The (Wisconsin) governor has proposed tax giveaways to corporations.
The budget crisis in Wisconsin has spurred a national discussion on spending priorities, including among the commentators on  ABC'sThis Week with Christiane Amanpour.Amanpour asked her guests if the plans in Wisconsin were shared sacrifice.Where is the sacrifice going to be borne the most? And is it equitable? Amanpour asked.Donna Brazile, a Democratic strategist, said it wasnt.Just like the tea party went out there and grabbed the microphone, what you have is grassroots people out there saying, No more, no more budget cuts on the back of working people, Brazile said. The governor has proposed tax giveaways to corporations.We're trying to balance the budgets on the backs of the poor and the middle class, and that's why workers are standing up for their rights, she said a little later in the program.The word giveaway is a loaded term for tax cuts, but we feel its fair to fact-check whether Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker has proposed tax breaks for corporations while advocating budget cuts for public workers.Walkers budget proposal asks state workers to pay more for their pensions and health insurance, which reduces take-home pay. But it also sets significant limits on collective bargaining power formost public sector unions, which has enraged union members and sparked protests at the state capitol.We next looked to see if Walker has proposed tax cuts for corporations.We found Walker has already signed bills that cut taxes for corporations.Walker signed a law on Jan. 31 that says that companies that relocate to Wisconsin will not have to pay corporate taxes for two years. The law stipulates that the company must move at least 51 percent of the workers on its payroll or at least those who account for $200,000 in wages. Walker also signed into law a bill that gives small tax breaks to companies that create jobs. Its debatable whether these could fairly be considered giveaways, since they are intended to reward companies for creating jobs.But Walker proposed additional tax breaks for business during the campaign for governor. PolitiFact Wisconsin documented those promises on PolitiFacts Walk-O-Meter, a database of Walkers campaign promises. That includesreducing taxes on employersand repealing the combined reporting requirement for business taxes, a measure that increased tax revenues and was approved in 2009.If you elect me as your next governor, Ill get government out of the way and lower the tax burden so Wisconsin business owners and factories can create 250,000 jobs and 10,000 businesses in our state by 2015, said Walker during the campaign.We also found that Walker told the Metropolitan Milwaukee Association of Commerce during the campaign thathe supportedefforts to repeal the corporate income tax. Though its a fine distinction, we should note that we were not able to find statements from Walker proposing a repeal, so its not a promise listed in the Walk-O-Meter database.Brazile said, The (Wisconsin) governor has proposed tax giveaways to corporations. The tax breaks he signed into law were linked to job growth, which means they were not necessarily giveaways. But he has proposed lower taxes for all businesses. And hes supported those tax cuts even in the face of a tight budget, saying they would lead to job growth. Because Brazile gets Walkers basic position on business taxes right -- he wants them lower -- we rate her statement Mostly True.
There's no evidence that Oprah Winfrey suffered a "tragedy" or died in early May 2022, nor did she endorse keto weight loss gummies. These claims, one of which resembled a death hoax, came from misleading text messages that were sent out to an unknown number of recipients. Oprah Winfrey keto Scammers sent the text messages with the words, "Fans react to the Oprah tragedy." The texts also included a link: Scammers Oprah    We don't recommend trusting text messages like these. Upon clicking the link, we were led to a fraudulent page that was purposely designed to mimic a Time magazine article. In reality, Time.com had nothing to do with the page. This bore similarities to another keto scam that used the image and likeness of "The Price Is Right" host Drew Carey, which we previously reported on days before publishing this story. Time magazine Time.com The Price Is Right Drew Carey reported The fake Time.com article mentioned nothing of Winfrey having died or suffered a tragedy, as the text messages were nothing more than misleading clickbait. The article falsely claimed Winfrey had personally endorsed keto weight loss gummies such as Keto Start ACV, Gemini Keto, Kwazi Keto Gummies, Slim Mediq Keto Gummies, Trim Life Keto + ACV Gummies, and perhaps others. It used both her image and likeness to sell the products. Winfrey Winfrey    Winfrey did not endorse any of these keto weight loss gummy products, nor did she die or suffer a tragedy in early May 2022. We noticed that the product name changed in the article when we refreshed. This perhaps indicated that the product name was rotated on a timed basis or that specific product names showed up in specific locations, depending on the user's IP address. Basically, the fake Winfrey endorsement was used for more than one keto gummies product. The articles on genuinesmother.com and newsurvey22offer.com began as follows: Oprah Launches First-Ever "Weight Loss Gummy" in Partnership with Weight Watchers After Being Forced to Lose 60 LBS in Just Weeks (Time) - In an insightful 1-on-1 interview, one of the world's most prominent talk show host reveals how she forced Weight Watchers to create a transformational weight loss product the world has never seen before. Gifted host, and business genius, Oprah Winfrey, made headlines after bringing the first ever "Weight Loss Gummy" to the market on live TV last week in memory of her heart failure just last year. Ever since Oprah was forced to lose 60 lbs due to her heart failure risk, Winfrey and her team have been working alongside the team at Weight Watchers to develop a better weight loss product that helps people quickly lose weight and keep it off for good. Oprah Winfrey Despite what's mentioned in the article, we found no evidence that Winfrey had suffered heart failure in 2021, nor did we find any data on Weight Watchers supposedly creating keto weight loss gummies. Both of these claims appeared to have been fabricated. Winfrey Weight Watchers The article went on to make the baseless claim that the long-running program "The Oprah Winfrey Show" had been "canceled because the producers were not happy with" her "weight and appearance." It also claimed that Winfrey appeared on "The Ellen DeGeneres Show" to promote the keto weight loss gummies that had supposedly been created by Weight Watchers. This also was false. Winfrey Ellen DeGeneres Weight Watchers The end of the page claimed that Winfrey herself was offering a "free" bottle of keto weight loss gummies to readers, whether that product be Keto Start ACV, Gemini Keto, Kwazi Keto Gummies, Slim Mediq Keto Gummies, Trim Life Keto + ACV Gummies, or another one. The article said, "The only thing you'll need to pay for is the shipping rate, which is less than $6!" Winfrey However, we read through the terms and conditions pages for the various products, which were not easy to find. The fine print said that purchasing a "free" bottle of the keto weight loss gummies enrolled customers in a "trial," "program," or "subscription" that would eventually charge the full cost on a monthly basis. One product's terms