Says the 3C Corridor train would have taken an hour and 15 minutes longer to carry passengers across Ohio than it would have taken on a New York Central train in 1935.
If former Gov. Ted Strickland had used a theme song in his unsuccessful re-election bid, it might have been I've Been Working on the Railroad.Jobs were the biggest issue of the fall campaign, and Strickland said that thousands would be created by his plan for a 3C Corridor passenger rail system linking Cleveland, Columbus and Cincinnati. He described Gov.-elect John Kasichs intention to kill the plan and return a $400 million federal grant as tragic and a job-killer.Critics of the plan claimed that its employment potential was exaggerated, its ridership forecasts were too optimistic and its cost projections too low.Ultimately, Plain Dealer columnist and former editorial director Brent Larkin wrote: Voters never warmed to the idea of spending hundreds of millions on a passenger rail project that would have taken riders from Cleveland to Cincinnati over a period an hour and 15 minutes longer than it would have taken on a New York Central train in 1935.We dont usually look at remarks from columnists, but that comment stopped PolitiFact Ohio in its tracks.We knew that the 3C Corridor was not a high-speed rail plan. We had not realized it was more like a trip back in time.So PolitiFact Ohio asked Larkin where he got his figures.He referred us first to a year-old feasibility report on the proposed Cleveland-to-Columbus-to- Cincinnati Amtrak service.This is the schedule Amtrak said it would run, and the schedule Ohio included as part of its application to the feds for the $400 million, Larkin said. No other schedule was ever formally provided to the feds.The proposed schedule shows a 255-mile Cleveland to Cincinnati trip taking 6-1/2 hours. The first daily train would leave Cleveland at 6:30 a.m. and arrive in Cincinnati at 1 p.m.Larkin then shared a railroad timetable from New York Central Lines, effective Feb 3, 1935. It showed a departure time of 3:10 p.m. from Cincinnati and an arrival in Cleveland of 8:20 p.m., for a travel time of 5 hours 10 minutes -- an hour and 20 minutes faster than the 3C line.Criticism of the 3C as snail rail with an average speed of 39 mph started as soon as the project was proposed.The Ohio Department of Transportation responded in September with a new average estimate of 50 mph and speed up to 79. It shortened the Cleveland-to-Cincinnati trip to 5 hours 12 minutes.But, not so fast.As an October story in the Columbus Dispatch noted, ODOT itself had said a year earlier that the trip couldn't be made in less than 5 hours 20 minutes -- even if the trains didn't stop. ODOTs revised schedule hadn't even been seen by the three freight lines that own the tracks the 3C passenger trains would use, putting its feasibility in serious doubt.And, no matter how weak or strong its support, the optimistic revision still comes up longer than the best rail time of 1935.The schedules speak for themselves, Larkin said.We rate his statement as True.
In April 2020, a coupon purporting to offer $250 in merchandise from the Kohl's department store circulated in Facebook posts directing viewers to click on a survey question:    This was a scam. Such efforts that trick viewers by offering free goods or money are long-standing. Kohl's is also a frequent target of such scams, but this fraud can target any business, from airlines to beer makers. A good rule of thumb to follow: If an offer seems too good to be true, it probably is. also frequent any airlines beer makers These types of viral "coupon" scams often involve websites and social media pages set up to mimic those of legitimate companies. Users who respond to those fake offers are required to share a website link or social media post in order to spread the scam more widely and lure in additional victims. Then those users are presented with a survey that extracts personal information such as email addresses, telephone numbers, dates of birth, and even sometimes credit card numbers. Finally, those who want to claim their "free" gift cards or coupons eventually learn they must first sign up to purchase a number of costly goods, services, or subscriptions. Despite the latest coupon scam above, Kohl's was indeed celebrating its 57th year as a department store, as of September 2019. It opened its first store in Brookfield, Wisconsin, according to company literature. In 2016, a variation of the same type of scam circulated, offering viewers $75 off purchases. literature variation The Better Business Bureau offers consumers several general tips to avoid getting scammed: offers consumers WHP.  "Scam Alert: Kohl's $75 Off Coupon Is Too Good to Be True."
