Retweet the hell out of this to annoy @ABC @CBS @cnn @cnbc @MSNBC @nbc @nytimes @washingtonpost #dishonestmedia. pic.twitter.com/ITArBQgcmJ @ABC @CBS @cnn @cnbc @MSNBC @nbc @nytimes @washingtonpost #dishonestmedia pic.twitter.com/ITArBQgcmJ Small Biz for Trump (@SmallBiz4Trump) May 15, 2017 May 15, 2017 Creating homebrew visual aids touting the accomplishments (or failures) of top politicians is a popular online pastime, not least because it's a cheap and easy way to propagandize, and because there are no pesky standards of fairness and accuracy to meet. As we've noted with regard to previous specimens (for example, a late-2016 meme touting the alleged economic achievements of President Obama), the graphic format lends itself to the display of cherry-picked facts to make a simplistic case with no semblance of context or nuance. achievements In this case, the claim is that, despite all the carping in the mainstream press about "chaos" and "ineptitude" in the Oval Office, President Trump has actually accomplished quite a lot during his first four months as chief executive, and thus you will not find mention of major campaign promises Trump has had difficulty keeping so far, such as instituting a Muslim immigration ban and building a wall on the Mexican border. Also, since it's very much a partisan case being made, there will be disagreement over what constitutes an "accomplishment." Some feats, such as reducing unemployment, are uncontroversial, while others, such as dismantling entire government agencies, aren't likely to be regarded as accomplishments by those who find the functions of those agencies critical. Here are the claims: 4.4 percent - lowest since May 2007 As reported in the Washington Post, government data released on 5 May 2017 indicated that the national unemployment rate hit a new low in April: reported The U.S. job market rebounded strongly last month and the unemployment rate fell to the lowest level seen in a decade, government data released Friday morning showed, calming fears that had bubbled up in the past month about the state of the economy. Employers added 211,000 jobs in April as the unemployment rate ticked down to 4.4 percent, the lowest level since May 2007. It bears pointing out that the jobless rate had already been on a steady decline since 2010. Further, unemployment hit a previous nine-year low of 4.6 percent in December 2016 when President Obama was still in office. It climbed back up to 4.8 percent in January, dipped to 4.7 percent in February, and to 4.5 percent in March 2017. unemployment To what degree short-term improvements in the economy since January can be attributed to a new chief executive whose economic policies remain nascent is perennially up for debate, though according to The New York Times' senior economic correspondent Neil Irwin, a "Trump effect" that is buoying corporate hiring policies after the election cannot be ruled out: according So does Mr. Trump deserve any credit for solid economic results? If you think the economy is driven by concrete, specific policies around taxes, spending, monetary policy and regulation, the answer is no. If you think that what really matters is the mood in the executive suite, then just maybe. SoftBank $50B Exxon $20B Hyundai $3.1B Apple $1B Chrysler $1B GM $1B Bayer AG $1BToyota $600M LG $250M This is a mostly-accurate, partial list of corporations who have announced investments in American facilities and/or jobs since the election of Donald Trump. With the exception of Bayer AG (which announced $8 billion in new investments, not $1 billion as claimed), the dollar amounts match those cited in press reports between January and April 2017 (sources: Softbank, Exxon Mobil Corp., Hyundai-Kia, Apple, Fiat Chrysler, General Motors, Bayer AG, Toyota, LG Electronics). Softbank Exxon Mobil Corp. Hyundai-Kia Apple Fiat Chrysler General Motors Bayer AG Toyota LG Electronics It's not necessarily accurate to characterize all of these commitments as "accomplishments" of President Trump, however. As CBS Moneywatch's Irina Ivanova reported in January 2017: reported Few of the jobs companies are promising to create in the U.S. can be attributed to a sudden renewed commitment to USA Inc. inspired by Trumps America First policies. Indeed, the businesses Trump has been quick to praise have been careful not to characterize their recent hiring announcements as new. And as usual with corporate investments of this scale, such plans are typically months or even years in the making, suggesting they long predate the presidential election. For example, Fiat Chrysler said their promise of a $1 billion investment in Michigan and Ohio plants, projected to create 2,000 jobs, was the "second phase" of an industrialization plan announced in 2016. GM's $1 billion investment was "several years in the making," according to sources cited by CBS. promise The largest of all the announced commitments, SoftBank's pledge of $50 billion, was also in the works long before Trump won the election: Another widely publicized corporate initiative that Trump trumpeted a promise by SoftBank to create 50,000 high-tech jobs in the U.S. was the result of a tech fund the company announced on Oct. 14 three weeks before the election. Given the massive tech industry in the U.S., economists say much of the planned $50 billion investment would have found its way to the states regardless of who occupied the White House. You dont just decide overnight to invest $3 billion, said Nathan Jensen, a professor at the University of Texas who studies interactions between government and corporations. Bayer AG's commitment to an $8 billion investment and the creation of 3,000 U.S. jobs was announced by the Trump transition team after the president-elect met in January 2017 with the CEOs of Bayer AG and Monsanto, who are planning a merger. Transition spokesman Sean Spicer credited Trump's negotiating skills for the pledge, but some analysts were skeptical that the companies had actually promised anything that wasn't already on the table when plans for the merger were first revealed in September 2016: commitment analysts Bayer and Monsanto said in a joint statement after Spicer's remarks that the "combined company expects to spend approximately $16 billion in R&D in agriculture over the next six years with at least half of this investment made in the United States." That amounts to about $2.7 billion a year, which roughly equates to what the combined companies already spend in that area globally, [Wall Street analyst Jeremy] Redenius said. As for the U.S. breakdown, he estimates it's likely close to half already; Monsanto spends $1.5 billion a year, the majority of which is in the U.S., he said, and Bayer already invests in R&D here as well. "Not an increase, but not substantially cutting," he said of the global figure. The merger, which awaits U.S. regulatory approval, is not likely to be completed until 2018, CNBC reported. reported $182B in April 2017 It is true that the U.S. Treasury reported a $182 billion budget surplus in April 2017, the largest April surplus since 2001 (and the second-largest in history), according to MarketWatch. It's unclear exactly how that surplus is attributable to President Trump, however. April is typically a surplus month because of tax receipts. In addition, citing a Congressional Budget Office (CBO) review as its source, Associated Press reported that the April 2017 surplus was "inflated" because of a tax deadline change allowing corporations to pay federal taxes in April that in previous years were paid in March. MarketWatch review inflated It remains to be seen what effect Tump's policies will have on the budget deficit for 2017 as a whole (the fiscal year ends on 30 September). The CBO projects a 4.6 percent drop in the deficit from what it was in 2016, but that is based on laws and policies already in effect when Trump took office. DOW at 20,896 The stock market can be fickle. As of April 29, the Dow Jones Industrial Average was at 20,940.51, 6.12 percent higher than when Trump took office positive movement, unquestionably. That number had risen to 20,981.94 by 16 May, then plummeted 372 points the next day as the market was shaken by news that Trump had shared classified information with Russian diplomats in the White House and attempted to divert FBI Director James Comey from an investigation of Trump's alleged ties to Russia before he fired him. 20,940.51 20,981.94 news Currently at 125.6 It's true that the Consumer Confidence Index, a metric assessing how ordinary consumers feel about the strength of the economy, hit 125.6 in March 2017, its highest point since 2000. It is also true that it fell five points to 120.3 the following month. Even so, it showed that consumers (as of April) had more confidence in the economy under Trump than under Obama, during whose administration the index never exceeded 113.7 (although it did manage to rise to that point after bottoming out in 2009 at 25). fell Passed 32 bills through Congress As of 17 May 2017, President Trump had signed 34 bills passed by Congress, a comparatively high number in such a short period of time (since Franklin Delano Roosevelt, who signed 76 pieces of legislation in his first 100 days, only Harry Truman, at 55, signed more). signed number That's not to say that all of the legislation signed by Trump between January and May 2017 was necessarily noteworthy, however. One bill changed the name of a Veterans Affairs outpatient clinic in Pago Pago, American Samoa; another renamed a VA health center in Pennsylvania; another approves the location of a memorial honoring Desert Storm and Desert Shield veterans; three appointed citizen regents to the board of the Smithsonian Institution. changed renamed Nor should it be assumed that Trump's signing of a given bill meant he or his administration was actively involved in its passage. Thirteen such bills nullifying federal regulations enacted during the Obama administration (such as H.J. Res. 69, reversing a U.S. Fish and Wildlife rule pertaining to Alaska's National Wildlife Refuges and S.J. Res. 34, reversing FCC Internet privacy rules) were rushed through Congress and quickly signed because they made use of the Congressional Review Act of 1996, which imposes a 60-day limit on the time allowed to overrule previously passed laws. Appointed constitutionalist Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch This is true. Gorsuch was confirmed by the U.S. Senate on 7 April 2017. true After 8 years of inaction This is true. Trump fulfilled a campaign promise by signing an executive order withdrawing the U.S. from the Trans-Pacific Partnership international trade agreement on 23 January 2017, one day after announcing he would renegotiate it. Despite President Obama's fervent support for the deal, many groups, including labor unions, were critical of the TPP, and CNN reported that its chances of approval by Congress were already "bleak." signing 40 percent fewer illegal border crossings and deportation of violent and repeat offenders The number of illegal border crossings from Mexico into the U.S. in February 2017 were indeed down 40 percent from the previous month, according to statistics provided by the Department of Homeland Security, and that downward trend, which had actually started the previous November, continued in March and April 2017. This U.S. Customs and Border Protection chart shows how striking the change was compared to the previous five years: statistics CNN Water contamination crisis started in April 2014 It's true that in March 2017, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) awarded a $100 million grant to the state of Michigan to upgrade the drinking water infrastructure in Flint, which experienced a lead pollution crisis potentially affecting as many as 100,000 people beginning in 2014. There has been some dispute, however, over whether this ought to be labeled a "Trump accomplishment" or an "Obama accomplishment." awarded crisis As we noted in a previous article, funding for the grant came from a bill signed by President Obama in 2016, though the monies weren't officially awarded until after he left office, hence some prefer to credit it to Trump. article Strengthening relationships China Japan Russia UK Tough on North Korea Tough on Syria Freed Humanitarian Workers from Egypt Although President Trump pledged to "strengthen" overseas relationships going into office and he had already met with several important foreign leaders by mid-May 2017, it is too soon to tell to what degree his promise will bear fruit. China: The president-elect got off to a rocky start with China in December by accepting a congratulatory call from the leader of Taiwan, which China views as a province,not an independent nation, and with which the U.S. does not have diplomatic relations. China lodged a formal complaint. In April, Trump met with Chinese President Xi Jinping, with whom he said he made "tremendous progress" but no breakthroughs. A trade deal negotiated by the Trump administration with China in May was rated "pretty good" by The Wall Street Journal. call met rated Japan: Japanese Prime Minister Abe, who has met twice with Trump, issued a joint statement with him reaffirming the "unshakable alliance" between the U.S. and Japan. That is despite Trump having called Japan a "currency manipulator" during the presidential campaign and pulling out of the TPP, which Abe supported. Whether the "very, very good chemistry" Trump says he has with Abe will improve the relationship between the two countries over the long haul remains to be seen. Russia: U.S.-Russia relations have been strained for many years, a situation not improved by Russia's attempts to meddle in the U.S. presidential election, nor by the fact that Trump associates are under investigation for possible collusion in that effort. A U.S. missile strike by Trump against Syria, with whose government Russia is closely allied, were strongly condemned by Russian leaders, who warned there could be "extremely serious" consequences. U.K.: British Prime Minister Theresa May was the first foreign leader to visit the Trump White House, and their cordial meeting was portrayed by both countries as a renewal of the "special relationship" between the U.S and the U.K. According to the BBC, Obama was seen by many Britons as more interested in the European Union as a whole than in the U.K. itself, while Trump, who was in favor of Brexit, is perceived as the opposite. BBC Tough on Korea? President Trump has employed what the Washington Post calls "hard-line rhetoric" against North Korea, including threats of force, in hopes of squelching that county's increasing militarism, a strategy some experts dismiss as "macho posturing" that could escalate into a Cuban Missile Crisis-like confrontation. calls experts Tough on Syria? In April 2017, Trump ordered U.S. missile strikes against an air base in Syria in response to an alleged chemical weapons attack on civilians by the Syrian government, which has been known to brutalize its own people during the ongoing civil war there. Trump's gesture came up short, however, in that the Syrian Air Force was able to launch a new attack against rebel forces from that same base just hours later. attack Humanitarian workers in Egypt: In April 2017 President Trump negotiated the release of U.S.. citizen Aya Hijazi, her Egyptian husband, and four other humanitarian workers from a prison in Cairo, Egypt, where they had been locked up since 2014, without evidence or trial, on charges of child abuse and trafficking. negotiated Trimming the fat at many overblown government agencies and promoting small business growth by reigning in the EPA Although it is true that President Trump signed an executive order on 13 March 2017 directing the heads of executive branch departments to eliminate all "unnecessary" agencies and reorganize those that remain to improve their "efficiency, effectiveness, and accountability," the order gave said department heads six months from the date of signing to come up with suggestions for this process, so not much fat has been trimmed thus far despite the groundwork being laid. signed Regarding efforts to "reign in" the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), a CNN report confirms that's been among Trump's top priorities from the start: priorities President Donald Trump made a campaign trail promise to eliminate the Environmental Protection Agency a department once looked to as an important national force tackling climate change and during his first 100 days in office has held true to his word, taking swift strides towards dismantling the agency and rolling back regulations. Alongside EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt, a former Oklahoma attorney general who once worked tangentially with the fossil fuel industry to oppose Obama-era regulations, the Trump administration has so far issued a flurry of EPA-focused executive orders, proposed employee buyouts, handed down a social media gag order and is proposing significant cuts to the EPA budget. The National Federation of Independent Business (NFIB), a small business advocacy group, has hailed Trump's commitment to cutting "burdensome regulations," while environmental protection groups see it as a threat to public health and the future of the planet. hailed threat Finished Dakota Access Pipeline & reversed Obama's "Land Grab" EO, freeing US to use our own natural resources The controversial Dakota Access Pipeline project, halted under President Obama, was revived by President Trump and will begin commercial operations on 1 June 2017. Trump also issued an executive order directing a review of lands designated as national monuments: halted revived directing Specifically, the review will consider all national monument designations of federal public lands since 1996 that are 100,000 acres or larger. Mr Trump singled out former President Barack Obamas egregious use of federal power in using the Antiquities Act to unilaterally place swaths of American land and water under federal control, adding, its time we ended this abusive practice. Antiquities Act As with many of the other items discussed above, whether or not one regards this as an "accomplishment" (as opposed, say, to a travesty) will depend almost entirely on one's political views going in. Baker, Peter and Davenport, Coral. "Trump Revives Keystone Pipeline Rejected by Obama." The New York Times. 24 January 2017. Bradner, Eric. "Trump's TPP Withdrawal: 5 Things to Know." CNN. 23 January 2017. Bunge, Jacob and Alessi, Christopher. "Bayer, After Trump Meeting, Pledges to Add Thousands of U.S. Jobs." The Wall Street Journal. 18 January 2017. Carroll, Lauren. "Trump Has Signed More Bills in 100 Days than Any President Since Truman, Spicer Says." Politifact.com. 27 April 2017. Crutsinger, Martin. "Federal Government Records $182.4 Billion Budget Surplus." Associated Press. 10 May 2017. DeCambre, Mark. "How Trump's Stock Market Ranks During His First 100 Days in Office." MarketWatch. 30 April 2017. Green, Miranda. "Trump's EPA: Cuts, Infighting and No Talk of Climate Change." CNN. 4 May 2017. Greene, Leonard. "Stock Market Suffers Biggest Blow Since President Trump Took Office." New York Daily News. 17 May 2017. Ivanova, Irina. "Trump Isn't the Reason Corporate America Is Investing in the U.S." CBS News. 18 January 2017. Kopan, Tal. "Does Border Drop Mean Trump's Tough Talk Is Working?" CNN. 9 March 2017. Kulish, Nicholas and Santos, Fernanda. "Illegal Border Crossings Appear to Drop Under Trump. The New York Times. 8 March 2017. Liptak, Adam and Flegenheimer, Matt. "Neil Gorsuch Confirmed by Senate as Supreme Court Justice." The New York Times. 7 April 2017. McKelvey, Tara. "Special Relationship Gets a New Lease on Life." BBC. 27 January 2017. Robb, Greg. "U.S. April Budget Surplus Rises to $182 Billion." MarketWatch. 10 May 2017. Rucker, Philip and DeYoung, Karen. "Freed Egyptian American Prisoner Returns Home Following Trump Intervention." The Washington Post. 20 April 2017. Ryan, Missy, Denyer, Simon and Rauhala, Emily. "On North Korea, Trump Administration Talks Tough but Hopes to Avoid War." The Washington Post. 19 April 2017. Ryan, Tim. "Trump Directs Department Heads to Trim Agency Fat." Courthouse News. 14 March 2017. Savransky, Rebecca. "Tillerson: U.S.-Russia Relationship 'At an All-Time Low Point' Since End of Cold War." The Hill. 14 May 2017. Thomas, Lauren. "Consumer Confidence Lags in April as Americans Are Less Optimistic About Economy." CNBC. 25 April 2017. Watson, Kathryn. "Trump Executive Order Calls for Review of 'Egregious' Federal Land Grab." CBS News. 26 April 2017. Boston Herald. "Editorial: Getting Tough in Syria." 20 May 2017. CBO.gov. "Monthly Budget Review for April 2017." 5 May 2017. Democracy Now. "Trump's Proposed EPA Cuts Threaten Health & Lives of Tens of Millions of Americans." 3 March 2017. NFIB.com. "In Targeting the Waters of the United States Rule, President Trump Looks to Dismantle Another Burdensome Regulation." 3 March 2017. PRNewsWire.com. "The Conference Board Consumer Confidence Index Declined in April." 25 April 2017. TradingEconomics.com. "United States Unemployment Rate." 5 May 2017. U.S. Customs and Border Protection. "Southwest Border Migration." 1 May 2017. The Wall Street Journal. "Japan's Abe Talks Trump." 22 May 2017. The Wall Street Journal. "Trump's Pretty Good China Deal." 14 May 2017.