and condition page said the charges would occur "every 30 days after the initial purchase." In order to cancel a recurring order, customers would first need to contact the company to initiate the process. However, that might be a problem for anyone who opted for a "free" bottle of Kwazi Keto Gummies. In the terms and conditions for that specific product, it listed no phone number. The contact page on the Kwazi Keto Gummies website showed only this email address: care@buykwazi.com. Even worse, the area that was supposed to show the return shipping address was left blank, making it more difficult for people to get their money back:    A package won't get very far without a shipping address. We contacted Kwazi Keto Gummies to ask about the absence of the phone number and shipping address. Within minutes, the page with the fake Time.com article that used Winfrey's image and likeness changed to a fake keto endorsement from the cast of "Shark Tank," which we reported on before. It then switched to another scam page that claimed singer-songwriter Adele Adkins, better known simply as Adele, had also endorsed keto weight loss gummies. All of this was false. reported Adele In sum, no, there's no evidence that Winfrey suffered a "tragedy" or died in early May 2022, nor did she endorse keto weight loss gummies that had been created by Weight Watchers. All of this was misleading and false. Winfrey Weight Watchers In October 2018, social media users shared a meme posted by the liberal Facebook page Occupy Democrats reporting a series of events involving Gulf states were the result of President Donald Trump and his son-in-law and adviser Jared Kushner "using American foreign policy to enrich themselves":   Although the sequence of events referenced in the meme is described accurately according to reputable news reports, the motives, connections, and causality the meme ascribes to those events have not been proved. It is true that Jared Kushner, who is married to President Trump's eldest daughter Ivanka, was in need of over a billion dollars to cover the mortgage on 666 Fifth Avenue, a 41-story Manhattan building he purchased for $1.8 billion in 2007, as the New Yorker reported on 2 March 2018: reported Kushner Companies co-owns 666 Fifth Avenue with another developer, Vornado Realty. In 2007, at Jared Kushners urging, the company paid $1.8 billion for the building -- at the time, the highest price ever paid for a New York office tower. The property occupies a prime spot between Fifty-second and Fifty-third streets, but it was built in 1957 and needed extensive upgrades. It still has many vacancies, and the $1.2 billion mortgage, which reportedly has ballooned to almost $1.5 billion, is due in February, 2019. Right now, it is not entirely clear whether Kushner Companies is in a position to repay or refinance the loan. The company hoped to knock the building down and put up another, twice as tall and far more luxurious, in its place, Bloomberg reported. It sought funds from investors in Saudi Arabia, Qatar, China, South Korea, Israel and France. No investors were announced for the plan, described by many as prohibitively expensive. That same day, The Intercept reported that in April 2017, Kushner's father Charles, who runs the family's real estate firm Kushner Companies, had made a direct appeal for financing to Qatari Finance Minister Ali Sharif Al Emadi, which was followed shortly afterwards by the Saudi-led blockade of Qatar: reported The 30-minute meeting, according to two sources in the financial industry who asked not to be named because of the sensitivity of the potential transaction, included aides to both parties, and was held at a suite at the St. Regis Hotel in New York. A follow-up meeting was held the next day in a glass-walled conference room at the Kushner property itself, though Al Emadi did not attend the second gathering in person. The failure to broker the deal would be followed only a month later by a Middle Eastern diplomatic row in which Jared Kushner provided critical support to Qatars neighbors. Led by Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, a group of Middle Eastern countries, with Kushners backing, led a diplomatic assault that culminated in a blockade of Qatar. Kushner, according to reports at the time, subsequently undermined efforts by Secretary of State Rex Tillerson to bring an end to the standoff. Middle Eastern diplomatic row subsequently undermined In May 2017, Qatar's Gulf neighbors commenced a blockade of that country, and within days President Trump tweeted his support of the blockage despite the fact that Qatar is home to Al Udeid Air Base, a key U.S. military installation: commenced tweeted During my recent trip to the Middle East I stated that there can no longer be funding of Radical Ideology. Leaders pointed to Qatar - look!  Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) June 6, 2017 June 6, 2017  In May 2018, the New York Times reported that the Kushner family was close to reaching a bailout deal for 666 Fifth Avenue with a company possessing Qatari government ties: reported Charles Kushner, head of the Kushner Companies, is in advanced talks with Brookfield Asset Management over a partnership to take control of the 41-story aluminum-clad tower in Midtown Manhattan, 666 Fifth Avenue, according to two real estate executives who have been briefed on the pending deal but were not authorized to discuss it. Brookfield is a publicly traded company, and its real estate arm, Brookfield Property Partners, is partly owned by the Qatari government, through the Qatar Investment Authority. And, the Trump administration around that time reversed course with Secretary of State Mike Pompeo telling the Saudis in April 2018 that it was time to end the blockade against Qatar. telling It's likely the meme gained momentum on social media in October 2018 due to scrutiny over Kushner and Trump's relationship with Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman in light of the gruesome murder of Jamal Kashoggi.  scrutiny Kashoggi, a Saudi national and columnist for the Washington Post, went missing on 2 October 2018 after entering the Saudi consulate in Istanbul seeking documents he needed to get married. According to reports citing Turkish government and U.S. intelligence sources, the Virginia resident never left the consulate, where he was ambushed by Saudi agents, tortured and murdered, and his body dismembered. ambushed Trump has resisted calls by U.S. lawmakers to impose sanctions on Saudi Arabia in retaliation for the journalist's apparent death, comparing global condemnation of the Gulf kingdom to accusations of sexual misconduct leveled against U.S. Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh. Trump told the Associated Press: "Here we go again with, you know, you're guilty until proven innocent. I don't like that. We just went through that with Justice Kavanaugh and he was innocent all the way as far as I'm concerned." calls told Cassidy, John.  "Jared Kushners Conflicts of Interest Reach a Crisis Point."
  The New Yorker.  2 March 2018. Swisher, Clayton and Ryan Grim.  "Jared Kushner's Real Estate Firm Sought Money Directly from Qatar Government Weeks Before Blockade."
  The Intercept.  2 March 2018. Bagli, Charles V. and Jesse Drucker.  "Kushners Near Deal with Qatar-Linked Company for Troubled Tower."
  The New York Times.  17 May 2018. Kirkpatrick, David D. and Carlotta Gall.  "Audio Offers Gruesome Details of Jamal Khashoggi Killing, Turkish Official Says."