  24 May 2016. Better Business Bureau.  "Scam Alert: Giveaway Scam Poses as Facebook."
  14 April 2017. Concerned by Donald Trump's secrecy about his dealings with other countries, 55 former government, military and national security officials  Democrats and some Republicans  havesigned a letterurging him to reveal his international business relationships and foreign investments, and to pledge to divest himself of all overseas business interests if he wins the presidency. The letter was drafted in part by Michael Morell, former acting director and deputy director of the Central Intelligence Agency. It says that the limited amount of information available to the public  Trump has refused to release his tax returns  suggests business relationships that would be problematic and might influence his policy positions as president, particularly when it comes to Russia. On the campaign trail, Mr. Trump has repeatedly praised Vladimir Putins authoritarian leadership, while outlining policies that read like a Kremlin wish list. He has claimed that Putin would never invade Ukraine, suggested permanently ceding Crimea to Russia, and placed conditions on upholding our obligation to protect our NATO allies. He even encouraged Russian espionage to interfere with our election, a tactic Putin has deployed across Central Asia and Europe to boost his preferred candidates. In addition, he has floated lifting sanctions against Russia, which would benefit both Putin and the Trump Organization. For this fact-check, we were interested in whether Trump has outlined policies that read like a Kremlin wish list. We talked to Russia experts who signed the letter as well as those who didn't. We emailed several people in the Trump campaign asking for reaction and information to dispute the assertion. We received no reply. We contacted Morell and more than a half dozen of the signers to get details on the claim. Their focus is on the issues mentioned in the letter: NATO, Ukraine and the lack of support for economic sanctions against Russia. Let's review them separately. NATO:In July, Trumptold theNew York Timesthat he wouldn't automatically come to the defense of a NATO ally that hasn't paid its expected contribution. I would be absolutely prepared to tell those countries, 'Congratulations, you will be defending yourself,' he said. NATO was created as deterrent to the former Soviet Union, of which Russia was the key player. Putin hasstrongly objectedto attempts to expand NATO because of Russian security concerns, so anything that weakens NATO could strengthen Russia. This is exactly what Putin wants  to sow the seeds of doubt in those countries on his periphery over whether the West will be there for them, Morell told us in an email. This kind of talk forces those states to be more accommodating to Russian interests. Trump'spotential unwillingness to defend NATO memberswho don't contribute enough financially to the alliance is essentially undermining unconditional nature of our commitment to their defense, said a cosigner of the letter, Richard Nephew, a former principal deputy coordinator of sanctions policy for the State Department who is now at Columbia University. Crimea and Ukraine:Russiaannexed Crimea, andPutin supportedan uprising in eastern Ukraine, sending in fighters after a revolution removed a pro-Russian president in 2014. Putin said annexation was morally and legally justified. The United States and the European Union disagreed. Trump hada different attitude. The people of Crimea, from what I've heard, would rather be with Russia than where they were,he saidin a July 31 interview with ABC's George Stephanopoulos. He also called Putins grab so smart inan April 12, 2014 Fox News interview. As PolitiFact reported in August, Trumps comments actually echo theofficial Kremlin positionthat Crimea is now Russian and its citizens prefer it that way. Trump has sided with Putin on all these issues, said Samantha Vinograd, another co-signer and former director for international affairs and Iraq at the National Security Council. If you look at how Trump will not condemn Russia's military takeover of Crimea, that's something that literally Putin was probably jumping up and down over when he said that. This lets Putin off the hook for the first land grab in Europe since World War II, said Morell. That gift to Putin even has a bow on it. Sanctions against Russia:The European Union and the United States responded to the situation in Ukraine by issuing sanctions against Russia.They affectRussian banks, arms makers and energy companies, andhave bothlimited Russia's access to Western markets and hindered its ability to deal with a recession caused by the sharp drop in oil prices. Clearly, Russia would like to see those sanctions lifted.Trump has saidhe would consider removing them. That undermines sanctions as a tool, said Vinograd. You don't just remove them without proof that a country has met its international obligations. What other Russia experts say Experts we consulted who didn't sign the letter agreed that many of Trump's comments line up with actions that Putin would probably like to see. I think Trump's foreign policy is the