neutral

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/everything-donald-trump-accomplished/

What Donald Trump has achieved within a mere four months?

David Emery

05/24/2017

In May 2017, a Reddit user posted a graphic that purported to list all of President Trump's accomplishments during his first four months in office. It was then widely shared on social media: Reddit TRUMP ACCOMPLISHMENTS ..Retweet the hell out of this to annoy @ABC @CBS @cnn @cnbc @MSNBC @nbc @nytimes @washingtonpost #dishonestmedia. pic.twitter.com/ITArBQgcmJ @ABC @CBS @cnn @cnbc @MSNBC @nbc @nytimes @washingtonpost #dishonestmedia pic.twitter.com/ITArBQgcmJ Small Biz for Trump (@SmallBiz4Trump) May 15, 2017 May 15, 2017 Creating homebrew visual aids touting the accomplishments (or failures) of top politicians is a popular online pastime, not least because it's a cheap and easy way to propagandize, and because there are no pesky standards of fairness and accuracy to meet. As we've noted with regard to previous specimens (for example, a late-2016 meme touting the alleged economic achievements of President Obama), the graphic format lends itself to the display of cherry-picked facts to make a simplistic case with no semblance of context or nuance. achievements In this case, the claim is that, despite all the carping in the mainstream press about "chaos" and "ineptitude" in the Oval Office, President Trump has actually accomplished quite a lot during his first four months as chief executive, and thus you will not find mention of major campaign promises Trump has had difficulty keeping so far, such as instituting a Muslim immigration ban and building a wall on the Mexican border. Also, since it's very much a partisan case being made, there will be disagreement over what constitutes an "accomplishment." Some feats, such as reducing unemployment, are uncontroversial, while others, such as dismantling entire government agencies, aren't likely to be regarded as accomplishments by those who find the functions of those agencies critical. Here are the claims: 4.4 percent - lowest since May 2007 As reported in the Washington Post, government data released on 5 May 2017 indicated that the national unemployment rate hit a new low in April: reported The U.S. job market rebounded strongly last month and the unemployment rate fell to the lowest level seen in a decade, government data released Friday morning showed, calming fears that had bubbled up in the past month about the state of the economy. Employers added 211,000 jobs in April as the unemployment rate ticked down to 4.4 percent, the lowest level since May 2007. It bears pointing out that the jobless rate had already been on a steady decline since 2010. Further, unemployment hit a previous nine-year low of 4.6 percent in December 2016 when President Obama was still in office. It climbed back up to 4.8 percent in January, dipped to 4.7 percent in February, and to 4.5 percent in March 2017. unemployment To what degree short-term improvements in the economy since January can be attributed to a new chief executive whose economic policies remain nascent is perennially up for debate, though according to The New York Times' senior economic correspondent Neil Irwin, a "Trump effect" that is buoying corporate hiring policies after the election cannot be ruled out: according So does Mr. Trump deserve any credit for solid economic results? If you think the economy is driven by concrete, specific policies around taxes, spending, monetary policy and regulation, the answer is no. If you think that what really matters is the mood in the executive suite, then just maybe. SoftBank $50B Exxon $20B Hyundai $3.1B Apple $1B Chrysler $1B GM $1B Bayer AG $1BToyota $600M LG $250M This is a mostly-accurate, partial list of corporations who have announced investments in American facilities and/or jobs since the election of Donald Trump. With the exception of Bayer AG (which announced $8 billion in new investments, not $1 billion as claimed), the dollar amounts match those cited in press reports between January and April 2017 (sources: Softbank, Exxon Mobil Corp., Hyundai-Kia, Apple, Fiat Chrysler, General Motors, Bayer AG, Toyota, LG Electronics). Softbank Exxon Mobil Corp. Hyundai-Kia Apple Fiat Chrysler General Motors Bayer AG Toyota LG Electronics It's not necessarily accurate to characterize all of these commitments as "accomplishments" of President Trump, however. As CBS Moneywatch's Irina Ivanova reported in January 2017: reported Few of the jobs companies are promising to create in the U.S. can be attributed to a sudden renewed commitment to USA Inc. inspired by Trumps America First policies. Indeed, the businesses Trump has been quick to praise have been careful not to characterize their recent hiring announcements as new. And as usual with corporate investments of this scale, such plans are typically months or even years in the making, suggesting they long predate the presidential election. For example, Fiat Chrysler said their promise of a $1 billion investment in Michigan and Ohio plants, projected to create 2,000 jobs, was the "second phase" of an industrialization plan announced in 2016. GM's $1 billion investment was "several years in the making," according to sources cited by CBS. promise The largest of all the announced commitments, SoftBank's pledge of $50 billion, was also in the works long before Trump won the election: Another widely publicized corporate initiative that Trump trumpeted a promise by SoftBank to create 50,000 high-tech jobs in the U.S. was the result of a tech fund the company announced on Oct. 14 three weeks before the election. Given the massive tech industry in the U.S., economists say much of the planned $50 billion investment would have found its way to the states regardless of who occupied the White House. You dont just decide overnight to invest $3 billion, said Nathan Jensen, a professor at the University of Texas who studies interactions between government and corporations. Bayer AG's commitment to an $8 billion investment and the creation of 3,000 U.S. jobs was announced by the Trump transition team after the president-elect met in January 2017 with the CEOs of Bayer AG and Monsanto, who are planning a merger. Transition spokesman Sean Spicer credited Trump's negotiating skills for the pledge, but some analysts were skeptical that the companies had actually promised anything that wasn't already on the table when plans for the merger were first revealed in September 2016: commitment analysts Bayer and Monsanto said in a joint statement after Spicer's remarks that the "combined company expects to spend approximately $16 billion in R&D in agriculture over the next six years with at least half of this investment made in the United States." That amounts to about $2.7 billion a year, which roughly equates to what the combined companies already spend in that area globally, [Wall Street analyst Jeremy] Redenius said. As for the U.S. breakdown, he estimates it's likely close to half already; Monsanto spends $1.5 billion a year, the majority of which is in the U.S., he said, and Bayer already invests in R&D here as well. "Not an increase, but not substantially cutting," he said of the global figure. The merger, which awaits U.S. regulatory approval, is not likely to be completed until 2018, CNBC reported. reported $182B in April 2017 It is true that the U.S. Treasury reported a $182 billion budget surplus in April 2017, the largest April surplus since 2001 (and the second-largest in history), according to MarketWatch. It's unclear exactly how that surplus is attributable to President Trump, however. April is typically a surplus month because of tax receipts. In addition, citing a Congressional Budget Office (CBO) review as its source, Associated Press reported that the April 2017 surplus was "inflated" because of a tax deadline change allowing corporations to pay federal taxes in April that in previous years were paid in March. MarketWatch review inflated It remains to be seen what effect Tump's policies will have on the budget deficit for 2017 as a whole (the fiscal year ends on 30 September). The CBO projects a 4.6 percent drop in the deficit from what it was in 2016, but that is based on laws and policies already in effect when Trump took office. DOW at 20,896 The stock market can be fickle. As of April 29, the Dow Jones Industrial Average was at 20,940.51, 6.12 percent higher than when Trump took office positive movement, unquestionably. That number had risen to 20,981.94 by 16 May, then plummeted 372 points the next day as the market was shaken by news that Trump had shared classified information with Russian diplomats in the White House and attempted to divert FBI Director James Comey from an investigation of Trump's alleged ties to Russia before he fired him. 20,940.51 20,981.94 news Currently at 125.6 It's true that the Consumer Confidence Index, a metric assessing how ordinary consumers feel about the strength of the economy, hit 125.6 in March 2017, its highest point since 2000. It is also true that it fell five points to 120.3 the following month. Even so, it showed that consumers (as of April) had more confidence in the economy under Trump than under Obama, during whose administration the index never exceeded 113.7 (although it did manage to rise to that point after bottoming out in 2009 at 25). fell Passed 32 bills through Congress As of 17 May 2017, President Trump had signed 34 bills passed by Congress, a comparatively high number in such a short period of time (since Franklin Delano Roosevelt, who signed 76 pieces of legislation in his first 100 days, only Harry Truman, at 55, signed more). signed number That's not to say that all of the legislation signed by Trump between January and May 2017 was necessarily noteworthy, however. One bill changed the name of a Veterans Affairs outpatient clinic in Pago Pago, American Samoa; another renamed a VA health center in Pennsylvania; another approves the location of a memorial honoring Desert Storm and Desert Shield veterans; three appointed citizen regents to the board of the Smithsonian Institution. changed renamed Nor should it be assumed that Trump's signing of a given bill meant he or his administration was actively involved in its passage. Thirteen such bills nullifying federal regulations enacted during the Obama administration (such as H.J. Res. 69, reversing a U.S. Fish and Wildlife rule pertaining to Alaska's National Wildlife Refuges and S.J. Res. 34, reversing FCC Internet privacy rules) were rushed through Congress and quickly signed because they made use of the Congressional Review Act of 1996, which imposes a 60-day limit on the time allowed to overrule previously passed laws. Appointed constitutionalist Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch This is true. Gorsuch was confirmed by the U.S. Senate on 7 April 2017. true After 8 years of inaction