  The New York Times.  17 October 2018. Channeling U.S. Rep Joe Wilson, the Republican from South Carolina who shouted You lie! during President Barack Obama's speech to Congress in September, the Republican Party of Texas has accused the president of lying when he said that a new federal mandate requiring individuals to have health insurance was not a tax. You lie! the party tweeted July 19. Obama said O-care mandate wasn't a tax. Now Obama admin says it is a tax. Did the Obama administration talk one way and then the other? Per the legislation that Obama signed into law in March, most people will be required to have health insurance starting in 2014. There are exceptions, but individuals who aren't exempt and refuse to join a plan will be required to pay an annual penalty of $695 per person, up to a maximum of $2,085 per family, or 2.5 percent of household income, whichever is greater. The health care law calls the fine individuals must pay if they don't have insurance a penalty. In a Sept. 20, 2009, interview with ABC's George Stephanopoulos, Obama denied that the mandate to buy health insurance was equivalent to a tax. For us to say that you've got to take a responsibility to get health insurance is absolutely not a tax increase, Obama said. He noted that Americans are required to have auto insurance, but nobody considers that a tax increase. (Auto insurance is a state mandate, but all the states except New Hampshire require it of resident drivers.) When Stephanopoulos pressed Obama on whether the mandate was a tax, Obama said: I absolutely reject that notion. However, on July 16 The New York Times published a story that seemed to vindicate opponents of the health care overhaul who argued that the insurance requirement was a tax. The headline: Changing stance, administration now defends insurance mandate as a tax. Texas is one of 21 states challenging the law's constitutionality in court, but Virginia was the first to face the federal government in a July 1 hearing on its lawsuit. The New York Times pointed to a brief filed in that case by the U.S. Department of Justice defending the individual mandate as a valid exercise of the federal government's power to lay and collect taxes. Congress can impose taxes to provide for the general welfare under Article I of the Constitution. From the health-care law: The requirement regulates activity that is commercial and economic in nature: economic and financial decisions about how and when health care is paid for, and when health insurance is purchased. The law then says that national health spending is projected to increase from $2.5 trillion  17.6 percent of the economy  in 2009, to $4.7 trillion in 2019. In its legal brief, the department says the penalty is also a tax because it will raise revenue  $4 billion a year by 2017, according to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office  and because it's imposed and collected under the Internal Revenue Code. Individuals who refuse to obtain health insurance and are penalized will have to report the fine as an addition to income tax liability, the brief says. The health care law itself doesn't mention Congress' taxing authority, instead noting that the mandate is protected under the Constitution's Article I commerce clause, which lets Congress regulate commercial activity that has a substantial effect on the national economy. The tax argument is the strongest argument, the Times quoted Jack Balkin, a professor at Yale Law School who supports the law, saying. This bill is a tax. Because it's a tax, it's completely constitutional. Balkin is also quoted saying that Obama has not been honest with the American people about the nature of the bill. White House spokesman Matt Lehrich defended the law both ways last week, telling us: We believe that the Commerce Clause provides ample constitutional authority for the individual mandate. If anyone has any doubts about that  and we dont think they should  its also clear that that the mandate is constitutional under Congresss power to tax. Similarly, Steven Schwinn, an associate professor of constitutional law at the John Marshall Law School in Chicago, pointed out on his blog July 18 that the Obama administration has consistently defended the mandate in court primarily under the Commerce Clause, and secondarily under Congress' taxing power to promote the general welfare. Henry Aaron, a scholar who specializes in health care and tax policy at the liberal-leaning Brookings Institution, said Obama was correct to say the mandate isn't a tax. A mandate is meaningless unless it is backed up by some 'or else,' as in 'obey the mandate or else,'  Aaron said. The administration asserted the legal power to impose a mandate. The mandate is backed up by a tax that has to be paid if the mandate is violated. You obey the mandate or you pay the tax. Upshot: In his interview with Stephanopoulos, Obama insisted the mandate to purchase health coverage is not a tax. But in defending its legality, the Justice Department argues in part that the mandate is a valid exercise of Congress' taxing power. From where we sit, Obama was trying to make a political point; the Justice Department, a legal one. In its tweet, the Republican Party overreaches when it says the administration now calls the mandate a tax. The administration (still) isn't doing that. But it does cite Congress' power to levy taxes as authority for the mandate. And that enables the GOP to score its own political point, based on what looks like the administration's runs at having it both ways. We rate the GOP's recap of Obama's early position and his administration's recent defense of the law as Mostly True. In late October 2021, a misleading copypasta meme spread on Facebook that attributed port bottlenecks and shipping delays to "California's liberal trucking laws." The meme circulated on various platforms including Facebook, LinkedIn, and Twitter. Here is a version of the meme that was posted to Facebook:   The meme above reads, in part: So ships are piling up at Long Beach waiting to get unloaded. The port is jammed full of containers with no place to stack more. The liberal media is blaming it on the trucking industry while the nation's store shelves are becoming bare ... Well there's more to the story. Could Gavin Newsom and California's liberal trucking laws be the blame ? ? The NEWS says the California port situation is caused by a driver shortage. Not so fast: It is in part caused by a California Truck Ban which says all trucks must be 2011 or newer and a law called AB 5 which prohibits Owner Operators. The two state laws mentioned are AB5, a 2019 law intended to prevent employers from wrongly classifying workers as contractors, and something called "California Truck Ban." The meme also mentions a September 2020 executive order by California Gov. Gavin Newsom that seeks to phase out fuel-burning vehicle engines by 2035 in an effort to combat global warming. AB5 executive order The meme is referencing congestion at the ports in San Pedro Bay in Southern California and the ports of Long Beach and Los Angeles, which collectively handle an estimated 40 percent of the nation's imports. The back-up is resulting in something of a crisis in shipping delays right before the 2021 winter holidays. congestion 40 percent crisis The meme above attempts to lay the blame for the crisis at the feet of Newsom, along with California labor and environmental laws. But from a broad perspective, the disruption in the supply chain is a global phenomenon sparked by a confluence of major calamities in 2020 and 2021, including labor shortages, facility