most pro-Russian policy we've seen from a major presidential candidate, at least since World War II, said Matthew Kroenig, associate professor at Georgetown University and a senior advisor on the Marco Rubio campaign who signed an anti-Trump letter last spring. With talk of tearing up NATO and positive talk about President Putin, it seems to be a very sympathetic Russian foreign policy, Putin and the Russians would be delighted to see him elected, Kroenig added. To be more supportive of the Kremlin, Trump would have to scrap America's nuclear arsenal and sign a treaty to give the Ukraine back to Russia. Michael McFaul, who served as U.S. ambassador to Russia from 2012 to 2014, made additional points in an Aug. 17, 2016,Washington Postcommentary. For example, a political battle over building a wall on the Mexican border, would be a major distraction in this country and a United States convulsed by infighting over Trump's deeply divisive policy proposals gives Putin more freedom to act around the world. But Peter Feaver, a professor of political science and public policy at Duke University, said the claim that Trump's policies read like a Kremlin wish list is hyperbole to be sure, because it's looking at some of Trump's statements and not others. For example, the candidate's pledge to reinvigorate the United States military would not be part of a Russian wish list. He said the idea that NATO allies aren't paying their fair share for the defense of Europe is a longstanding United States complaint. It's just that Trump is the first to threaten to take action by not defending a country that's attacked but is not paying. And he described the situation in Crimea and Eastern Ukraine in a way that was favorable to Russia's interpretation of what's happening, said Feaver. So I wouldn't say his comments are are on the Kremlin's wish list, but they were certainly reinforcing Putin's approach and undermining NATO, which is a way of achieving one of Putin's goals, which is to weaken NATO. He also cautioned that it can be hard to tell what Trump really thinks, given all the things he says in off-the-cuff remarks. Only the other hand, he noted, Trump seldom backtracks on an outrageous statement he's made. The claim that Trump's policies read like a Kremlin wish list has a lot more to do with Donald Trump's overall statements about Russia than it does with any concrete policies, and that's because Donald Trump doesn't really have many concrete policies, said Emma Ashford, a defense and foreign policy research fellow at the libertarian Cato Institute. Trump tends to be quite inconsistent on a lot of things such as working with Russia to fight ISIS, she said. So with Donald Trump's inconsistency, it's really really hard to tell what he would do on some of these issues. Our ruling Morell and others said Trump has outlined policies that read like a Kremlin wish list. Trumps comments on backing away from NATO, supporting Russia on the Ukraine and rethinking sanctions against Russia certainly qualify as statements that dovetail with what the Putin administration would like. But not all of his opinions, such as wanting to increase military spending, are in lockstep with policies the Kremlin might favor. We rate the statement Mostly True. https://www.sharethefacts.co/share/5df18d2f-7ff9-4a32-8bc9-ab8300a0ac0c In June 2022, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a ruling that overturned the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision and ended 50 years of constitutionally protected abortion rights. While many people took to the streets to protest the ruling, others used social media to share fantasy scenarios of protesting by other means. On TikTok, for example, some people fantasized about someone mailing their uterus to the Supreme Court as an act of protest: overturned the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision   While the above-displayed video described a potential future action ("I need to mail" vs. "I mailed"), other TikTok users shared videos claiming that someone had indeed followed through with this action.   While a number of TikTok users claimed that someone literally sent their uterus to the Supreme Court, there's no actual evidence that this happened.  Protests against the Supreme Court in the wake of the Roe v. Wade ruling garnered plenty of coverage by mainstream media outlets. If someone truly had one if their organs removed, put it in a box, sent their innards to the Supreme Court, and there were actual evidence of this, there would certainly be news coverage of the incident. However, no credible news outlets have filed any such reports.  Roe v. Wade While there are plenty of videos on TikTok of people making this claim, none of them contain images of the alleged package or the identity of the alleged sender. In fact, most of the TikTok videos that we viewed involve imagining what it would be like for an employee of the Supreme Court to open such a package.     