Sotomayor Speech From 2001 Recirculates After Trump Comments on Judge's Mexican Heritage
In June 2016, several pundits misquoted, paraphrased, or presented incomplete or inaccurate versions of a 2001 speech delivered by Sonia Sotomayor at the University of California in an attempt to defend Republican Presidential candidate Donald Trump's recent comments about U.S. District Court Judge Gonzalo Curiel. In an interview with CNN, Trump said that Curiel should recuse himself from a case he's overseeing against the now-defunct Trump University, since he may not be able to give him a fair trial due to his Mexican heritage: interview The presumptive GOP nominee claims that his plan to build a massive wall along the U.S. border with Mexico has resulted in a conflict of interest for Curiel in the case over Trumps for-profit university.Hes proud of his heritage, OK? Im building a wall, Trump told Tapper. Hes a Mexican. Were building a wall between here and Mexico, he added.Tapper, however, pointed out that Curiel was born in Indiana.We live in a society thats very pro-Mexico, and thats fine. Thats all fine, Trump said at another point in the interview. But I think he should recuse himself.Because hes a Latino? Tapper asked.Im building a wall, Trump maintained. While several Republicans have denounced Trump's statements (House Speaker Paul Ryan called it "textbook racism"), others have used Sotomayor's speech to come to his defense. For instance, television personality Eric Bolling equated Sotomayor's comments with the comments made by Trump: textbook racism equated Justice Sotomayor said, I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would often make, often more than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasnt lived that life. Better conclusion, not a different conclusion, a better conclusion. She went on to say that our gender and national origins may and will make a difference in our judging. Shes basically saying her heritage will determine how she will find cases, not the merits of the case, but what her experiences are. Pundit Ann Coulter bashed Paul Ryan on Twitter, questioning why the House Speaker did not call Sotomayor a "textbook racist":   In 2001, Sonia Sotomayor delivered the annual "Olmos Memorial Lecture" at the UC Berkeley School of Law. Sotomayor (who was at that point an appeals court judge) took issue with a quote attributed to Justice Sandra Day O'Connor: delivered Whether born from experience or inherent physiological or cultural differences, a possibility I abhor less or discount less than my colleague Judge Cedarbaum, our gender and national origins may and will make a difference in our judging. Justice O'Connor has often been cited as saying that a wise old man and wise old woman will reach the same conclusion in deciding cases. I am not so sure Justice O'Connor is the author of that line since Professor Resnik attributes that line to Supreme Court Justice Coyle. I am also not so sure that I agree with the statement. First, as Professor Martha Minnow has noted, there can never be a universal definition of wise. Second, I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn't lived that life. While Sotomayor's speech was centered on the idea that her experiences as a Latina woman influenced her thought process, she never said (as insinuated by Bolling) that her heritage  rather than the merits of the case  would determine her decisions. Instead, Sotomayor said that her heritage does not limit her ability to understand the values or needs of people from different backgrounds: I, like Professor Carter, believe that we should not be so myopic as to believe that others of different experiences or backgrounds are incapable of understanding the values and needs of people from a different group. Many are so capable. As Judge Cedarbaum pointed out to me, nine white men on the Supreme Court in the past have done so on many occasions and on many issues including Brown. However, to understand takes time and effort, something that not all people are willing to give. For others, their experiences limit their ability to understand the experiences of others. Other simply do not care. Hence, one must accept the proposition that a difference there will be by the presence of women and people of color on the bench. Personal experiences affect the facts that judges choose to see. My hope is that I will take the good from my experiences and extrapolate them further into areas with which I am unfamiliar. I simply do not know exactly what that difference will be in my judging. But I accept there will be some based on my gender and my Latina heritage. This is not the first time that Sotomayor's 2001 speech has been scrutinized. In 2009, during Sotomayor's confirmation hearings to the Supreme Court, the soon-to-be justice clarified her comments: scrutinized "I was trying to inspire (students) to believe their experiences would enrich the legal system," Sotomayor said Tuesday. "I was also trying to inspire them to believe they could become anything they wanted to become, just as I have." She said the context of her words created a misunderstanding. "I want to state upfront, unequivocally and without doubt: I do not believe that any ethnic, racial or gender group has an advantage in sound judging," she said. "I do believe every person has an equal opportunity to be a good and wise judge, regardless of their background or life experience." Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor did deliver a speech in 2001 in which she talked about how her experience as a Latina woman could influence her thought process, as everyone has different life experiences to draw from. However, unlike the sentiment expressed by Donald Trump in his comments about Judge Gonzalo Curiel, Sotomayor argued that diversity was essential to the progress of law.