This is true. Trump fulfilled a campaign promise by signing an executive order withdrawing the U.S. from the Trans-Pacific Partnership international trade agreement on 23 January 2017, one day after announcing he would renegotiate it. Despite President Obama's fervent support for the deal, many groups, including labor unions, were critical of the TPP, and CNN reported that its chances of approval by Congress were already "bleak." signing 40 percent fewer illegal border crossings and deportation of violent and repeat offenders The number of illegal border crossings from Mexico into the U.S. in February 2017 were indeed down 40 percent from the previous month, according to statistics provided by the Department of Homeland Security, and that downward trend, which had actually started the previous November, continued in March and April 2017. This U.S. Customs and Border Protection chart shows how striking the change was compared to the previous five years: statistics CNN Water contamination crisis started in April 2014 It's true that in March 2017, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) awarded a $100 million grant to the state of Michigan to upgrade the drinking water infrastructure in Flint, which experienced a lead pollution crisis potentially affecting as many as 100,000 people beginning in 2014. There has been some dispute, however, over whether this ought to be labeled a "Trump accomplishment" or an "Obama accomplishment." awarded crisis As we noted in a previous article, funding for the grant came from a bill signed by President Obama in 2016, though the monies weren't officially awarded until after he left office, hence some prefer to credit it to Trump. article Strengthening relationships China Japan Russia UK Tough on North Korea Tough on Syria Freed Humanitarian Workers from Egypt Although President Trump pledged to "strengthen" overseas relationships going into office and he had already met with several important foreign leaders by mid-May 2017, it is too soon to tell to what degree his promise will bear fruit. China: The president-elect got off to a rocky start with China in December by accepting a congratulatory call from the leader of Taiwan, which China views as a province,not an independent nation, and with which the U.S. does not have diplomatic relations. China lodged a formal complaint. In April, Trump met with Chinese President Xi Jinping, with whom he said he made "tremendous progress" but no breakthroughs. A trade deal negotiated by the Trump administration with China in May was rated "pretty good" by The Wall Street Journal. call met rated Japan: Japanese Prime Minister Abe, who has met twice with Trump, issued a joint statement with him reaffirming the "unshakable alliance" between the U.S. and Japan. That is despite Trump having called Japan a "currency manipulator" during the presidential campaign and pulling out of the TPP, which Abe supported. Whether the "very, very good chemistry" Trump says he has with Abe will improve the relationship between the two countries over the long haul remains to be seen. Russia: U.S.-Russia relations have been strained for many years, a situation not improved by Russia's attempts to meddle in the U.S. presidential election, nor by the fact that Trump associates are under investigation for possible collusion in that effort. A U.S. missile strike by Trump against Syria, with whose government Russia is closely allied, were strongly condemned by Russian leaders, who warned there could be "extremely serious" consequences. U.K.: British Prime Minister Theresa May was the first foreign leader to visit the Trump White House, and their cordial meeting was portrayed by both countries as a renewal of the "special relationship" between the U.S and the U.K. According to the BBC, Obama was seen by many Britons as more interested in the European Union as a whole than in the U.K. itself, while Trump, who was in favor of Brexit, is perceived as the opposite. BBC Tough on Korea? President Trump has employed what the Washington Post calls "hard-line rhetoric" against North Korea, including threats of force, in hopes of squelching that county's increasing militarism, a strategy some experts dismiss as "macho posturing" that could escalate into a Cuban Missile Crisis-like confrontation. calls experts Tough on Syria? In April 2017, Trump ordered U.S. missile strikes against an air base in Syria in response to an alleged chemical weapons attack on civilians by the Syrian government, which has been known to brutalize its own people during the ongoing civil war there. Trump's gesture came up short, however, in that the Syrian Air Force was able to launch a new attack against rebel forces from that same base just hours later. attack Humanitarian workers in Egypt: In April 2017 President Trump negotiated the release of U.S.. citizen Aya Hijazi, her Egyptian husband, and four other humanitarian workers from a prison in Cairo, Egypt, where they had been locked up since 2014, without evidence or trial, on charges of child abuse and trafficking. negotiated Trimming the fat at many overblown government agencies and promoting small business growth by reigning in the EPA Although it is true that President Trump signed an executive order on 13 March 2017 directing the heads of executive branch departments to eliminate all "unnecessary" agencies and reorganize those that remain to improve their "efficiency, effectiveness, and accountability," the order gave said department heads six months from the date of signing to come up with suggestions for this process, so not much fat has been trimmed thus far despite the groundwork being laid. signed Regarding efforts to "reign in" the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), a CNN report confirms that's been among Trump's top priorities from the start: priorities President Donald Trump made a campaign trail promise to eliminate the Environmental Protection Agency a department once looked to as an important national force tackling climate change and during his first 100 days in office has held true to his word, taking swift strides towards dismantling the agency and rolling back regulations. Alongside EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt, a former Oklahoma attorney general who once worked tangentially with the fossil fuel industry to oppose Obama-era regulations, the Trump administration has so far issued a flurry of EPA-focused executive orders, proposed employee buyouts, handed down a social media gag order and is proposing significant cuts to the EPA budget. The National Federation of Independent Business (NFIB), a small business advocacy group, has hailed Trump's commitment to cutting "burdensome regulations," while environmental protection groups see it as a threat to public health and the future of the planet. hailed threat Finished Dakota Access Pipeline & reversed Obama's "Land Grab" EO, freeing US to use our own natural resources The controversial Dakota Access Pipeline project, halted under President Obama, was revived by President Trump and will begin commercial operations on 1 June 2017. Trump also issued an executive order directing a review of lands designated as national monuments: halted revived directing Specifically, the review will consider all national monument designations of federal public lands since 1996 that are 100,000 acres or larger. Mr Trump singled out former President Barack Obamas egregious use of federal power in using the Antiquities Act to unilaterally place swaths of American land and water under federal control, adding, its time we ended this abusive practice. Antiquities Act As with many of the other items discussed above, whether or not one regards this as an "accomplishment" (as opposed, say, to a travesty) will depend almost entirely on one's political views going in. Baker, Peter and Davenport, Coral. "Trump Revives Keystone Pipeline Rejected by Obama." The New York Times. 24 January 2017. Bradner, Eric. "Trump's TPP Withdrawal: 5 Things to Know." CNN. 23 January 2017. Bunge, Jacob and Alessi, Christopher. "Bayer, After Trump Meeting, Pledges to Add Thousands of U.S. Jobs." The Wall Street Journal. 18 January 2017. Carroll, Lauren. "Trump Has Signed More Bills in 100 Days than Any President Since Truman, Spicer Says." Politifact.com. 27 April 2017. Crutsinger, Martin. "Federal Government Records $182.4 Billion Budget Surplus." Associated Press. 10 May 2017. DeCambre, Mark. "How Trump's Stock Market Ranks During His First 100 Days in Office." MarketWatch. 30 April 2017. Green, Miranda. "Trump's EPA: Cuts, Infighting and No Talk of Climate Change." CNN. 4 May 2017. Greene, Leonard. "Stock Market Suffers Biggest Blow Since President Trump Took Office." New York Daily News. 17 May 2017. Ivanova, Irina. "Trump Isn't the Reason Corporate America Is Investing in the U.S." CBS News. 18 January 2017. Kopan, Tal. "Does Border Drop Mean Trump's Tough Talk Is Working?" CNN. 9 March 2017. Kulish, Nicholas and Santos, Fernanda. "Illegal Border Crossings Appear to Drop Under Trump. The New York Times. 8 March 2017. Liptak, Adam and Flegenheimer, Matt. "Neil Gorsuch Confirmed by Senate as Supreme Court Justice." The New York Times. 7 April 2017. McKelvey, Tara. "Special Relationship Gets a New Lease on Life." BBC. 27 January 2017. Robb, Greg. "U.S. April Budget Surplus Rises to $182 Billion." MarketWatch. 10 May 2017. Rucker, Philip and DeYoung, Karen. "Freed Egyptian American Prisoner Returns Home Following Trump Intervention." The Washington Post. 20 April 2017. Ryan, Missy, Denyer, Simon and Rauhala, Emily. "On North Korea, Trump Administration Talks Tough but Hopes to Avoid War." The Washington Post. 19 April 2017. Ryan, Tim. "Trump Directs Department Heads to Trim Agency Fat." Courthouse News. 14 March 2017. Savransky, Rebecca. "Tillerson: U.S.-Russia Relationship 'At an All-Time Low Point' Since End of Cold War." The Hill. 14 May 2017. Thomas, Lauren. "Consumer Confidence Lags in April as Americans Are Less Optimistic About Economy." CNBC. 25 April 2017. Watson, Kathryn. "Trump Executive Order Calls for Review of 'Egregious' Federal Land Grab." CBS News. 26 April 2017. Boston Herald. "Editorial: Getting Tough in Syria." 20 May 2017. CBO.gov. "Monthly Budget Review for April 2017." 5 May 2017. Democracy Now. "Trump's Proposed EPA Cuts Threaten Health & Lives of Tens of Millions of Americans." 3 March 2017. NFIB.com. "In Targeting the Waters of the United States Rule, President Trump Looks to Dismantle Another Burdensome Regulation." 3 March 2017. PRNewsWire.com. "The Conference Board Consumer Confidence Index Declined in April." 25 April 2017. TradingEconomics.com. "United States Unemployment Rate." 5 May 2017. U.S. Customs and Border Protection. "Southwest Border Migration." 1 May 2017. The Wall Street Journal. "Japan's Abe Talks Trump." 22 May 2017. The Wall Street Journal. "Trump's Pretty Good China Deal." 14 May 2017.