The claim that someone mailed their uterus to the Supreme Court is part of a larger trend on TikTok involving users claiming that some extreme action was taken by someone to protest the abortion ruling. For example, another string of videos claimed (without evidence) that the several Supreme Court justices had had their credit card numbers leaked. Social media users also claimed (without evidence) that the IP addresses of the justices had been leaked.  another string of videos claimed also claimed (without evidence) that the IP addresses Sources: Fact Check: Posted IP Addresses NOT Linked To 5 Supreme Court Judges -- They Belong To Unrelated Entities | Lead Stories. https://leadstories.com/hoax-alert/2022/06/fact-check-ip-addresses-not-linked-to-five-supreme-court-justices.html. Accessed 30 June 2022. Sullivan, Becky. With Roe Overturned, State Constitutions Are Now at the Center of the Abortion Fight. NPR, 29 June 2022. NPR, https://www.npr.org/2022/06/29/1108251712/roe-v-wade-abortion-ruling-state-constitutions. On Oct. 27, 2019, U.S. President Trump announced the death of Islamic State (IS) leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi. As news outlets quickly fielded reports about the terrorist leader's death, the Washington Post published an obituary that labeled al-Baghdadi an "austere religious scholar." Screenshots of this obituary headline were widely shared on social media along with criticism of the news outlet. Former White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer, for instance, posted the following message on Twitter: Stop, read this & think about it: last night a ruthless, brutal terrorist who threatened our country & is responsible for the death of American citizens was killed in a successful operation by US military & @washingtonpost described #Albagdadi as an austere religious scholar pic.twitter.com/Mjptm0Fa3Z @washingtonpost #Albagdadi pic.twitter.com/Mjptm0Fa3Z  Sean Spicer (@seanspicer) October 27, 2019 October 27, 2019  This is a genuine headline that briefly appeared on Washingtonpost.com. An archived version of the article can be found here. here The headline appeared on the Washington Post's website for about two hours. The story was published at 8:31 a.m. CDT, according to the article's timestamp. This headline was changed to "Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, extremist leader of Islamic State, dies at 48" at about 10:35 a.m., according to archived links from the Internet Wayback Machine.  archived links Kristine Coratti Kelly, the vice president and communications general manager of Washington Post Live, posted a message on Twitter saying that the headline "should never have read that way." Regarding our al-Baghdadi obituary, the headline should never have read that way and we changed it quickly.  Kristine Coratti Kelly (@kriscoratti) October 27, 2019 October 27, 2019  The qualms over the Washington Post's headline likely served as the inspiration of a meme targeting another "mainstream media" outlet, CNN. Some social media users started to share an image that supposedly showed a screenshot from a CNN broadcast about al-Baghdadi's death featuring the chyron "Trump Kills Unarmed Father of Three": For the record, while the Washington Post briefly published a headline for al-Baghdadi's obituary labeling him a religious scholar, the above-displayed chryon is a digital manipulation featuring a years-old image of Don Lemon that never aired on CNN.   years-old image of Don Lemon Warrick, Joby.  "Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, Extremist Leader of Islamic State, Dies at 48."
  The Washington Post.  27 October 2019. Warrick, Joby.  "Abu Bakr Al-Baghdadi, Extremist Leader of Islamic State, Dies at 48."
  The Washington Post.  27 October 2019. President Barack Obama touted the success of Obamacare during his final State of the Union address. He said the Affordable Care Act has led to nearly 18 million more people gaining health insurance and has helped to slow health care cost inflation. He added that the law didnt destroy the job market,despite pessimistic predictionsfrom critics. Our businesses have created jobs every single month since it became law, Obama said on Capitol Hill on Jan. 12, 2016. We hadnt heard that particular Obamacare talking point before, so we decided to take a look. Because Obama referred specifically to our businesses, we looked atprivate-sector employment datafrom the Bureau of Labor Statistics starting in March 2010, when Obama signed theAffordable Care Act. Of the 70 months since, Obama is correct that every single one has seen positive job growth. Thats a record for uninterrupted job growth, according to our friends at theWashington PostFact Checker. This graph from BLS shows monthly change in private-sector job growth (in thousands) since the start of 2010:  From early 2010 on, the data is above the zero line, showing positive job growth. The fact that the country has gained jobs despite the health care law also might not assuage critics argument that job growth, and other aspects of the economy, would have been stronger absent the law. For example, in aJanuary 2015 fact-check, we found that the law might have caused many thousands of employees to have their hours cut from full-time to part-time. But independent studies havent backed up claims that the law would end up reducing