closures, and an increased e-commerce demand resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic, extreme weather, and a massive container ship that had become lodged in the Suez Canal for nearly a week. global phenomenon Here we will look at whether the two laws and executive order mentioned in the meme are to blame for the slowdown at the Southern California ports. There is no law called the "California Truck Ban." But from the description above  that "all trucks must be 2011 or newer"  it appears the post is referencing the California Truck and Bus Regulation. That regulation doesn't currently block registration of vehicles from the year 2010 and older, however. Regulation The Truck and Bus Regulation requires trucks serving the ports to have engines from 2010 or newer as of Jan. 1, 2023. If they don't, the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) would deny registrations to non-compliant vehicles. But the rule, which was adopted in 2008, has taken effect gradually over several years. It's not new, whereas the situation at the L.A. and Long Beach ports in the fall of 2021 is acute. requires In an email, Stanley Young, spokesperson for the California Air Resource Board, told Snopes, "As of 2021 only trucks with engines older than 2005 would have their registration denied." Young added that 96 percent of the trucks currently serving the major ports in California are already compliant with the regulation. "Despite what you may have heard or read, there is simply no evidence to support any claims that the current congestion at our ports has any connection to the states efforts to clean up Californias trucks," Young stated. "Since trucks at major California ports have been required to have 2007 or newer engines since 2014, and since these engines are legal until at least 2023, its impossible that any shortage of vehicles at ports is the result of CARB regulations." Assembly Bill 5 (AB 5) is a California law that went into effect in January 2020, although it has faced an onslaught of legal challenges preventing it from being implemented. The law is intended to prevent companies like Uber and Instacart from misclassifying so-called gig workers as independent contractors, rather than employees.  Truckers often operate under an "owner-operator" model, in which they own their own vehicles, which they then use to transport goods as contractors for trucking companies. Both the California Trucking Association (CTA) and freight transport company Cal Cartage Express filed legal challenges against AB 5. Cal Cartage lost its case but the U.S. Supreme Court has yet to decide whether to hear a petition by CTA. Until it does, AB 5 remains in limbo for the trucking industry. Matt Schrap, CEO of the the Harbor Trucking Association (which represents drayage truck companies serving the ports of L.A. and Long Beach) said it's not a shortage of truckers that's driving the delays, and pointing the finger at AB 5 doesn't take reality into account. Instead, Schrap said that the 2020 COVID-19 pandemic lockdowns spurred an explosion of online buying that ramped up sharply during the pandemic lockdowns, and the ports of L.A. and Long Beach don't have the infrastructure to handle the sudden influx. explosion "Its like jamming ten lanes of freeway traffic into five lanes," Schrap said in a phone interview with Snopes. Currently, the bte noire for truckers and trucking companies at the ports of L.A. and Long Beach is an excess of empty shipping containers piling up at the ports, which often block truckers from picking up and dropping off cargo. "Were struggling with these empty containers," Schrap said. "That is really whats working us over." Schrap said he expects that the situation will start to improve, because with the sudden attention on the issue, officials are taking steps to help resolve it, like placing fees on cargo ship companies that leave behind empty containers, and potentially allowing empty container stacking on empty parcels of land at the ports. placing fees But these are just Bandaids on a larger problem, which is that the Southern California ports need investment in infrastructure to prevent crises like these, Schrap stressed. "Were in this problem because of the underinvestment in the infrastructure that supports the American consumers buying habits," Schrap said. "It's a temporary solution to a longstanding problem." Newsom issued an executive order in September 2020 seeking to phase out gas-burning vehicles by making all new vehicles sold as of 2035 and beyond zero-emission. But Newsom's order wouldn't make the current fuel-powered trucks illegal as of 2035. The executive order explicitly states that while California will require new vehicles sold as of 2035 and beyond to be zero-emission, older vehicles will not be illegal to own and operate, and can still be purchased and sold. executive order A news release from the governor's office announcing the order states, "The executive order will not prevent Californians from owning gasoline-powered cars or selling them on the used car market." FreightWaves. "CTAs Last Hope To Protect California Trucking From AB5: US Supreme Court," 10 August, 2021, https://www.yahoo.com/now/ctas-last-hope-protect-california-184730483.html.  Goodman, Peter S., and Erin Schaff. Its Not Sustainable: What Americas Port Crisis Looks Like Up Close. The New York Times, 10 Oct. 2021. NYTimes.com, https://www.nytimes.com/2021/10/11/business/supply-chain-crisis-savannah-port.html. Koetsier, John. COVID-19 Accelerated E-Commerce Growth 4 To 6 Years. Forbes, 12 June 2020, https://www.forbes.com/sites/johnkoetsier/2020/06/12/covid-19-accelerated-e-commerce-growth-4-to-6-years/. No SCOTUS Review of California Laws Impact on Trucking Industry. Reuters, 5 Oct. 2021, https://www.reuters.com/legal/government/no-scotus-review-california-laws-impact-trucking-industry-2021-10-04/. Lynch, David J. Stubborn Supply Chain Woes Are Resisting Bidens Remedies. Washington Post, 26 October 2021, https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2021/10/26/supply-chain-ports-fees-biden/.  Swanson, Ana. Angling for a Merry Fishmas Despite Global Shipping Delays. The New York Times, 31 Oct. 2021, https://www.nytimes.com/2021/10/31/business/economy/global-shipping-delays-shortages.html. Updated to note AB 5 remains in limbo for the trucking industry pending legal actions. From single-payer health care to free college tuition for all, Bernie Sanders policy proposals have been both dismissed and lauded as radical. But when it comes to reparations for slavery, some fault the Vermont senator and presidential candidate for holding a more conventional view. Sanders opposition to reparations has been the subject of some controversy after Ta-Nehisi Coates called him out inThe Atlantic,writing, Unfortunately, Sanderss radicalism has failed in the ancient fight against white supremacy. What he proposes in lieu of reparations  job creation, investment in cities, and free higher education  is well within theOverton window, and his platform on race echoes Democratic orthodoxy. Meet the Presshost Chuck Todd followed up with Sanders about Coates columnJan. 