neutral

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/everything-donald-trump-accomplished/

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

David Emery

05/24/2017

In May 2017, a Reddit user posted a graphic that purported to list all of President Trump's accomplishments during his first four months in office. It was then widely shared on social media: Reddit TRUMP ACCOMPLISHMENTS ..Retweet the hell out of this to annoy @ABC @CBS @cnn @cnbc @MSNBC @nbc @nytimes @washingtonpost #dishonestmedia. pic.twitter.com/ITArBQgcmJ @ABC @CBS @cnn @cnbc @MSNBC @nbc @nytimes @washingtonpost #dishonestmedia pic.twitter.com/ITArBQgcmJ Small Biz for Trump (@SmallBiz4Trump) May 15, 2017 May 15, 2017 Creating homebrew visual aids touting the accomplishments (or failures) of top politicians is a popular online pastime, not least because it's a cheap and easy way to propagandize, and because there are no pesky standards of fairness and accuracy to meet. As we've noted with regard to previous specimens (for example, a late-2016 meme touting the alleged economic achievements of President Obama), the graphic format lends itself to the display of cherry-picked facts to make a simplistic case with no semblance of context or nuance. achievements In this case, the claim is that, despite all the carping in the mainstream press about "chaos" and "ineptitude" in the Oval Office, President Trump has actually accomplished quite a lot during his first four months as chief executive, and thus you will not find mention of major campaign promises Trump has had difficulty keeping so far, such as instituting a Muslim immigration ban and building a wall on the Mexican border. Also, since it's very much a partisan case being made, there will be disagreement over what constitutes an "accomplishment." Some feats, such as reducing unemployment, are uncontroversial, while others, such as dismantling entire government agencies, aren't likely to be regarded as accomplishments by those who find the functions of those agencies critical. Here are the claims: 4.4 percent - lowest since May 2007 As reported in the Washington Post, government data released on 5 May 2017 indicated that the national unemployment rate hit a new low in April: reported The U.S. job market rebounded strongly last month and the unemployment rate fell to the lowest level seen in a decade, government data released Friday morning showed, calming fears that had bubbled up in the past month about the state of the economy. Employers added 211,000 jobs in April as the unemployment rate ticked down to 4.4 percent, the lowest level since May 2007. It bears pointing out that the jobless rate had already been on a steady decline since 2010. Further, unemployment hit a previous nine-year low of 4.6 percent in December 2016 when President Obama was still in office. It climbed back up to 4.8 percent in January, dipped to 4.7 percent in February, and to 4.5 percent in March 2017. unemployment To what degree short-term improvements in the economy since January can be attributed to a new chief executive whose economic policies remain nascent is perennially up for debate, though according to The New York Times' senior economic correspondent Neil Irwin, a "Trump effect" that is buoying corporate hiring policies after the election cannot be ruled out: according So does Mr. Trump deserve any credit for solid economic results? If you think the economy is driven by concrete, specific policies around taxes, spending, monetary policy and regulation, the answer is no. If you think that what really matters is the mood in the executive suite, then just maybe. SoftBank $50B Exxon $20B Hyundai $3.1B Apple $1B Chrysler $1B GM $1B Bayer AG $1BToyota $600M LG $250M This is a mostly-accurate, partial list of corporations who have announced investments in American facilities and/or jobs since the election of Donald Trump. With the exception of Bayer AG (which announced $8 billion in new investments, not $1 billion as claimed), the dollar amounts match those cited in press reports between January and April 2017 (sources: Softbank, Exxon Mobil Corp., Hyundai-Kia, Apple, Fiat Chrysler, General Motors, Bayer AG, Toyota, LG Electronics). Softbank Exxon Mobil Corp. Hyundai-Kia Apple Fiat Chrysler General Motors Bayer AG Toyota LG Electronics It's not necessarily accurate to characterize all of these commitments as "accomplishments" of President Trump, however. As CBS Moneywatch's Irina Ivanova reported in January 2017: reported Few of the jobs companies are promising to create in the U.S. can be attributed to a sudden renewed commitment to USA Inc. inspired by Trumps America First policies. Indeed, the businesses Trump has been quick to praise have been careful not to characterize their recent hiring announcements as new. And as usual with corporate investments of this scale, such plans are typically months or even years in the making, suggesting they long predate the presidential election. For example, Fiat Chrysler said their promise of a $1 billion investment in Michigan and Ohio plants, projected to create 2,000 jobs, was the "second phase" of an industrialization plan announced in 2016. GM's $1 billion investment was "several years in the making," according to sources cited by CBS. promise The largest of all the announced commitments, SoftBank's pledge of $50 billion, was also in the works long before Trump won the election: Another widely publicized corporate initiative that Trump trumpeted a promise by SoftBank to create 50,000 high-tech jobs in the U.S. was the result of a tech fund the company announced on Oct. 14 three weeks before the election. Given the massive tech industry in the U.S., economists say much of the planned $50 billion investment would have found its way to the states regardless of who occupied the White House. You dont just decide overnight to invest $3 billion, said Nathan Jensen, a professor at the University of Texas who studies interactions between government and corporations. Bayer AG's commitment to an $8 billion investment and the creation of 3,000 U.S. jobs was announced by the Trump transition team after the president-elect met in January 2017 with the CEOs of Bayer AG and Monsanto, who are planning a merger. Transition spokesman Sean Spicer credited Trump's negotiating skills for the pledge, but some analysts were skeptical that the companies had actually promised anything that wasn't already on the table when plans for the merger were first revealed in September 2016: commitment analysts Bayer and Monsanto said in a joint statement after Spicer's remarks that the "combined company expects to spend approximately $16 billion in R&D in agriculture over the next six years with at least half of this investment made in the United States." That amounts to about $2.7 billion a year, which roughly equates to what the combined companies already spend in that area globally, [Wall Street analyst Jeremy] Redenius said. As for the U.S. breakdown, he estimates it's likely close to half already; Monsanto spends $1.5 billion a year, the majority of which is in the U.S., he said, and Bayer already invests in R&D here as well. "Not an increase, but not substantially cutting," he said of the global figure. The merger, which awaits U.S. regulatory approval, is not likely to be completed until 2018, CNBC reported. reported $182B in April 2017 It is true that the U.S. Treasury reported a $182 billion budget surplus in April 2017, the largest April surplus since 2001 (and the second-largest in history), according to MarketWatch. It's unclear exactly how that surplus is attributable to President Trump, however. April is typically a surplus month because of tax receipts. In addition, citing a Congressional Budget Office (CBO) review as its source, Associated Press reported that the April 2017 surplus was "inflated" because of a tax deadline change allowing corporations to pay federal taxes in April that in previous years were paid in March. MarketWatch review inflated It remains to be seen what effect Tump's policies will have on the budget deficit for 2017 as a whole (the fiscal year ends on 30 September). The CBO projects a 4.6 percent drop in the deficit from what it was in 2016, but that is based on laws and policies already in effect when Trump took office. DOW at 20,896 The stock market can be fickle. As of April 29, the Dow Jones Industrial Average was at 20,940.51, 6.12 percent higher than when Trump took office positive movement, unquestionably. That number had risen to 20,981.94 by 16 May, then plummeted 372 points the next day as the market was shaken by news that Trump had shared classified information with Russian diplomats in the White House and attempted to divert FBI Director James Comey from an investigation of Trump's alleged ties to Russia before he fired him. 20,940.51 20,981.94 news Currently at 125.6 It's true that the Consumer Confidence Index, a metric assessing how ordinary consumers feel about the strength of the economy, hit 125.6 in March 2017, its highest point since 2000. It is also true that it fell five points to 120.3 the following month. Even so, it showed that consumers (as of April) had more confidence in the economy under Trump than under Obama, during whose administration the index never exceeded 113.7 (although it did manage to rise to that point after bottoming out in 2009 at 25). fell Passed 32 bills through Congress As of 17 May 2017, President Trump had signed 34 bills passed by Congress, a comparatively high number in such a short period of time (since Franklin Delano Roosevelt, who signed 76 pieces of legislation in his first 100 days, only Harry Truman, at 55, signed more). signed number That's not to say that all of the legislation signed by Trump between January and May 2017 was necessarily noteworthy, however. One bill changed the name of a Veterans Affairs outpatient clinic in Pago Pago, American Samoa; another renamed a VA health center in Pennsylvania; another approves the location of a memorial honoring Desert Storm and Desert Shield veterans; three appointed citizen regents to the board of the Smithsonian Institution. changed renamed Nor should it be assumed that Trump's signing of a given bill meant he or his administration was actively involved in its passage. Thirteen such bills nullifying federal regulations enacted during the Obama administration (such as H.J. Res. 69, reversing a U.S. Fish and Wildlife rule pertaining to Alaska's National Wildlife Refuges and S.J. Res. 34, reversing FCC Internet privacy rules) were rushed through Congress and quickly signed because they made use of the Congressional Review Act of 1996, which imposes a 60-day limit on the time allowed to overrule previously passed laws. Appointed constitutionalist Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch This is true. Gorsuch was confirmed by the U.S. Senate on 7 April 2017. true After 8 years of inaction