employment. In 2011, we rated a claim from former Rep. Eric Cantor, R-Va., that Obamacare is job killingFalse. Former Rep. John Boehner, R-Ohio, said in 2014 that Obamacare is expected to destroy 2.3 million jobs. We rated that claimMostly False. Our ruling Obama said, Our businesses have created jobs every single month since (Obamacare) became law. The private sector has seen job growth every single month since Obama signed the Affordable Care Act in March 2010. Theres room for argument over what the growth would have looked like absent the health care law, but Obamas statistic is on target. We rate this claim True. On Aug. 16, 2022, we received mail from our readers that asked if Facebook pages named Target Fans and Walmart Fans were legitimately giving away or donating hundreds of refrigerators and ovens. The truth was that these pages were nothing more than the first step of potentially dangerous survey scams. The scammers appeared to be based in Indonesia. The posts showed pictures of refrigerators and ovens (ranges) with the caption, "We are happy to announce that we will be donating 670 refrigerators and cookers which cannot be sold due to a few scratches and minor damage, all machines are in working order, so we will send them randomly to someone who writes 'DONE' before August 19th!"  A search of Facebook for the words Target Fans and the lowercase and special characters ??????? ???? showed dozens of pages that were hosting the survey scams. Target Fans ??????? ???? Survey scams like the one for the Target refrigerators giveaway are a specific kind of ruse. They promise big prizes up front, but then lead to a seemingly endless number of surveys with other tantalizing prizing promises, such as a $750 transfer via the mobile finance app, Cash App. Usually, the scammers who created the Facebook posts are hoping that users sign up for accounts on various websites that might land them small amounts of commission. Target At the same time, survey scams can also be quite dangerous, reported AARP.org: reported AARP.org Amid questions about the supposed subject, sham surveys solicit personal or financial information, such as a credit card number to pay a shipping fee for your prize  something a legit survey will not do. They might trick you into signing up for a free trial offer thats actually a costly subscription for a dietary supplement or other product. Clicking on the link might also launch malware that can scrape sensitive data from your device. Either way, the scammers get information they can use for identity theft or sell on to other bad actors. Some major retailers, including Amazon and Walmart, do offer gift cards as prizes for customers who complete online surveys about their shopping experience, but those companies say they will never ask participants to provide sensitive data. We strongly advise readers to never click any links in offers that seem too good to be true. Also, we recommend sharing our article with family members or friends who might be susceptible to falling for this kind of a Target or Walmart Facebook scam. In sum, no, Target and Walmart weren't giving away or donating refrigerators or ovens on Facebook on pages named Target Fans and Walmart Fans. Walmart Facebook Source: Beware of Survey Scams That Require Personal Information. AARP, https://www.aarp.org/money/scams-fraud/info-2021/survey.html. If you're strapped for cash, as Rhode Island certainly is, you're always looking for a way to cut expenses.One area often targeted by pundits, because it makes up such a large share of the state budget, is spending on human services such as Medicaid, which provides health care to low-income people.In April, we looked at one aspect of that portion of the budget, giving aHalf Trueto a statement by Rhode Island Tea Party founder Colleen Conley that Rhode Island has the most generous welfare benefits in New England. (We found that every New England state, except Maine, pays more to its welfare recipients. )During the June 26 broadcast of10 News Conference, Gary Sasse, former director of the Rhode Island Department of Administration and the business-backed Rhode Island Public Expenditure Council, made a related comparison, saying that the state gives out far more benefits than the national average.Speaking of what is now the 2012 state budget, Sasse said that of the $200-million increase [in overall spending], 90 percent is to support human service programs. We spend 52 percent more per capita on human service programs than the national average.When reporter Bill Rappleye asked for specific numbers, Sasse said, Well, we spend about $9,300 per capita on Medicaid programs, and that's soup to nuts, that's everything from RIte Care to nursing homes. The average for the country is about $6,100. There's a $3,000 difference.So the question on human services is not necessarily cutting back on eligibility, but looking at what optional services we provide. We provide about $60 [million] -- probably more than that, probably about $70 million -- in optional Medicaid services that many other states don't provide.We asked Sasse for the source of his assertion that Rhode Island spends $1.52 for every $1 