24, asking, Why aren't you for reparations because of slavery for African-Americans when you're calling for economic justice on so many other levels? Why do you stop short on that issue? Well, for the same reason that Barack Obama has and the same reason, I believe, that Hillary Clinton has, Sanders responded. And that is, it is absolutely wrong and unacceptable that we have so much poverty in this country and it is even worse in the African-American community. Todd chided Sanders for not answering the question, but Sanders again deflected that it was for the same reasons as Obama and Clinton. Is it true that his position against reparations is the same as Clinton and Obamas views? Sanders is right that Obamas opposition echoes his own. (Coatescallsthis the conventional Democratic philosophy of a rising tide lifts all boats.) Clintons stance is less direct but largely follows the same rationale. Sanders case against reparations First, lets explain why Sanders is opposed to reparations for African-Americans. When first asked about the issue byFusionat the Jan. 11 Iowa Brown & Black Democratic Forum, Sanders stressed the political impracticability and polarizing nature of the proposal, and suggested prioritizing current economic inequality in lieu of compensating for past injustices. First of all, its likelihood of getting through Congress is nil. Second of all, I think it would be very divisive. The real issue is when we look at the poverty rate among the African-American community, when we look at the high unemployment rate within the African-American community, we have a lot of work to do. So I think what we should be talking about is making massive investments in rebuilding our cities, in creating millions of decent paying jobs, in making public colleges and universities tuition-free, basically targeting our federal resources to the areas where it is needed the most, and where it is needed the most is in impoverished communities, often African-American and Latino. OnMeet the Press, Sanders pretty much dropped the pragmatism argument (though he pushed back on the notion that his economic proposals are politically impossible) and focused instead on the second part of his rationale about improving economic conditions and schools for minorities. So how does this mirror, if at all, the approach by Obama and Clinton? Obamas opposition In 2007 and 2008, then-presidential candidate Obama voiced his opposition to reparations, arguing that the best way to amend for the past is to focus on the present and future. I think the reparations we need right here in South Carolina is investment, for example, in our schools, Obama said in aJuly 2007 CNN debate. Obama couched his opposition somewhat differently in a 2007NAACP presidential questionnaire. He said that nothing, including reparations, can fully compensate for the stain of slavery before arguing that reparations could lead to negligence on other matters of racial injustices: I fear that reparations would be an excuse for some to say 'weve paid our debt' and to avoid the much harder work of enforcing our anti-discrimination laws in employment and housing; the much harder work of making sure that our schools are not separate and unequal; the much harder work of providing job training programs and rehabilitating young men coming out of prison every year; and the much harder work of lifting 37 million Americans of all races out of poverty. These challenges will not go away with reparations. So while I applaud and agree with the underlying sentiment of recognizing the continued legacy of slavery, I would prefer to focus on the issues that will directly address these problems  and building a consensus to do just that. Obama explains he will not pursue reparations because the action could be used as an excuse not to work on other lingering problems for minorities. Here, Obamas comments sound different from Sanders. Sanders and Obama sound more aligned in thesecommentsby Obama from July 2008, which both Obama and the Sanders campaign pointed out: You know, I have said in the past  and I'll repeat again  that the best reparations we can provide are good schools in the inner city and jobs for people who are unemployed. And, you know, I think that strategies that invest in lifting people out of the legacy of slavery and Jim Crow, but that have broad applicability and allow us to build coalitions to actually get these things done, that, I think, is the best strategy. You know, the fact is, is that dealing with some of the  some of the legacy of discrimination is going to cost billions of dollars. And we're not going to be able to have that kind of resource allocation unless all Americans feel that they are invested in making this stuff happen. And so, you know, I'm much more interested in talking about, how do we get every child to learn? How do we get every person health care? How do we make sure that everybody has a job? How do we make sure that every senior citizen can retire with dignity and respect? And if we have a program, for example, of universal health care, that will disproportionately affect people of color, because they're disproportionately uninsured. If we've got an agenda that says every child in America should get -- should be able to go to college, regardless of income, that will disproportionately affect people of color, because it's oftentimes our children who can't afford to go to college. Obama, as far as we can tell through searching Nexis, has not changed or revisited his stance on reparations since 2008. Clintons position Clintons recent and past comments suggest her ideas for helping the black community are no different from Sanders and Obamas. Clinton didnt directly answer the question about reparations at the Iowa Brown & Black Forum, but she alsosuggestedinvesting in black communities and addressing poverty: I think we should start studying what investments we need to make in communities to help individuals and families and communities move forward. And I am absolutely committed to that. There are some good ideas out there. Theres an idea in the Congressional Black Caucus about really targeting federal dollars to communities that have had either disinvestment or no investment, and have had years of being below the poverty level. Thats the kind of thing Id like us to focus on and really help lift people up. In October 2015, she provided a similar response when asked by the hosts of theBuzzFeedpodcast Another Round: Ill tell you what, I think we need to make many more investments in everything from pre-school education to affordable housing, thats my form of trying to give people the chance to be empowered, to make the most out of their God-given potential. As Fusionpointed out, this was largely Clintons answer in 2000 as well. When she was asked about reparations during her Senate campaign, shesaidAfrican-Americans deserve an apology for slavery before pivoting to economic conditions. But I think that the people I know and the people I work with want us to stay focused on the future, keep our economy going, keep providing good public education, quality affordable health care  do the things that will enable people to have the best futures for themselves, and thats what Im committed to doing. Our ruling Sanders said he opposes reparations for the same reason that Barack Obama has and the same reason, I believe, that Hillary Clinton has. The reason, he said, is the need to focus instead on addressing current economic problems in the black community by improving education, providing jobs and addressing poverty. That is basically what Obama and Clinton has suggested in lieu of reparations. Its worth noting that Sanders previously suggested that reparations were politically impractical and divisive. Obama and Clinton have not made comments to this effect. In 2007, Obama said reparations could be used an excuse not to do more for African-Americans. We rate Sanders' claim Mostly True. American and European