This is true. Trump fulfilled a campaign promise by signing an executive order withdrawing the U.S. from the Trans-Pacific Partnership international trade agreement on 23 January 2017, one day after announcing he would renegotiate it. Despite President Obama's fervent support for the deal, many groups, including labor unions, were critical of the TPP, and CNN reported that its chances of approval by Congress were already "bleak." signing 40 percent fewer illegal border crossings and deportation of violent and repeat offenders The number of illegal border crossings from Mexico into the U.S. in February 2017 were indeed down 40 percent from the previous month, according to statistics provided by the Department of Homeland Security, and that downward trend, which had actually started the previous November, continued in March and April 2017. This U.S. Customs and Border Protection chart shows how striking the change was compared to the previous five years: statistics CNN Water contamination crisis started in April 2014 It's true that in March 2017, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) awarded a $100 million grant to the state of Michigan to upgrade the drinking water infrastructure in Flint, which experienced a lead pollution crisis potentially affecting as many as 100,000 people beginning in 2014. There has been some dispute, however, over whether this ought to be labeled a "Trump accomplishment" or an "Obama accomplishment." awarded crisis As we noted in a previous article, funding for the grant came from a bill signed by President Obama in 2016, though the monies weren't officially awarded until after he left office, hence some prefer to credit it to Trump. article Strengthening relationships China Japan Russia UK Tough on North Korea Tough on Syria Freed Humanitarian Workers from Egypt Although President Trump pledged to "strengthen" overseas relationships going into office and he had already met with several important foreign leaders by mid-May 2017, it is too soon to tell to what degree his promise will bear fruit. China: The president-elect got off to a rocky start with China in December by accepting a congratulatory call from the leader of Taiwan, which China views as a province,not an independent nation, and with which the U.S. does not have diplomatic relations. China lodged a formal complaint. In April, Trump met with Chinese President Xi Jinping, with whom he said he made "tremendous progress" but no breakthroughs. A trade deal negotiated by the Trump administration with China in May was rated "pretty good" by The Wall Street Journal. call met rated Japan: Japanese Prime Minister Abe, who has met twice with Trump, issued a joint statement with him reaffirming the "unshakable alliance" between the U.S. and Japan. That is despite Trump having called Japan a "currency manipulator" during the presidential campaign and pulling out of the TPP, which Abe supported. Whether the "very, very good chemistry" Trump says he has with Abe will improve the relationship between the two countries over the long haul remains to be seen. Russia: U.S.-Russia relations have been strained for many years, a situation not improved by Russia's attempts to meddle in the U.S. presidential election, nor by the fact that Trump associates are under investigation for possible collusion in that effort. A U.S. missile strike by Trump against Syria, with whose government Russia is closely allied, were strongly condemned by Russian leaders, who warned there could be "extremely serious" consequences. U.K.: British Prime Minister Theresa May was the first foreign leader to visit the Trump White House, and their cordial meeting was portrayed by both countries as a renewal of the "special relationship" between the U.S and the U.K. According to the BBC, Obama was seen by many Britons as more interested in the European Union as a whole than in the U.K. itself, while Trump, who was in favor of Brexit, is perceived as the opposite. BBC Tough on Korea? President Trump has employed what the Washington Post calls "hard-line rhetoric" against North Korea, including threats of force, in hopes of squelching that county's increasing militarism, a strategy some experts dismiss as "macho posturing" that could escalate into a Cuban Missile Crisis-like confrontation. calls experts Tough on Syria? In April 2017, Trump ordered U.S. missile strikes against an air base in Syria in response to an alleged chemical weapons attack on civilians by the Syrian government, which has been known to brutalize its own people during the ongoing civil war there. Trump's gesture came up short, however, in that the Syrian Air Force was able to launch a new attack against rebel forces from that same base just hours later. attack Humanitarian workers in Egypt: In April 2017 President Trump negotiated the release of U.S.. citizen Aya Hijazi, her Egyptian husband, and four other humanitarian workers from a prison in Cairo, Egypt, where they had been locked up since 2014, without evidence or trial, on charges of child abuse and trafficking. negotiated Trimming the fat at many overblown government agencies and promoting small business growth by reigning in the EPA Although it is true that President Trump signed an executive order on 13 March 2017 directing the heads of executive branch departments to eliminate all "unnecessary" agencies and reorganize those that remain to improve their "efficiency, effectiveness, and accountability," the order gave said department heads six months from the date of signing to come up with suggestions for this process, so not much fat has been trimmed thus far despite the groundwork being laid. signed Regarding efforts to "reign in" the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), a CNN report confirms that's been among Trump's top priorities from the start: priorities President Donald Trump made a campaign trail promise to eliminate the Environmental Protection Agency a department once looked to as an important national force tackling climate change and during his first 100 days in office has held true to his word, taking swift strides towards dismantling the agency and rolling back regulations. Alongside EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt, a former Oklahoma attorney general who once worked tangentially with the fossil fuel industry to oppose Obama-era regulations, the Trump administration has so far issued a flurry of EPA-focused executive orders, proposed employee buyouts, handed down a social media gag order and is proposing significant cuts to the EPA budget. The National Federation of Independent Business (NFIB), a small business advocacy group, has hailed Trump's commitment to cutting "burdensome regulations," while environmental protection groups see it as a threat to public health and the future of the planet. hailed threat Finished Dakota Access Pipeline & reversed Obama's "Land Grab" EO, freeing US to use our own natural resources The controversial Dakota Access Pipeline project, halted under President Obama, was revived by President Trump and will begin commercial operations on 1 June 2017. Trump also issued an executive order directing a review of lands designated as national monuments: halted revived directing Specifically, the review will consider all national monument designations of federal public lands since 1996 that are 100,000 acres or larger. Mr Trump singled out former President Barack Obamas egregious use of federal power in using the Antiquities Act to unilaterally place swaths of American land and water under federal control, adding, its time we ended this abusive practice. Antiquities Act As with many of the other items discussed above, whether or not one regards this as an "accomplishment" (as opposed, say, to a travesty) will depend almost entirely on one's political views going in. Baker, Peter and Davenport, Coral. "Trump Revives Keystone Pipeline Rejected by Obama." The New York Times. 24 January 2017. Bradner, Eric. "Trump's TPP Withdrawal: 5 Things to Know." CNN. 23 January 2017. Bunge, Jacob and Alessi, Christopher. "Bayer, After Trump Meeting, Pledges to Add Thousands of U.S. Jobs." The Wall Street Journal. 18 January 2017. Carroll, Lauren. "Trump Has Signed More Bills in 100 Days than Any President Since Truman, Spicer Says." Politifact.com. 27 April 2017. Crutsinger, Martin. "Federal Government Records $182.4 Billion Budget Surplus." Associated Press. 10 May 2017. DeCambre, Mark. "How Trump's Stock Market Ranks During His First 100 Days in Office." MarketWatch. 30 April 2017. Green, Miranda. "Trump's EPA: Cuts, Infighting and No Talk of Climate Change." CNN. 4 May 2017. Greene, Leonard. "Stock Market Suffers Biggest Blow Since President Trump Took Office." New York Daily News. 17 May 2017. Ivanova, Irina. "Trump Isn't the Reason Corporate America Is Investing in the U.S." CBS News. 18 January 2017. Kopan, Tal. "Does Border Drop Mean Trump's Tough Talk Is Working?" CNN. 9 March 2017. Kulish, Nicholas and Santos, Fernanda. "Illegal Border Crossings Appear to Drop Under Trump. The New York Times. 8 March 2017. Liptak, Adam and Flegenheimer, Matt. "Neil Gorsuch Confirmed by Senate as Supreme Court Justice." The New York Times. 7 April 2017. McKelvey, Tara. "Special Relationship Gets a New Lease on Life." BBC. 27 January 2017. Robb, Greg. "U.S. April Budget Surplus Rises to $182 Billion." MarketWatch. 10 May 2017. Rucker, Philip and DeYoung, Karen. "Freed Egyptian American Prisoner Returns Home Following Trump Intervention." The Washington Post. 20 April 2017. Ryan, Missy, Denyer, Simon and Rauhala, Emily. "On North Korea, Trump Administration Talks Tough but Hopes to Avoid War." The Washington Post. 19 April 2017. Ryan, Tim. "Trump Directs Department Heads to Trim Agency Fat." Courthouse News. 14 March 2017. Savransky, Rebecca. "Tillerson: U.S.-Russia Relationship 'At an All-Time Low Point' Since End of Cold War." The Hill. 14 May 2017. Thomas, Lauren. "Consumer Confidence Lags in April as Americans Are Less Optimistic About Economy." CNBC. 25 April 2017. Watson, Kathryn. "Trump Executive Order Calls for Review of 'Egregious' Federal Land Grab." CBS News. 26 April 2017. Boston Herald. "Editorial: Getting Tough in Syria." 20 May 2017. CBO.gov. "Monthly Budget Review for April 2017." 5 May 2017. Democracy Now. "Trump's Proposed EPA Cuts Threaten Health & Lives of Tens of Millions of Americans." 3 March 2017. NFIB.com. "In Targeting the Waters of the United States Rule, President Trump Looks to Dismantle Another Burdensome Regulation." 3 March 2017. PRNewsWire.com. "The Conference Board Consumer Confidence Index Declined in April." 25 April 2017. TradingEconomics.com. "United States Unemployment Rate." 5 May 2017. U.S. Customs and Border Protection. "Southwest Border Migration." 1 May 2017. The Wall Street Journal. "Japan's Abe Talks Trump." 22 May 2017. The Wall Street Journal. "Trump's Pretty Good China Deal." 14 May 2017.