spent nationally.He gave us two.The first is aFeb. 10 presentation developed by the House Finance Committee, which reported that in 2008, a total of $294 billion was spent nationally on Medicaid recipients. That averages out to $6,120 per recipient (19.4 percent of the money went to children, 13.5 percent went to adults, 43 percent was for the disabled and 24.1 percent was spent on the aged).In Rhode Island that year, the state spent $1.7 billion (about 52 percent of it federal funds) or $9,341 per recipient, with children and adults getting less (13.5 percent and 10.1 percent respectively) and the disabled getting a lot more (51.4 percent). House spokesman Larry Berman said the source of those numbers was theHenry J. Kaiser Family Foundation, which collects state and federal spending data.The per-enrollee spending is 52.6 percent higher in Rhode Island than the United States. Sasse said that's where his 52 percent statement came from.But what about the per capita spending?Sasse said in an interview that when he said per capita, the population he was referring to was enrollees. However, we believe most people who hear the term will think it's based on the population in Rhode Island.Would the number be different if calculated using the general population?As a second source, he referred us to RIPEC's 2010 How Rhode Island Compares report. It's based onU.S. Census datafrom 2008 and looks at the cost of public welfare -- Medicaid and cash payments to the poor -- on the basis of state population. That report says public welfare costs were $2,036 per Rhode Island resident, which is 51.8 percent more than the $1,341 spent per capita nationally.If you just look at RIPEC's Medicaid numbers, as the House Finance Committee staff report did, per capita spending in Rhode Island is actually 55.8 percent more than the national average, a bit higher than Sasse said.Why does Rhode Island spend so much more?We have very high residential care costs, said Sasse, a factor others have noted.In addition, Rhode Island covers some services regarded as optional by the federal government, such as adult daycare, assisted living for the elderly and hospice care for the dying.Sasse offered no specific suggestions about what to cut. He said that's for the politicians to decide; he's just looking at the basic numbers.Fred Sneesby, spokesman for the state Department of Human Services, said in April after we published our earlier item that it's important to consider other fiscally meaningful differences among states; for example, the percentage of disabled and elderly in Rhode Island is significantly higher than in neighboring states as well as the national average.He pointed us to section of the Kaiser website, StateHealthFacts.org, showing that since the 2004 fiscal year, the state's growth inMedicaid spending has been significantly less than the U.S. average. He also said that eligibility for Rhode Island programs isas strict -- if not stricter-- than Massachusetts and Connecticut.To sum up, Sasse said Rhode Islands per capita human services spending -- by his definition, Medicaid spending per enrollee --  is 52 percent higher than the national average. By that definition, hes correct.Hes also correct in the more common use of per capita -- spending by population.So we rate his claimTrue.As often happens, our research on this item raised questions that go beyond the statement we evaluated. Chief among them: How concerned should we be that Rhode Island spends more than the national average?Advocacy groups rarely address the question directly when they offer their reports and statistics.The 52-percent figure could mean that the state is being overly generous with its benefits.Or it could mean that the characteristics of Rhode Island's population require us to spend more to give the same level of service that other states provide.Or it could mean that the national average is depressed by states that are declining to provide some of the optional services, such as hospice care for the poor, that some Rhode Islanders might regard as anything but optional.Such context would help voters and their leaders make intelligent decisions about where to attack the problem. It would also help them ensure that our money is being spent wisely on the services we want to offer. (Get updates fromPolitiFactRI on Twitter. To comment or offer your ruling, visit us on ourPolitiFact Rhode Island Facebookpage.) In response to a new Democratic proposal to overhaul immigration laws, U.S. Rep. Lamar Smith noted that a large number of illegal immigrants have jobs in the United States and suggested that one way to reduce the unemployment rate would be to free up those jobs for citizens and legal immigrants.Smith, R-San Antonio, said the illegal immigrants hold 8 million jobs, according to a news release distributed Dec. 15.Arguing against the Democrats proposal to provide millions of immigrants a path to citizenship, Smith says U.S. policies should put American workers, American taxpayers, and American citizens first, not those who are in the country illegally. This is the kind of legislation that foreign governments would promote, not the U.S. Congress.He added