leaders find themselves scrambling to respond to Russias deployment of troops in the Crimean Peninsula of Ukraine. With military action on no ones wish-list, diplomacy and economic sanctions are the only moves effectively in play. Secretary of State John Kerry said on CBSFace the Nationthat he had been on the phone with his counterparts among the G-8 nations. Every single one of them are prepared to go to the hilt in order to isolate Russia with respect to this invasion, Kerry said. Theyre prepared to put sanctions in place, theyre prepared to isolate Russia economically, the ruble is already going down. Russia has major economic challenges. This fact-check zeros in on the value of the Russian ruble. It has declined but partly because thats what the Russians wanted. A big drop In the early part of 2013, the ruble was worth 3.3 U.S. cents. Today, its value has tumbled by 15 percent, to 2.8 cents. A little less than half of that fall came in January as the situation in Ukraine deteriorated. Heres the picture over the past year, taken from the currency exchange serviceXE.com:   There is no question that the violence and political turmoil in Ukraine took a toll on the ruble. Russian banks have about $28 billion in loans in the country. Before the Russian troops moved in, investors were already worried. Last week,two of the largest banks in Russiasaid they would suspend any new lending in Ukraine. But the rubles decline has deeper roots. In 2010, the Russian Central Bank announced it wanted to get out of the business of setting the rubles value on the international market. It had in mind a gradual glide path for the currencys fall, andin October, it gave the ruble even more leewayto drop further. The countrys economy grew less than 2 percent last year, and it has struggled to keep inflation in check. The ruble got pretty over-valued in the big energy boom from 2001-08, said Mark Adomanis, a management consultant and contributor to Forbes. That hurt Russian manufacturing and letting the ruble fall potentially could help. With a weaker ruble Russian goods become more competitive on international markets, Adomanis said. That said, a free fall is not what the Russian Central Bank has in mind. In January,the bank signaled that it would stepin to prop up the ruble. But the overall policy remains the same. Our ruling Kerry said the ruble is going down, and it is. The Russian currency has lost about 15 percent of its value against the dollar since early 2013. It is not all because of the situation in Ukraine, however, a fact that viewers may not have picked up on by hearing Kerry's statement. The currencys decline is also part of Russian policy to reduce inflation and make domestic manufacturers more competitive. Theres a little more going on here than Kerrys statement would suggest. We rate his claim Mostly True. In early 2022, folk-rock legend Neil Young found himself the target of a laughable conspiracy theory after he spoke out against COVID-19-related misinformation. On Jan. 24, Young wrote that he wanted his music removed from the streaming platform Spotify, unless the company ended its agreement to host Joe Rogan's podcast, which has on several occasions provided a forum for potentially harmful misinformation about COVID-19 vaccines. In response, Spotify removed Young's back catalog from its library, rather than cutting ties with Rogan.  wrote misinformation removed In the midst of that controversy, vaccine skeptics and COVID-19 conspiracy theorists shared a ludicrous conspiracy theory claiming that the pharmaceutical company Pfizer  which produces a widely-used COVID-19 vaccine  either owned the rights to Young's music catalog or, through a chain of connections, held sway over the rock star and influenced, or even ordered, his pro-vaccination stance.  For example, some social media users posted a meme with the text, "When you realize Neil Young's music catalogue is owned by Pfizer": posted meme   Others did not explicitly claim that Pfizer itself owned some or all of Young's catalog, but did suggest that the company held sway over him, by way of a series of connections, and that therefore Young's opposition to Rogan and his criticism of vaccine misinformation should be dismissed as the result of corruption and self-compromise, rather than a principled stance.  did suggest series connections On social media, a conspiracy theorist who uses the moniker An0maly outlined the theory in helpful detail, starting with the observation that in January 2021, Young reportedly sold half of his catalog to a U.K.-based investment fund called Hipgnosis, for around $150 million. An0maly continued: outlined the theory So, 50% to UK investment fund Hipgnosis. In October of 2021, Blackstone and Hipgnosis Song Management launched [a] "$1 billion partnership to invest in songs, recorded music, music IP and royalties." Interesting. Blackstone is "an American alternative investment management company" who, interestingly enough, in 2020 announced the appointment of "Jeffrey B. Kindler, former chairman and CEO of Pfizer, as [a] senior adviser." Now I don't know the answer to this, but did Neil Young independently make the decision to try and blackball Joe Rogan for questioning big pharma and the government narrative? Or was it a team decision with a multi-billion-dollar investment firm who also owns a big chunk of his music? The first point to note here is that, even among those promulgating the Young-Pfizer theory, it is not seriously suggested that Pfizer itself  which is, after all, a pharmaceutical company  owns the rights to any of Young's music. That claim can be dismissed.  Before assessing the logic behind the theory, and its coherence, it's worth briefly evaluating the accuracy of each of its components. First, it appears to be true that, in January 2021, Young sold half of his songs to Hipgnosis. In a news release, Hipgnosis wrote: "...The Company has acquired 50% of Neil Youngs worldwide copyright and income interests in his entire song catalogue comprising 1,180 songs." news release Secondly, it is also true that in October 2021, Blackstone bought an ownership stake in Hipgnosis, as demonstrated in news releases published by both companies. Finally, it is also true that in August 2020, Blackstone hired Jeff Kindler as a senior advisor, and that Kindler used to be the chairman and CEO of Pfizer.  both companies hired Jeff Kindler used to be However, rather than having uncovered a web of corruption, those pushing the Young-Pfizer story were engaging in the classic conspiracy theorist's fallacy of finding whatever possible connection they can between two separate entities (in this case, Young and Pfizer) without first testing the logical or chronological basis of that putative link. In other words, "connecting the dots" by whatever means available, rather than uncovering an actual, organic conspiracy.  