neutral

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/trump-reverses-insecticide-ban-dow-chemicals/

Did President Trump Reverse an Insecticide Ban After Receiving $1 Million from Dow Chemicals?

Alex Kasprak

11/27/2017

The insecticide chlorpyrifos, sold under the brand names Lorsban, Dursban, and others, has been the subject of regulatory battles for decades. It was first introduced as a pesticide in 1965, and it remains the most commonly applied pesticide in the United States. In 1996, the Clinton administration signed into law the Food Quality Protection Act, which mandated regular scientific reviews and safety evaluations of existing pesticides based on childrens health safety benchmarks. One of the actions resulting from this review was a 2000 ban on chlorpyrifos for nearly all residential and indoor uses: Lorsban 1965 remains 2000 This action comes after completing the most extensive scientific review of the potential hazards from a pesticide ever conducted. This action the result of an agreement with the manufacturers will significantly minimize potential health risks from exposure to Dursban, also called chlorpyrifos, for all Americans, especially children. Following this ruling, the EPA additionally ruled that chlorpyrifos would remain classified as safe for use in other agricultural and industrial settings. This latter ruling resulted in a September 2007 petition to the EPA filed by the Pesticide Action Network of North America and the Natural Resources Defense Council, both of which jointly requested that the agency ban the pesticide or issue final rulings on their acceptable levels (legally termed tolerances) in food. In September 2015, the Ninth Circuit court of appeals mandated that the EPA respond to this petition by either banning the chemical completely or issuing final rulings on tolerances of the chemicals residue on food products by October 31, 2015. mandated Following this court order, the EPA conducted a lengthy review and delivered a proposal on 6 November 2015, which suggested as requested by the petition that all currently published tolerances regarding chlorpyrifos residue on food should be revoked: proposal EPA is proposing to revoke all tolerances for residues of the insecticide chlorpyrifos [including] tolerances for residues of chlorpyrifos on specific food commodities; on all food commodities treated in food handling and food service establishments in accordance with prescribed conditions; and on specific commodities when used under regional registrations. The agency is proposing to revoke all of these tolerances because EPA cannot, at this time, determine that aggregate exposure to residues of chlorpyrifos, including all anticipated dietary exposures and all other non-occupational exposures for which there is reliable information, are safe. In March 2017, before the EPAs proposal was implemented, Scott Pruitt the new EPA administrator under President Donald Trump reversed course and argued the previous administrations scientific rationale was dubious, denying the petition: reversed course In October 2015, under the previous Administration, EPA proposed to revoke all food residue tolerances for chlorpyrifos, an active ingredient in insecticides. This proposal was issued in response to a petition from the Natural Resources Defense Council and Pesticide Action Network North America. The October 2015 proposal largely relied on certain epidemiological study outcomes, whose application is novel and uncertain, to reach its conclusions. The decision to deny the petition faced renewed scrutiny because the CEO of Dow Chemical, Andrew Liveris, had been appointed by Trump to a White House manufacturing working group, and his company subsequently donated $1 million to Donald Trumps inauguration fund. Liveris also was scrutinized over reports that he met with Pruitt prior to his announcement reversing the ban. appointed reports On 19 November 2017, using text from a viral Chelsea Handler tweet, the progressive Facebook Page "Really American" launched a petition with a call to action: using text We explore each component of this memetic claim: Chlorpyrifos Was Invented by the Nazis as a Nerve Agent false. Chlorpyrifos is a specific chemical that belongs to a broader class of chemicals called organophosphates. While the Nazis were at the forefront of developing this broader class as both weapons and insecticides, they can not be credited with inventing chlorpyrifos specifically. In the 1930s, a German researcher named Gerhard Schrader at German chemical producer IG Farben (infamous for producing the gas most commonly employed at Nazi death camps) discovered that organophosphates interact with cholinesterase, an enzyme that aids in the production of an important neurotransmitter in animals. IG Farben interact Originally this effect was explored as a way to produce an insecticide, but one of Schrader's formulations, named Preparation 9/91, ended up being extremely toxic to humans. Schrader himself required hospitalization as a result of his own interaction with it. This discovery was reported to Nazi authorities, who mandated that all German researchers report any scientific development that could have military applications to the regime. required Shraders discovery led to the discovery and production of some of the worlds most infamous organophosphate nerve gases, including Tabun and Sarin gases. Other countries, including Britain and the United States, also began research into organophosphates during WWII as weapons. After the war ended, research resumed into organophosphate use as an insecticide. led Chlorpyrifos, a specific formulation of an organophosphate, is included as one of many chemicals assigned to the Dow Chemical company in a 1963 patent which lists United States-based researcher Raymond Rigterink as the inventor. The only connection that chlorpyrifos has to the Nazi regime is its foundational work on the biological effects of organophosphates that researchers performed prior to, and during, WWII. Many nations built on this work after the war. patent Chlorpyrifos Causes Brain Damage Unproven, but likely. That organophosphates can be toxic to humans is nothing new. The idea, in developing such a chemical for use an insecticide, is to engineer an organophosphate that is below the threshold for affecting the human nervous system (via its effect on cholinesterase, something scientifically referred to as AChE inhibition) but is still toxic to insects. AChE inhibition From a scientific standpoint, the main controversy surrounds the potential residual effects that chlorpyrifos may have on the neurological development of fetuses and young children, which some studies have documented even at levels well below what is currently considered acceptable. In their 2016 decision to ban all tolerances for the chemical on food, the Environmental Protection Agency stated: In summary, the EPAs assessment is that the [Columbia Center for Childrens Environmental Health, CCCEH] study, with supporting results from the other 2 U.S. cohort studies and the seven additional epidemiological studies reviewed in 2015, provides sufficient evidence that there are neurodevelopmental effects occurring at chlorpyrifos exposure levels below that required for AChE inhibition. The primary study cited by the EPA was conducted by the Columbia Center for Childrens Environmental Health and published in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences in 2012. This study compared fetal exposure to chlorpyrifos (based on sampling of blood in the mother's umbilical cord) to differences in brain development: study We investigated associations between [chlorpyrifos, CPF] exposure and brain morphology using magnetic resonance imaging in 40 children, 5.911.2 y, selected from a nonclinical, representative community-based cohort. Twenty high-exposure children (upper tertile of CPF concentrations in umbilical cord blood) were compared with 20 low-exposure children on cortical surface features [...]. In a press release this study, CCCEH said: press release Even low to moderate levels of exposure to the insecticide chlorpyrifos during pregnancy may lead to long-term, potentially irreversible changes in the brain structure of the child [...] Changes were visible across the surface of the brain, with abnormal enlargement of some areas and thinning in others. The disturbances in brain structure are consistent with the IQ deficits previously reported in the children with high exposure levels of [...] CPF, suggesting a link between prenatal exposure to CPF and deficits in IQ and working memory at age 7. previously reported [...] Notably, the brain abnormalities appeared to occur at exposure levels below the current EPA threshold for toxicity, which is based on exposures high enough to inhibit the action of the key neurological enzyme cholinesterase. The present findings suggest that the mechanism underlying structural changes in the brain may involve other pathways. There have been several large-scale studies that show a similar association between exposure to chlorpyrifos and other organophosphates to neurological problems, and there have been several studies proposing hypotheses about why such an association exists, but there lacks a rigorous consensus on the later point. The Pruitt EPA, in essence, has used this uncertainty to punt a decision on its neurological effects to a later review date: lacks date Following a review of comments on both the November 2015 proposal and the November 2016 notice of data availability, EPA has concluded that, despite several years of study, the science addressing neurodevelopmental effects remains unresolved and that further evaluation of the science during the remaining time for completion of registration review is warranted to achieve greater certainty as to whether the potential exists for adverse neurodevelopmental effects to occur from current human exposures to chlorpyrifos. EPA has therefore concluded that it will not complete the human health portion of the registration review or any associated tolerance revocation of chlorpyrifos without first attempting to come to a clearer scientific resolution on those issues. As noted, Congress has provided that EPA must complete registration review by October 1, 2022. Because the 9th Circuit's August 12, 2016 order has made clear, however, that further extensions to the March 31, 2017 deadline for responding to the Petition would not be granted, EPA is today also denying all remaining petition claims. Pruitt highlighted specific methodological problems and uncertainties scientists raised during their 2016 review, but importantly neglected to mention that at the time of the panels meeting, they still concluded that the ban was necessary even if the mechanistic aspects of chlorpyrifos danger are not yet settled. Jim Jones, the former head of the EPA chemical safety unit, contended in an interview with the New York Times that the science behind the neurological risks of chlorpyrifos is not questioned: neglected interview They are ignoring the science that is pretty solid, Mr. Jones said, adding that he believed the ruling would put farm workers and exposed children at unnecessary risk. Speaking of the EPAs reversal, the Union of Concerned Scientists issued a statement suggesting that Pruitts decision was not based on science, arguing an ethical responsibility to use science for the good of humanity: arguing Science should be used to prevent harm and to protect lives. The decision to put the agenda of a corporation over the lives and wellbeing of Americans is an egregious failure of our government to use strong, independent science to protect public health and safety. Chlorpyrifos Was Supposed to Be Banned in 2017, but Trump Is Now Allowing It True. In a broad sense, the "blame" for this chlorpyrifos ban reversal belongs only indirectly to Trump himself. He did, however, appoint anti-regulation crusader Scott Pruitt as administrator of the EPA, who subsequently decided to exercise his executive authority to reject the chlorpyrifos petition and reverse the previous EPAs ban, which is a power afforded to Pruitt through the United States Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act: anti-regulation afforded Act: Under section 408(d)(4) of the FFDCA, EPA is authorized to respond to a section 408( d) petition to revoke tolerance either by issuing a final rule revoking the tolerances, issuing a proposed rule, or issuing an order denying the Petition. If Pruitt had not exercised this authority, the EPA had a court-mandated deadline to make a ruling on the matter by 31 March 2017. Prior to this deadline, Pruitt issued his own ruling rejecting the work done by previous advisory boards. Had a different administrator been in charge, that call may have been very different. to make a ruling As a result of Trump and Pruitts actions, chlorpyrifos will continue to be allowed to be sprayed on food items, but it should be noted that this represents no change in current policy; it merely blocks what would likely have been the implementation of a change that would have otherwise taken effect in March 2017. Dow Chemicals Gave President Trump $1 Million for His Inauguration True. Dow Chemicals donated one million dollars to Trumps inaugural committee, a donation described by political news site TheHill.com as among Trumps largest. Dow also donated $250,000 to the 2005 George W. Bush inaugural committee (whose administration also sought to limit regulation on chlorpyrifos), but not to either the 2009 or 2013 Obama inaugural funds. described 2009 2013 Responding to an April 2017 report alleging that Dow attempted to kill efforts to study the negative effects of chlorpyrifos, Dow contended that the gift was legal and not part of an influence campaign: report Rachelle Schikorra, the director of public affairs for Dow Chemical, said any suggestion that the companys $1 million donation to Trumps inaugural committee was intended to help influence regulatory decisions is completely off the mark. Dow actively participates in policymaking and political processes, including political contributions to candidates, parties and causes, in compliance with all applicable federal and state laws, Schikorra said. Dow maintains and is committed to the highest standard of ethical conduct in all such activity. Although it is clear that Dow Chemicals actively lobbied against a chlorpyrifos ban, we cannot rule on claims that their $1 million donation influenced Trump or Pruitt to change their view on the issue. lobbied While some aspects of the text included in the Chelsea Handler tweet and Really American petition, such as chlorpyrifoss connection to Nazi Germany and the scientific degree to which irreversible brain damage has been alleged, include some uncertainty, the bulk of its claims are true. The EPAs scientific community was certain enough, despite questions about methods or mechanisms, to agree with the petition that chlorpyrifos posed a risk to neurological health and should be banned. President Donald Trump, who did receive a significant amount of money from Dow Chemicals for his inauguration, unilaterally reversed this decision through his administrator Pruitts actions. Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry. "Chlorpyrifos: Production, Import/export, Use, and Disposal. Accessed 27 November 2017. Environmental Protection Agency. "Chlorpyrifos. Archived from 19 January 2017. Environmental Protection Agency. "Dursban Announcement. 8 June 2000. United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. "Pesticide Action Network North America; Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., v. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 10 August 2015. Regulations.gov. "Tolerance Revocations: Chlorpyrifos. 6 November 2016. Environmental Protection Agency. "EPA Administrator Pruitt Denies Petition to Ban Widely Used Pesticide. 29 March 2017. Biesecker, Michael. "Pesticide Maker Tries to Kill Risk Study." Associated Press. 20 April 2017. Associated Press. "EPA Chief Met with Dow Chemical CEO Before Deciding Not to Ban Toxic Pesticide. 30 June 2017. Everts, Sarah. "The Nazi Origins of Deadly Nerve Gases." C&EN. 17 October 2016. Rauh, Virginia A. et al. "Brain Anomalies in Children Exposed Prenatally to a Common Organophosphate Pesticide" Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 30 April 2012. Columbia Center for Childrens Environmental Health. "Insecticide Linked to Altered Brain Structure. 30 April 2012. Environmental Protection Agency. "Transmittal of Meeting Minutes of the April 19-21 2016 FIFRA SAP Meeting Held to Consider and Review Scientific Issues Associated with Chlorpyrifos: Analysis of Biomonitoring Data? 21 April 2016. Environmental Protection Agency. "Chlorpyrifos; Order Denying PANNA and NRDC's Petition to Revoke Tolerances. March 2017. Lipton, Eric. "E.P.A. Chief, Rejecting Agencys Science, Chooses Not to Ban Insecticide." The New York Times. 29 March 2017. Union of Concerned Scientists. "How Dow Chemical Influenced the EPA to Ignore the Scientific Evidence on Chlorpyrifos. April 2017. Goodell, Jeff. "Scott Pruitt's Crimes Against Nature." Rolling Stone. 27 July 2017. Wilson, Megan R. "Corporate Donors to Trump Inaugural Revealed." Rolling Stone. 2 February 2017.

neutral

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/lou-holtz-didn39t-nail-it/

Lou Holtz Nails It

David Mikkelson

12/30/2014

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

neutral

https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2015/sep/02/jeb-bush/did-donald-trump-propose-biggest-tax-hike-history-/

Trump proposed enacting the largest tax increase in American history.