Voting in the 2020 U.S. Election may be over, but the misinformation keeps on ticking. Never stop fact-checking. Follow our post-election coverage here. here On Oct. 31 2020, The New York Times reported that the Trump Campaign's fundraising landing page was "now automatically checking a box to create recurring weekly donations from supporters until mid-December." This is true, though the "automatically checked box" development is fairly old news. The Trump Campaign's primary fundraising platform  WinRed  changed the landing page to automatically check the monthly recurring donation option in March 2020. The shift to soliciting for weekly donations occurred in mid-September 2020, with that option also appearing as pre-checked. reported changed March 2020 shift September 2020 The more recent development is the change in when those weekly contributions would stop. Earlier solicitations committed people to donations that would stop automatically recurring on Election Day, Nov. 3 2020. In late October, the text was changed to read "make this a recurring donation until 12/14." It bears mentioning that well before any returns came in on Nov. 3, the campaign encouraged donations as a way to "keep fighting after election day" because "there will be voter fraud like you've never seen." late October Speaking to the Times, Trump campaign spokesperson Tim Murtaugh said that no one would receive a recurring charge without their knowledge and donors could opt out at any time. He argued that funds were needed because "this race will be very close, and it is possible that multiple states will require recounts and potential additional spending from our campaign.  Speaking From a factual standpoint, there is no guarantee that the money goes to fight election-related lawsuits. Some of the money goes to resolving Trump Campaign debt, much of the rest goes to the Republican National Committees' general operating account. Because the Trump Campaign is indeed accepting recurring donations until Dec. 12, and because that option is auto-checked on the campaign's primary fundraising platform, we rank this claim  the money One of the more unusual and complicated theories associated with the sovereign citizen and tax protester movements is the belief that lawyers who are members of bar associations in the United States are, in fact, agents of the British crown and do not have legitimate status in American courts. This theory is partly informed by a false but widely repeated claim that the word "bar" in this context is an acronym for "British Accreditation Register":  Here's how the elaborate and confusing theory is outlined in an anonymously-authored essay called "Hiding Behind the Bar," which has been republished and shared in tax protester and sovereign citizen circles for more than a decade: essay During the middle 1600's, the Crown of England established a formal registry in London where barristers [lawyers] were ordered by the Crown to be accredited. The establishment of this first International Bar Association allowed barrister-lawyers from all nations to be formally recognized and accredited by the only recognized accreditation society. From this, the acronym BAR was established denoting (informally) the British Accredited Registry, whose members became a powerful and integral force within the International Bar Association (IBA). Although this has been denied repeatedly as to its existence, the acronym BAR stood for the British barrister-lawyers who were members of the larger IBA. Almost every part of this is factually inaccurate. For one thing, the International Bar Association was founded in 1947, not in the 1600s. Second, we could find no evidence of the existence of a professional association for lawyers called the "British Accredited Registry," either in 2018 or at any previous time in history. 1947 A History of the American Bar, a 1911 book by the Pulitzer Prize-winning legal scholar Charles Warren, contains no mention of any "British Accredited Registry" or "British Accreditation Registry" (with "accredited" and "accreditation" being used variously in different versions of this conspiracy theory). It would also make little sense for a group of lawyers in 17th century England to form a group describing itself as "British." Great Britain (composed of England, Wales and Scotland) does not have, and has never had, a unified courts system, instead being separated into two systems: England and Wales and Scotland. In fact, Great Britain itself was not even formally created until 1707, when the Acts of Union joined the Kingdom of Scotland with the Kingdom of England (which included Wales). book accreditation England and Wales Acts of Union But more broadly, this theory offers a confused summary of the history of "the bar." In the Middle Ages, lawyers in London established four "Inns of Court": Lincoln's Inn, the Inner Temple, the Middle Temple, and Gray's Inn. These were physical buildings but, more figuratively, they were also the professional associations for lawyers working in the more important English courts. A "barrister" was a legal expert or advocate who has been "called to the bar." This is a metonymic phrase which is rooted in the physical barrier that was present in a courtroom, to separate fully qualified lawyers entitled to plead cases before a judge from (roughly speaking) trainee lawyers and members of the public. In modern