that allowing millions of illegal immigrants to stay and take jobs away from citizens and legal immigrants is like giving a burglar a key to the house. Illegal immigrants currently occupy 8 million jobs. Those stolen jobs rightfully belong to citizens and legal immigrants.Leaving aside the question of whether any of those jobs were stolen from their rightful owners, we wondered whether Smith's 8 million figure  about the same as the population of Virginia  was correct. Do illegal immigrants hold that many jobs? Smiths source for the number is a demographer at the Pew Hispanic Center,Jeffrey Passel, who analyzed the relevant data for an April 2009 report, A Portrait of Unauthorized Immigrants in the United States. The Pew center is a research organization that seeks to improve understanding of the U.S. Hispanic population.Using March 2008 data, primarily from the U.S. Census Bureau, Passel estimated that the number of undocumented workers in the United States was 7.8 million, so Smith is clearly in the ballpark.But is it fair ofthe congressmanto make his statement aboutjobswhen the datarefers toworkers? Passel saidyes.We found a wrinkle, though.Economic conditions have changed since March 2008. Smiths statement suggests that the 8 million is a current figure, but the data used for that estimate are more than 20 months old. Since then, millions of people have lost their jobs, including many undocumented immigrants.According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the national unemployment rate for March 2008 was 5.1 percent; that figure has skyrocketed, to 10 percent, in December 2009. That month, more than 15 million people were without jobs.Immigrants have been hit harder in the economic downturn. The unemployment rate for immigrants, without regard to their citizenship status, has gone up faster than that of natives, Passel said. With huge job losses across all demographic groups, Passel saidthe number of employed illegal immigrants has most likely dropped.Passel suggested that today the number is closer to 7 million.So Smith is right that millions of jobs are held by illegal immigrants. Yet by citing numbers thatwere20 months old, hedidn't account forconditions that have caused some of those jobs to disappear. We find his claim Mostly True. Claim:  The U.S. government has agreed to allow China to exercise "eminent domain" as collateral for American debt.   Example:  [Turner, February 2009] The United States of America has tendered to China a written agreement which grants to the People's Republic of China, an option to exercise Eminent Domain within the USA, as collateral for China's continued purchase of US Treasury Notes and existing US Currency reserves! On February 11, Bloomberg Business News reported that China was seeking "guarantees" for its US Government debt (Story Here), and it now appears they got it. Well placed senior sources at the US Embassy in Beijing CONFIRM the formal written agreement was delivered by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton during her recent trip to China. This means that in the event the US Government defaults on its financial obligations to China, the Communist Government of China would be permitted to physically take  inside the USA  land, buildings, factories, perhaps even entire cities  to satisfy the financial obligations of the US government. [Rest of article here.] here Origins:  The large amount of U.S. debt held by foreign countries such as China has long concerned many Americans, and especially so with the current climate of economic turmoil.  As the Washington Post noted: China is the biggest foreign holder of U.S. debt, which helped finance the spending binge the United States went on before the current economic crisis. Some experts have expressed concern that China's substantial holding of U.S. debt gives it increased leverage in dealings with Washington because any halt in Chinese purchases would make it more difficult to finance the government bailout and stimulus packages. Likewise, as Bloomberg news reported, some Chinese officals have opined that China should ask the U.S. for some economic guarantees as a prerequisite for additional purchases of U.S. securities: China will ask for a guarantee that the U.S. will support the dollar's exchange rate and make sure China's dollar-denominated assets are safe," said He [Zhicheng, an economist at Agricultural Bank of China]. But that's as far as the truth of the item cited in the example block above goes.  The notion that the U.S. has agreed to guarantee its foreign debt by granting China permission to enact "eminent domain" and "physically take land, buildings, factories, perhaps even entire cities" from the U.S. isn't even a sensible claim.   The concept of "eminent domain" in the United States refers to the right of the government to seize private property for public use in exchange for payment of fair market value.  (The Fifth Amendment to the Constitution mandates that "private property [shall not] be taken for public use, without just compensation.")  