Amy Sherman

09/02/2015

Republican candidates continue to attack Donald Trump onhispastpositions,claiming he is not the conservative he says he is today. Jeb Bush picked up the attack by taking on Trump over tax policy. I cut taxes every year, Bush said at an Aug. 20 rally in New Hampshire. Hes proposed the largest tax increase in mankinds history, not just our own countrys history. The next day Bush repeated the basic claim in afundraising email: Trump proposed enacting the largest tax increase in American history. Seems like something worth fact-checking. Trumps tax plan in 1999 A spokesman for Bush told us that the former Florida governor was referring to Trumps1999 proposaltoraise taxeson the rich. Trump, who at the time was considering a run for president under the Reform Party, proposed a one-time tax on individuals and trusts with a worth of $10 million or more. Trump said the one-time tax of 14.25 percent would raise $5.7 trillion and wipe out the debt. Trump said if the rich were having trouble liquidating their assets they could pay off their tax over 10 years. TheNew York Daily Newsfeatured a photograph of Trump with the words, SOAK THE RICH. Experts at the time bashed Trumps plan as economically and politically unviable. I don't think the plan makes much economic sense, said Stephen Moore, director of fiscal policy studies at the libertarian Cato Institute told theNew York Timesin 1999. The fact is that most people's wealth that has been built up over 10, 20 or 50 years is wealth that has already been taxed. Daniel Mitchell, a senior fellow at the Heritage Foundation in 1999 said of Trumps plan at the time, The lunacy of this idea is almost indescribable. He raised concerns about the economic consequences including that households would shift assets overseas to try to avoid confiscation. Trump calculated that 1 percent of Americans would pay the Trump tax. He proposed that half the savings would go toward middle-class tax cuts and the other half for Social Security. A spokeswoman for Trumps2016 presidential campaign, Hope Hicks, wouldnt tell us if Trump still supports that plan and said that he will release his current tax plan later in September. But in 2011, talk show host George Stephanopoulos asked Trump if he still supported that tax, and Trump said it was no longer viable. Well, at a time, it would have paid off the deficit. I mean, you wouldn't have a deficit, at that time, Trump said (though he confuseddebt and deficit). Unfortunately, the world has changed, today you can't do it. Today, and I'm very strongly against tax increases. And the reason I'm- So, you're no longer for that tax? Stephanopoulos asked. No, no. I'm no longer for that tax, no, Trump said. Would Trumps tax have broken records? Many tax experts told us that indeed Trumps plan would have been record-breaking in terms of revenue, but they said it was never going to happen and lacked major details. It certainly would have been the biggest ever simply because of its sheer size -- it was trillions of dollars, said Roberton Williams, a fellow at the Tax Policy Center. However, its a totally crazy idea. ... I don't think anybody was taking it seriously -- it was Donald Trump being Donald Trump. The United States gross domestic product in 1999 was $9.7 trillion, so if Trumps tax had raised $5.7 trillion, that would have been 59 percent of GDP, said Chris Edwards of the libertarian Cato Institute. Federal tax hikes typically are no more than 1 percent of GDP, Edwards said. The Bush 1990 hike and Clinton 1993 hike were less than 1 percent of GDP over 5 years whereas Trumps tax would have been 59 percent one time in one year, Edwards said. PolitiFact previously has lookedinto the largest tax increases as a percentage of GDP. Topping the list from 1940-2006 was the Revenue Act of 1942, which was about 5 percent of GDP. Richard Phillips, an expert at the Citizens for Tax Justice research group, which aims to require the wealthy to pay their fair share, said that Trumps one-time tax proposal cant be compared to conventional tax reform, which typically refers to taxes collected annually. His estimate was based on a back of the envelope calculation of total wealth of individuals with over $10 million in assets multiplied by the 14.25 percent rate, he said. There are very real questions as to whether you could plausibly tax all forms of wealth and whether wealthy individuals would be able to take action to shield large swaths of their wealth from taxation. Additionally, Trump proposed repealing the estate tax and enacting other tax cuts using the revenue that the federal government would save by no longer paying interest on the national debt. Its not clear how much those tax cuts would have cost and how much of the tax they would offset over time, Phillips said. Our ruling Bush said, Trump proposed enacting the largest tax increase in American history. Yes, in 1999, Trump proposed a historically large one-time tax increase. Trump said the tax would have raised $5.7 trillion and wiped out the national debt. It would have applied only to the wealthiest Americans. This claim rates True.

true

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/every-other-given-sunday/

Obama Places Limits on Church Services

David Mikkelson

04/14/2015

Claim: President Obama has limited churches to offering twice-monthly services. Example: [Collected via Twitter, April 2015] Is this true about Obama? Is he really making people go to church two times a month instead of four times? Wtf Origins: On 8 April 2015, the News Examiner web site published an article reporting that President Obama had limited churches to offering twice-monthly services in order to ensure Americans worked harder: article At a press conference today, President Barack Obama announced he would be implementing a new law changing the current monthly 4-Week church services down to 2 times a month. Obama says during these rough economic times it crucial to take drastic measures so Americans can work harder and pray less. These effects are to take place May 1st of this year and analyst expect this move to increase the economy by more than 40%. Americans tend to work hard and pray harder. I'm asking them to make these changes for the good of the country during these hard times. If things don't work out within 6 months we can always switch back to the old way, but for now, lets give this a solid shot and see where it takes us. These are crucial times my friends and we must stick together as a country if we are going to succeed. If you have any questions about President Obama's new 2-week church schedule that will be taking place May 1st a hotline has been set up to answer all your questions at (785) 273-0325. President Obama could not have made any such announcement, as he has no authority to limit church services, and any attempt to do so would be an obvious violation of the First Amendment's protections of religious freedom. The referenced article was a just another hoax from the News Examiner, a fake news site started by Paul Horner, the former lead writer for the similarly fake National Report web site, after Facebook implemented a crackdown on the posting of hoax articles that virtually destroyed the latter site's reach. crackdown Previous hoaxes from the same site include the false claim that the world's first head transplant was successfully performed in South Africa in April 2015. head transplant The "hotline" phone number provided in the article is actually that of the infamous Westboro Baptist Church. Last updated: 14 April 2015

false

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/confederate-soldiers-veterans/

Did Congress Designate Confederate Soldiers as United States Veterans?

Kim LaCapria

08/24/2017

In August 2017, a national debate about the display of Confederate flags and monuments once again gained steam after a protest of the planned removal of a statue of Confederate General Robert E. Lee from a park in Charlottesville, Virginia turned deadly. Charlottesville In the wake of that incident, several cities (and protestors) moved to quickly take down monuments, statues, and plaques. Meanwhile, rumors appeared that Congress had passed two laws retroactively declaring Confederate soldiers United States veterans, which means that removing the statues is illegal. Some of the claims were bolstered by a link to an extremely dubious web site: statues illegal dubious Confederate soldiers, sailors, and Marines that fought in the Civil war were made U.S. Veterans by an act of Congress in in 1957, U.S. Public Law 85-425, Sec 410, Approved 23 May, 1958. This made all Confederate Army/ Navy/ Marine Veterans equal to U.S. Veterans. Additionally, under U.S. Public Law 810, Approved by the 17th Congress on 26 Feb 1929 the War Department was directed to erect headstones and recognize Confederate grave sites as U.S. War dead grave sites. Just for the record the last Confederate veteran died in 1958. So, in essence, when you remove a Confederate statue, monument or headstone, you are in fact, removing a statue, monument or head stone of a U.S. VETERAN. The rumor also appeared as a meme on the Facebook page "Uncle Sam's Misguided Children" on 16 August 2017: appeared meme The same image was previously shared by the same Facebook page in a July 2015, just after a gunman in Charleston, South Carolina, killed nine black churchgoers. According to the meme, two acts of Congress (Public Law 810 of 1929 and Public Law 85-425 of 1958) bestows upon Confederate soldiers the benefits and status of a United States military veteran. shared Charleston Public Law 810 refers to Part II, Chapter 23 of U.S. Code 38 which says that the government should, when requested, pay to put up monuments or headstones for unmarked graves for three groups of people: Code 38 (1) Any individual buried in a national cemetery or in a post cemetery. (2) Any individual eligible for burial in a national cemetery (but not buried there), except for those persons or classes of persons enumerated in section 2402(a)(4), (5), and (6) of this title. (3) Soldiers of the Union and Confederate Armies of the Civil War. No portion of the law appears to confer any privilege other than markers for graves of Confederate soldiers, nor does it grant Confederate soldiers status equal to those of veterans of the United States military. As of 1901, 482 individuals (not all soldiers) were already interred in the Confederate section of Arlington National Cemetery. interred In 1868, President Andrew Johnson pardoned Confederate soldiers, but did not grant them U.S. veteran status. Public Law 85-425 was passed 23 May 1958, entitling the widows of deceased Confederate soldiers (what few were left by 1958) to military pensions: pardoned passed To increase the monthly rates of pension payable to widows and former widows of deceased veterans of the Spanish-American War, Civil War, Indian War, and Mexican War, and provide pensions to widows of veterans who served in the military or naval forces of the Confederate States of America during the Civil War. A National Archives and Records Administration document details the matter of Confederate soldiers and pensions, and shows that the law seems to recognize those who fought for the Confederacy as veterans of a war, but not necessarily of the United States military. document The last recorded Confederate soldier deaths were in 1959, meaning that the 1957 law had negligible effects for those under its provisions, and in any event the law again conferred no status or other benefit to Confederate soldiers themselves. 1959 effects We reached out to several historians, none of whom wished to be quoted on the record. Several were dubious about the purported laws. One, a scholar who specializes in the Civil War and Reconstruction, told us that he, too, had trouble locating them: [It's] clear that Public Law 85-425, section 410 of 1958 was intended solely to provide a symbolic, Civil War Centennial gesture late-life pension to Walter Williams, the supposed only surviving Confederate veteran, and did not apply in any way to any other Confederate soldiers. Of course it turned out (as many people knew then) that Williams was not, in fact, a Confederate veteran but the desire to still have a living link to the War proved more important than fact. I have been no more successful than anyone else in finding the supposed Public Law 810 passed in 1929. But, given my experience with other claims based on legislation introduced or passed in Congress during that era, I would surmise that any such law was symbolic and meant as a gesture. On the other hand, there was the 1906 Foraker Law that began Federal involvement in caring for Confederate graves. You have probably seen this VA publication [PDF] and consulted John Neffs important work, Honoring the Civil War Dead (University Press of Kansas, 2005) about that issue. Neff makes clear that Federal money spent on maintaining Federal graves always kept the distinctions between the graves and the service of Federal versus Confederate soldiers. PDF [There is, however] the decision in the case of Patrick G. Griffin, III vs. Department of Veterans Affairs issued by the US Court of Appeals 4th District ... the decision ultimately affirmed the VAs contention that the Confederate prisoners buried at Point Lookout were buried and honored as American soldiers and, therefore (the issue before the court) there was no obligation to allow Confederate flags to fly over their graves. decision The cited ruling did not recognize the flag of the Confederacy as a legitimate American flag suitable for display in veterans' memorials. The Veterans' Affairs document to which the historian pointed, Federal Stewardship of Confederate Dead, contained historical context about Confederate burials and the evolution of federal involvement in the interment of their dead, and included President William McKinley's 1898 remarks to legislators in Georgia, noting that was a time when "no disabled Confederate veteran was eligible to live in a federal soldiers home, receive a pension, or, when they died, be buried in a national cemetery": The Department of War had been content to allow Northern cemeteries where Confederates were interred to languish. However, after the Spanish-American War (1898), the federal government, led by President William McKinley, in the spirit of national reconciliation and in the postwar glow of recent victory, proposed that a loving nation would reach out and care for the graves of fallen Confederates. Recognition of these places as hallowed ground and the individuals interred in them as deserving of honor began with the creation of the Confederate section at Arlington National Cemetery in 1900, and continued with the renewal through 1916 of 1906 legislation that authorized federal funds to mark all Confederate graves. Until the turn of the 20th century, United States government interment of Confederate soldiers generally involved deceased prisoners buried during the Civil War on Union lands. In 2013, The Atlantic reported that the United States government continued to follow through on its subsequent promises to provide for all Confederate war dead: reported Providing headstones for America's fallen soldiers is a tradition that goes back to laws passed in 1867 and 1873 that ordered the Department of War to properly establish national cemeteries and furnish graves with headstones ... It wasn't until the 20th century, though, that Confederate veterans were included in this tradition. It started with legislation passed in 1906, at first providing headstones for a very limited number of Confederate veterans, specifically prisoners of war, "who died in Federal prisons and military hospitals in the North and who were buried near their places of confinement." That mandate for the Department of War was expanded to all Confederate graves with a law passed in 1929. Responsibility for headstones was transferred to the VA in the National Cemeteries Act of 1973, which declared, "The Administrator shall furnish, when requested, appropriate Government headstones or markers at the expense of the United States for the unmarked graves of" a number of categories of veterans and those who'd served the country or were buried in a national cemetery, including specifically, "Soldiers of the Union and Confederate Armies of the Civil War." It's no coincidence that many of these changes in attitude and law, and the erection of so many Confederate monuments and memorials, occurred around the turn of the 20th century. They followed the federal withdrawal from the South in 1877, a strategic retreat from the failed policies of reconstruction. When a debate over Confederate monuments and flags came under the national spotlight in June 2015, codified changes in burials and pensions enacted in 1929 and 1958 were puffed up to suggest that a nebulous act of Congress, either in the 1920s or the 1950s, officially declared that Confederate soldiers were the same as United States veterans in the eyes of the federal government. However, no legislation either explicitly or implicitly granted Confederate soldiers status as United States veterans. Survivors of dead Confederate soldiers often took offense at measures appearing to equate them to Union soldiers, objections that died off as Southerners from the Civil War era did. Sturgis, Sue. "Busting The Myth That Congress Made Confederate Vets Into U.S. Vets." Facing South. 24 July 2015. Weiss, Steven I. "You Won't Believe What the Government Spends on Confederate Graves." The Atlantic. 19 July 2013. U.S. Code, Title 38. "Part II, Chapter 23, 2306: Headstones, Markers, And Burial Receptacles." Accessed 23 August 2017. 85th Congress, H.R. 358. "Public Law 85-424." 23 May 1958. Messages and Papers of the Presidents: Andrew Johnson. "Proclamation 179Granting Full Pardon And Amnesty For The Offense Of Treason Against The United States During The Late Civil War." 25 December 1868. Arlington National Cemetery. "Confederate Memorial." Accessed 23 August 2017. U.S.Department of Veterans Affairs,National Cemetery Administration. "Federal Stewardship Of Confederate Dead." July 2016. National Archives and Records Administration. "Pensions For Military Service In The Army Of The Confederate States Of America." Accessed 23 August 2017. Correction [25 August 2017]: Due to an editing error, a previous version of this article stated that President Andrew Jackson pardoned Confederate soldiers.