Let's look at the sequence of events. Kindler left Pfizer in 2010  a full decade before he joined Blackstone, and before the emergence of the COVID-19 pandemic prompted Pfizer to develop a vaccine along with its German partner BioNTech. left Pfizer in 2010 Blackstone is a publicly traded company, meaning it has a fiduciary duty to its shareholders, and Kindler, in turn, has a professional obligation to provide sound business and strategic advice to Blackstone. Aside from presenting no concrete evidence whatsoever, those pushing the Young-Pfizer conspiracy theory appear to be asking readers to believe, despite these circumstances, one of two explanations: publicly traded company As outlandish as these scenarios are, they are premised on even shakier assumptions: for example, that Kindler was even consulted on the Blackstone-Hipgnosis deal; or that if he was, he was in favor of it; and that Young has any remaining financial or commercial obligations to Hipgnosis and/or Blackstone after the sale of half his music  after all, if that deal is already done, what is the supposed basis of Hipgnosis or Blackstone's putative leverage over Young? It's not necessary to list, in excruciating detail, each of the known factual and logical flaws associated with the Young-Pfizer conspiracy theory. The claim that the pharmaceutical company "owned Young's music catalog" was patently false, and the theory of a fantastical web of corruption, with Kindler at its centre, was presented without any concrete evidence and, perhaps more importantly, made no sense whatsoever. In July 2021, some Facebook users reported seeing new warning messages from site administrators about "harmful extremist content" or asking whether they felt someone they knew was "becoming an extremist."   The reports authentically captured a new Facebook-led pilot initiative that attempted to help site administrators identify users or content that breached Facebook's existing bans on "objectionable content." For that reason, we rate this claim  objectionable content According to reputable news outlets, the new messages were appearing for some users when they used the desktop or mobile version of Facebook. One notice took the form of a question, "Are you concerned that someone you know is becoming an extremist?" while the other warned, "you may have been exposed to harmful extremist content recently." news outlets Another alert read, according to CNN: "Violent groups try to manipulate your anger and disappointment. [...] You can take action now to protect yourself and others." Reuters reported: Reuters reported Facebook said the small test, which is only on its main platform, was running in the United States as a pilot for a global approach to prevent radicalization on the site. 'This test is part of our larger work to assess ways to provide resources and support to people on Facebook who may have engaged with or were exposed to extremist content, or may know someone who is at risk,' said a Facebook spokesperson in an emailed statement. "We are partnering with NGOs [non-governmental organizations] and academic experts in this space and hope to have more to share in the future.' We reached out to the tech giant's communication team ourselves to discuss the notices, but we have not yet received a response. We will update this report, when, or if, that changes. All messages gave recipients the option to "get support" from one or more Facebook partners. A Facebook spokesperson told CNN they included Life After Hate, an advocacy group that helps people leave violent far-right movements. told CNN Life After Hate According to Reuters, the effort was part of Facebook's promise to counter extremist content after a user live-streamed himself opening fire at a New Zealand mosque  killing 51 people  in March 2019. March 2019 Andy Stone, a spokesperson for Facebook, confirmed the factualness of CNN's article about the news messages with the below-displayed tweet. tweet   Ultimately, the new warnings were a response to critics who believe the tech giant could have done more to prevent users from circulating false claims during the 2020 election and planning violence like the Jan. 6 Capitol insurrection. users 2020 election Jan. 6 Capitol In March, for example, Avaaz, a nonprofit that seeks to curb misinformation, uncovered at least 267 pages or groups with connections to that it said spread violence-glorifying content  some of which remained active despite Facebook's efforts to block users from such material. Avaaz pages or groups such material Snopes has also identified such groups that have seemingly evaded the site's attempts to ban violent rhetoric, including a militia group in which users discussed plans to open fire on any one that starts rioting after the police shooting of a Black man, Jacob Blake, in Kenosha, Wisconsin. Snopes attempts to ban militia group Jacob Blake [See here for exclusive Snopes analysis titled, "Violence Brewed in Facebook Groups Ahead of 'Stop The Steal' Protests"] here On March 23, 2021, shipping traffic through Egypt's Suez Canal was grounded to a halt after a large vessel called the "Ever Given" got stuck in the passageway. Shortly after news broke about this blocked shipping route, an image started to circulate on social media that supposedly showed how the Ever Given, a nearly 200-foot wide, 224,000-ton vessel, had "drawn" a penis in its route movements shortly before it entered the Suez Canal:   This is a genuine image showing the Ever Given's route before it got stuck in the Suez Canal. While it may resemble a rough drawing of a penis, there's no evidence to indicate that this was "drawn" on purpose. The image comes from a video created by the vessel-trafficking service provider VesselFinder.com. The video shows the movements of the Ever Given as it waited for its turn to enter the Suez Canal. Vessel Finder wrote: VesselFinder.com On the occasion of the disputed incident of the ultra-large container ship Ever Given blocking the Suez Canal, the VesselFinder team made a video simulation of the movements of the ship in more detail, for some time before it got stuck in the canal and blocked the main artery of cargo flow between Asia and Europe. Here's the video:  While some social media users may have been skeptical of this image, thinking that it was just a crude joke, a spokesperson for Vesselfinder.com confirmed to Vice that the route was genuine, adding that "there is no room for some kind of conspiracies or false data." Vice Another map from the ship-tracking website Myshiptracking.com also shows the Ever Given's seemingly NSFW route.  map Myshiptracking.com CNN reported on March 24 that eight tugboats were working to free the vessel, but that it could be days before the Suez Canal, one of the world's busiest shipping routes, returns to normal traffic levels: reported Eight tug boats are working to free a large container ship stuck in Egypt's Suez Canal, halting marine traffic through one of the busiest and most important waterways in the world. The rescue boats are working to float and release the Ever Given, a 59-meter-wide (193.5-feet) vessel that ran aground after 40-knot winds and a sandstorm caused low visibility and poor navigation, the Suez Canal Authority said in a statement Wednesday. The 224,000-ton vessel, sailing under a Panama flag, was en route to the port of Rotterdam in the Netherlands when it was knocked off course. Claim:  Photographs show poachers collecting sea turtle eggs in Costa Rica. REAL PHOTOGRAPHS; INACCURATE DESCRIPTION Example:  [Collected via e-mail, March 2010] Aha, maybe we have just discovered why the sea turtle is going extinct & it is not global warming. !!!!!!!....  Sending you an e-mail of the turtle poachers on the beaches of Costa Rica.  See the 2nd picture too, where the female cannot cover up her own eggs, before the intruder steals away what Nature has given her to protect her young. These people have unfortunately, taught their children nothing for the future generation to cherish. Look at these children and they do not know anything about conservation of Marine Life Protection and look at the disastrous road their parents are taking too... What have they they all gained for the future of Costa Rica's Marine Life protection? World Wide shame in COSTA RICA. Please distribute widely. The Turtle eggs  are stolen to be sold. The PLANET IS THANKFUL.                           