Thus the idea of enacting eminent domain as a form of debt repayment or guarantee isn't logical: It's akin to a debtor's offering to settle a $5,000 debt by agreeing to sell his creditor $5,000 worth of jewelry for $5,000  at the end of the day, the debtor hasn't given up anything, and his creditor still hasn't collected anything on his original loan amount. mandates Moreover, Executive Order 13406 ("Protecting the Property Rights of the American People") states that the the federal government must limit its use of the taking of private property "to situations in which the taking is for public use, with just compensation" and "not merely for the purpose of advancing the economic interest of private parties to be given ownership or use of the property taken." 13406 Aside from functional arguments, the common sense test applies: If the U.S. government had actually guaranteed, in writing, that China could seize private property within the U.S. to satisfy the financial obligations of the U.S. government, that information would be the biggest new story of the day.  So who is reporting this news?  Not any legitimate news outlet  the story appears only in the blog of former radio host Hal Turner (who has previously presented fictitious tales of politically outrageous subjects as actual occurrences, such as proffering fake Amero coins as proof of a secret conspiracy to merge the U.S., Mexico, and Canada into a single entity) and in hundreds of identical Internet replications. Hal Turner Amero Last updated:  8 March 2009    Corsi, Jerome R.  "Did Hillary Really Pledge U.S. Homes to China?"   WorldNetDaily.  2 March 2009.    Kessler, Glenn.  "Clinton Urges Continued Investment in U.S."   Washington Post.  23 February 2009  (p. A12). A common item of interest on social media is a rather gruesome anecdote attributed to Soviet leader Josef Stalin, which describes him purportedly plucking a live chicken in order to demonstrate "how easy it is to govern stupid people":  We found no sources for this anecdote that were contemporaneous with Stalin's life (he died in 1953), nor from the next few decades afterwards. The earliest recountings of it seem to date from the early 1990s or late 1980s, which is consistent with the following excerpt from a 1988 New Yorker article that attributes it to the mid-1980s writings of anti-Stalinist Soviet/Kyrgyz author Chingiz Aitmatov: With the new Party line established, editors around the country unleashed an extraordinary torrent of articles damning Stalin. A novelist named Chingiz Aitmatov wrote one of the most powerful. Aitmatov has a distinguished history as an anti-Stalinist. In the early nineteen-eighties, when discipline of all kinds was lax, he managed to get past the censors a novel called "The Day Lasts More Than a Hundred Years," which in elliptical, allegorical ways, attacked the Stalinist legacy, and sold five million copies. Now Aitmatov was free to use language as blunt as he liked. He began with an anecdote: Stalin called together his closest comrades-in-arms. "I understand you're wondering how I govern the people so that every last one of them ... thinks of me as a living god. Now I'll teach you the right attitude toward the people." And he ordered a chicken brought in. He plucked it live, in front of them all, down to the last feather, down to the red flesh, until only the comb was left on its head. "And now watch," he said, and let the chicken go. It could have gone off where it wished, but it went nowhere. It was too hot in the sun and too cold in the shade. The poor bird could only press itself against Stalin's boots. And then he tossed it a crumb of grain, and the bird followed him wherever he went. Otherwise, it would have fallen over from hunger. "That," he told his pupils, "is how you govern our people." Aitmatov appears to be the source of this tale, but as noted in the above New Yorker article and a 2008 Reuters obituary for Aitmatov, he wrote in "elliptical, allegorical ways," and his works "often interwove popular myths and folktales to create allegorical themes populated with down-to-earth characters." Aitmatov acknowledged that of himself as well, writing in the introduction to his novel "The Day Lasts More Than a Hundred Years": obituary As in previous works, here I also draw on legends and myths handed down to us from former generations; together with these, for the first time in my writing career I also use fantasy to form part of the story. But, for me, neither is an end in itself, simply a method of expressing thoughts, a means of identifying and interpreting realities. Given that Aitmatov is the apparent source for this anecdote, that it did not first appear until some 30 years after Stalin's death, and that Aitmatov was known for his use of allegory, most likely the tale is not a literal account of something Stalin did, but rather an illustrative sketch that Aitmatov either invented himself or heard elsewhere and subsequently attributed to Stalin. We therefore rate this claim "Legend." Cullen, Robert.  "Letter from Moscow."
  The New Yorker.  17 October 1988  (p. 100). Aitmatov, Chingiz.  The Day Lasts More than a Hundred Years.
  Indiana University Press, 1988.  ISBN 0-253-20482-8. Reuters.  "Kyrgyz Writer, Perestroika Ally Aitmatov Dies."
  10 June 2008.