false

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/gold-tongued-mummies-egypt/

Were Gold-Tongued Mummies Discovered in Egypt?

Madison Dapcevich

02/08/2021

Archaeologists excavating a well-known burial site believed to be the final resting place of Cleopatra discovered a number of mummies dating back an estimated 2,000 years, some of which had golden tongues placed within their mouths. Kathleen Martinez, of the University of Santo Domingo in the Dominican Republic, reported that her team discovered 16 burial shafts at the Taposiris Magna Temple in western Alexandria. The find was shared in a Facebook post dated Jan. 29, 2021, and in a statement made by Egypts Ministry of Tourism and Antiquities. Facebook post Jan. 29, 2021 statement Taposiris Magna is an ancient town located on Lake Mariut in Egypt with a temple whose name implies that it was a tomb of Osiris, the Egyptian god of fertility and the afterlife. This nearly 100-foot-tall landmark has been theorized to be the final resting place of Queen Cleopatra, the Greek famed for her beauty who reigned over Egypt 2,000 years ago. Cleopatra was the last ruler of Egypt before it was annexed to Rome in 30 B.C., according to Ancient History. Taposiris Magna final resting place Ancient History Archaeologists said that the number of mummies in a poor state of preservation found inside the shafts highlighted the characteristics of mummifications in the Greek and Roman eras. According to research published by the Spurlock Museum of World Cultures, mummification processes were much different when Egypt was considered a part of Greece and Rome. In many instances, the art of embalming rapidly declined and embalmers no longer could no longer afford to take the time to efficiently mummify a body. Often, bodies had already started to decay before the process had begun. X-rays of mummies from this time period show wrappings that cover incomplete bodies with missing parts replaced by bones, pottery, or palm fibers, wrote the institution. The emphasis for these later mummies was not on the treatment of the body but on the external additions. Within the bandages were wrapped masks, breastplates, and foot coverings made of cartonnage. Among the items discovered were a funeral mask made for a woman. Egypt Ministry of Tourism and Antiquities And these external adornments were exactly what Martinez and her team discovered at Taposiris Magna. Some mummies were wrapped in gilded cartonnage, the material that is used to wrap a mummy, while amulets of tongue-shaped golden foil were placed inside the mouths of others in what is believed to have been part of a ritual to enable speaking in the afterworld. To be clear, they were not actual tongues covered in gold. Marble statues found at the temple were indicative of Roman and Greek art. Egypt Ministry of Tourism and Antiquities Of particular interest were two of the newly discovered mummies, one of which was adorned with decorations in the likeness of Osiris, the god of the afterlife, and the other of which wore what is known as the Atef crown. Also symbolic of Osiris, this feathered white crown was decorated with horns and a cobra snake on the forehead. The chest of this mummy also exhibited a gilded decoration in the form of a necklace with the head of a falcon, a symbol of the god Horus. Other significant archaeological treasures were discovered, according to Dr. Khaled Abu Al-Hamd, director general of Alexandria Antiquities, including a funeral mask designed for a woman. Also found were eight golden flakes representing a golden wreath, and eight masks of marble that also dated to the Greek and Roman areas. Excavations over the last decade have revealed important finds that have helped archaeologists piece together the history of the Temple of Tabosiris Magna. These include coins bearing the name and image of Cleopatra VII and other pieces of archaeological significance that prove the temple was built by King Ptolemy, the younger brother of Cleopatra who was ceremonially married to her so she could ascertain the throne.

true

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/stick-stiffed/

Stick Stiffed

David Mikkelson

01/10/1998

Claim: After a young man slips his date an aphrodisiac and leaves her alone in the car, he returns to find that she has impaled herself on the stick shift handle in a sexual frenzy. LEGEND Example: [Collected via e-mail, 1995] A friend at work says that when she was in high school a story circulated about a boy who wanted to sleep with his girlfriend, but she was unwilling. After he complained to his friends about this state of affairs, someone suggested he try Spanish fly. He agrees and gets some. They go to a drive-in movie, and he slips the spanish fly in her drink. A while passes and nothing happens, so he gets out to go to the bathroom. While he is out of the car she, in a fit of sexual frustration, impales herself on the gearshift. Variations: Where the boy takes his date varies: usually either a drive-in movie or parking at some secluded spot. The reason why the boy leaves his date alone for a few minutes also varies: generally either to go to the bathroom or to visit to the drive-in's snack bar. Sometimes one (or both) of the participants is a well-known community member. Origins: The legend that Spanish fly (or cantharides, a substance made from dried beetle remains) is a powerful aphrodisiac has been around for hundreds of years. The substance irritates the urogenital tract and produces an itching sensation in sensitive membranes, a feeling that allegedly increases a woman's desire for intercourse. No medical or scientific test has ever shown Spanish fly to be deserving of its reputation as an aphrodisiac, however, and its indiscriminate use can result in serious medical problems. The legend of the girl and the gearshift lever has been circulating since at least the early 1950s, and has probably been in existence as long as automobiles have been around. The legend combines the male fantasy of a "love potion" that turns any female into a willing sexual partner with a sort of medical "sorcerer's apprentice" horror story about the perils of the uninitiated attempting to cast powerful spells they can't control. Perhaps the latter point plays on the adolescent male fear of the (perceived) strength and irrationality of the female sex drive; the idea that even a "nice" girl is really a ravening sexual beast just waiting to be awakened, and that if you do arouse this primal lust, it will be more than you can handle. (Female hypersexuality is a common feature of adolescent sex legends.) There may also an element of the sexist "cain't leave 'em alone fer a minute" in the fact that the boy leaves, then comes back to find his girlfriend sexually active. The unfortunate young man then experiences the ultimate American male nightmare: being cuckolded by his own automobile. Last updated: 22 March 2011 The Choking Doberman Brunvand, Jan Harold. Too Good To Be . New York: W. W. Norton, 1999. ISBN 0-393-04734-2 (pp. 123-124). Too Good To Be Nordenberg, Tamar. "The Facts About Aphrodisiacs." FDA Consumer. January 1996 (p. 10). Reuben, David. Everything You Always Wanted to Know About Sex. New York: David McKay Company, 1970 (p. 73). Rodgers, Joann. "The Enduring Myth of Aphrodisiacs." The Los Angeles Times. 14 December 1987 (p. B4).

true

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/dog-leaf-cookie/

Did Negro the Colombian Dog Pay for Cookies with Leaves?

Jordan Liles

07/18/2022

On July 17, 2022, the Facebook page The Sized posteda meme that claimed a dog in Colombia named Negro was known for paying for cookies with leaves. We received mail from our readers that asked if this was true. We soon found that the story of the dog was real. posted The post has since been removed, but the meme lives on: The meme said, "After watching customers pay money to buy cookies from a store, a dog in Colombia named Negro started bringing a leaf in his mouth and presenting it to the store attendant. The leaf-cookie exchange has become a daily occurrence for extremely good boy Negro, who is a 'paying' customer just like everybody else." Colombia This true story appeared to have first been posted on Twitter on April 16, 2018. The tweet was liked and shared for a total of hundreds of thousands of engagements. Twitter tweet l es "NEGRO" y le gustan las galletas. Llega a la tienda del Colegio y como si fuera un estudiante ms, pide una galleta. No es fiada ni regalada. Negro ve qe los estudiantes llevan billetes y reciben algo a cambio. l toma una hoja del suelo y se acerca a comprar su antojito. pic.twitter.com/Hkf5kVsCKR pic.twitter.com/Hkf5kVsCKR Gloria? (@AyPlobnrg) April 16, 2018 April 16, 2018 The tweet translates to, "He is 'NEGRO' and he likes cookies. He arrives at the school store and as if he were just another student, he asks for a cookie. It is not trusted or given away. Black sees that the students carry bills and receive something in return. He picks up a leaf from the ground and goes to buy his snack." According to The Dodo, the store referenced in the meme was a small shop on the campus of Institucin Educativa Tcnico Diversificado de Monterrey, which is located in Monterrey, Colombia. The Dodo Institucin Educativa Tcnico Diversificado de Monterrey Apparently, this tale of man's best friend was once subjected to a bit of misinformation. The La FM Facebook page previously falsely claimed that the story took place in Mexico. Commenters called out La FM for the mistake. Facebook falsely claimed This picture of the school was posted on its Facebook page. The article from The Dodo said that, as of 2018, Negro the dog was serving as a "guardian of sorts," watching over the children's daily activities. He had been cared for by the school's faculty since around 2013. According to the story, one day Negro decided to try something that he witnessed the students doing at the shop: Early on in Negro's tenure at the school, he came to be aware of the little store on campus where students gather to buy things on their breaks; sometimes they'd buy him cookies sold there. This, evidently, is where the dog first learned aboutcommerce and decided to try it out himself. "He would go to the store and watch the children give money and receive something in exchange," teacher Angela Garcia Bernal told The Dodo. "Then one day, spontaneous, he appeared with a leaf in his mouth, wagging his tail and letting it be known that he wanted a cookie." The Dodo added that, "Staff have made sure he's only getting treatssafe for dogs to eat, and they do limit his purchases to just a couple a day (to stave off inflation in both the leafy currency and his waistline)." We didn't find any other pictures of Negro on the school's Facebook page. His most recent photographs were posted in 2018. Note: We reached out to Angela Garcia Bernal, who was previously interviewed by The Dodo. However, we were unlikely to receive a response any time soon, as our message went to her message requests. Messenger does not issue notifications for message requests from unknown senders. Institucin Educativa Tcnico Diversificado de Monterrey. https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100057287746349. Messenger, Stephen. "Dog Always Brings A Leaf To 'Buy' Himself Treats At The Store." The Dodo, 25 Apr. 2018, https://www.thedodo.com/close-to-home/dog-buys-treats-using-leaf.

true