Origins:  These photographs do show the collection of olive ridley sea turtle eggs in the coastal town of Ostional, Costa Rica, but those who are gathering them are not "poachers" (i.e. people who catch fish or game illegally), nor are they regarded as threatening the sustainability of the sea turtle population in that area.  As described in a 1998 article by National Public Radio correspondent John Burnett, the gatherers are engaged in a government sponsored conservation activity, collecting a relatively small portion of eggs, which  biologists have averred would otherwise have been destroyed, from the millions of olive ridley eggs laid during the turtles' reproductive season: olive ridley conservation activity In the coastal town of Ostional, located on Costa Rica's Guanacaste Peninsula, a 13-year-old project has helped stabilize the population of the olive ridley sea turtle.  For 10 months of the year, usually around the third quarter of the moon, olive ridleys swim by the hundreds of thousands to a single mile of beach at Ostional in an ancient reproductive rite little understood by scientists. They scuttle onto the sand, dig a hole with their flippers, and drop in an average of 100 leathery, white eggs the size of ping pong balls. Over the course of a five-day "arribada," literally, an arrival, nesting females will leave as many as 10 million eggs in the black, volcanic sand. Mass nesting is nature's way of ensuring that after the turkey vultures, feral dogs and raccoons have eaten all the fresh eggs they want, there will be enough left over to produce a sustainable population of olive ridleys. In the early 1980s, scientists learned that because of limited space on the beach, females arriving later destroy the first laid eggs. The researchers wondered: why not let poachers have the doomed eggs? Under a law written especially for Ostional, the government allows an egg harvesting cooperative to collect all they can during the first 36 hours of every arribada. Coop members then truck the eggs around the country, selling them to bars and restaurants. In return, the community must protect the olive ridley. Coop members clean debris from the nesting areas and patrol the beach day and night for poachers. Forty days later, when the hatchlings emerge, children from the Ostional Primary school run to the beach. "We protect the tortugitas when they crawl to the ocean. If we don't, the vultures will get them and bite their heads off," says a local 8-year-old boy, breathlessly. A Sea Turtle Conservancy (STC) representative noted that the activity pictured here is controversial but legal (Ostional is the only part of Costa Rica where sea turtle egg gathering is allowed), and that investigation to determine its overall effect on the olive ridley population is ongoing: STC Sea Turtle Conservancy (STC) has seen a lot of recent communication among conservation groups and turtle advocates concerning these photos showing sea turtle eggs being harvested in Costa Rica. The reality is that this harvest is the only remaining LEGAL harvest of turtle eggs in that country. The community of Ostional on the Pacific Coast is permitted to harvest all of the olive ridley eggs that are deposited during the first couple of days of an arribada (when thousands of turtles return to nest at the same time over about a week). The eggs are packaged and marked for sale around the country, with much of the income returning to the community. While I don't personally agree with this egg collection, the project is endorsed by the Costa Rican government for the time being. This is a very controversial subject among sea turtle scientists, conservationists and community members in Costa Rica. Among other issues, the legal sale of any turtle eggs in the country opens the door for clandestine egg harvesting from other parts of the country. The photos being circulated have served as a catalyst for the Costa Rican National Sea Turtle Conservation Network (of which STC is an integral part) to initiate an investigation of the scientific justification for this egg harvest. Specifically, the group is investigating the validity of claims that the harvest increases (or at least doesn't reduce) overall hatching productivity on this beach. The claim put forth is that during an arribada, many of the first nests to be laid are dug up and destroyed by females attempting to nest in the same spot days later. Not only are the earliest nests often destroyed, the rotting eggs become putrid and attract lots of bugs and predators, thus threatening the last nests deposited. A committee of the CRNSTCN was formed (on which STC's scientific director, Dr. Emma Harrison serves) to investigate the issues surrounding this legal harvest further. In addition to an independent investigation of the issue, questions are being asked of the people in charge of the project to help determine whether there is sufficient monitoring of the program and its impacts on the Ostional olive ridley population.  Based on the results of this investigation, there could be some recommendations for changes in the future. For the time being, what you see in these photos is completely legal and regulated by the Costa Rican government, though it remains quite controversial, and there is a formal review of the program underway by independent biologists in Costa Rica. The Costa Rica Tourism Board has also placed a notice on its web site in response to the circulation of these photographs: notice A chain of emails is circulating on the Internet with false information regarding the Conservation and Use of Ridley Sea Turtle Eggs Project (Lepidochels olivacea) at the Ostional National Wildlife Refuge in Guanacaste. There are 12 photos of the legal gathering of eggs accompanied by text labeling it as "theft" and an "international shame." The Costa Rica Tourism Board (ICT) seeks to clarify that the images actually represent a model of sustainable development in the Ostional community, approved in 1990 by executive order for the Protection, Conservation, and Recovery of Sea Turtle populations enacted on November 28th, 2002 and by Fishing and Agriculture law approved on April 25th, 2005. The legal use and allotment of resources plan, far from being an embarrassment, is the pride of the country and has been applauded and recognized by national and international scientists.  The Ostional National Wildlife Refuge witnesses up to 200,000 Olive Ridley turtles during the rainy season and about 15,000 in the dry season. Upon their arrival, the sea turtles lay thousands of eggs and destroy a large portion of them as they return to the ocean. That's why, under the sustainability development concept, the nearby rural areas are allowed to remove a specified amount for commercial purposes in Costa Rica under the Ostional Internal Development Association (ADIO). ADIO assures a rational use of the eggs and avoids massive and uncontrolled removal by communities. The association works together with the Environment, Energy, and Telecommunications Ministry (MINAET), the Costa Rica Institute of Fishing and Agriculture (INCOPESCA), and the Biology Department of the University of Costa Rica. Only ADIO has permission to commercialize turtle eggs in the country, packed in sealed bags displaying the association's logo and sold with corresponding invoices. Any other consumption is illegal.    Reuters.  "Caribbean Turtles Said Threatend by Catches, Trade."