times, this physical barrier generally separates participants in a trial (such as lawyers, clerks, defendants, the jury, and the judge) from the gallery in which members of the public and the news media sit. established metonymic So someone who has been "called to the bar" has been given the right to advocate before a judge and is thereby known as a "barrister." A "bar association" is, roughly speaking, a professional association for lawyers, akin to a guild. In some jurisdictions, bar associations are limited to barristers (as opposed to solicitors, a different type of lawyer); whereas in others, they are open to all members of the legal profession. In some jurisdictions a bar association is the body that licenses and regulates legal professionals, and in others it is merely a professional association. The "BAR" conspiracy theory essay goes on to say: When America was still a chartered group of British colonies under patent  established in what was formally named the British Crown territory of New England  the first British Accredited Registry (BAR) was established in Boston during 1761 to attempt to allow only accredited barrister-lawyers access to the British courts of New England. This was the first attempt to control who could represent defendants in the court at or within the bar in America. Today, each corporate STATE in America has it's [sic] own BAR Association, i.e. The Florida Bar or the California Bar, that licenses government officer attorneys, NOT lawyers. In reality, the U.S. courts only allow their officer attorneys to freely enter within the bar while prohibiting those learned of the law  lawyers  to do so. They prevent advocates, lawyers, counselors, barristers and solicitors from entering through the outer bar. Only licensed BAR Attorneys are permitted to freely enter within the bar separating the people from the bench because all BAR Attorneys are officers of the court itself. Does that tell you anything? A 1930 essay published in the Cornell Law Review (page 393) refers to a bar association's having been established in Boston in 1761, but remember that a bar association is no more than a kind of guild for lawyers. "Bar" is not an acronym for "British Accredited Registry," because that acronym is a fabrication. As with many sovereign citizen theories, the essay builds on the shaky foundations of an inaccurate account of the history of bar associations in the United States and draws confused conclusions about the function and legal status of lawyers. page 393 Many of these claims are based on the etymology of certain words, rather than their modern meaning. For example, the author of the essay referenced above presents the origins of the word "attorney," citing Webster's 1828 dictionary definition, as: "In the feudal law, to turn, or transfer homage and service from one lord to another." That essay also proclaims: Here's where the whole word game gets really tricky. In each State, every licensed BAR Attorney calls himself an Attorney at Law. Look at the definitions above and see for yourself that an Attorney at Law is nothing more than an attorney  one who transfers allegiance and property to the ruling land owner. That passage is false. Whatever the older origins of the word "attorney" might be, the modern definition of that word is much broader. Merriam-Webster defines an attorney as simply "one who is legally appointed to transact business on another's behalf." In common American parlance, "attorney" is used interchangeably with "lawyer." defines This fixation on word origins leads to something like a game of Telephone in the logic of the conspiracy theory, with false conclusions being drawn from inaccurate or incomplete premises. Here are more examples, summarized from the essay: The historical origins of the word "esquire" did have to do with the transfer of property between feudal land-owners, but that was hundreds of years ago. This argument is roughly analogous to claiming that because the title "Ph.D" derives from the Latin "philosophiae doctor" ("doctor of philosophy"), microbiologists with Ph.D at the end of their names have no legal right to conduct scientific research because they are actually philosophers and not scientists. "A BAR [British Accredited Registry] licensed Attorney is not an advocate," the theory goes on to falsely claim, "so how can he do anything other than what his real purpose is?": He can't plead on your behalf because that would be a conflict of interest. He can't represent the crown (ruling government) as an official officer at the same time he is allegedly representing a defendant. His sworn duty as a BAR Attorney is to transfer your ownership, rights, titles, and allegiance to the land owner. When you hire a BAR Attorney to represent you in their courts, you have hired an officer of that court whose sole purpose and occupation is to transfer what you have to the creator and authority of that court.  It's not clear what the origins of the the fabricated acronym are, but "British Accredited Registry" was invoked as early as 2001 by Austin Gary Cooper, a long-time "sovereign citizen" activist. In 2003, a U.S. District Court in Colorado barred Cooper and his wife Martha Cooper from selling advice on how to avoid paying federal income tax after the couple set up groups called "Taking Back America" and the "Ten Foundation," which advised their paying customers that they could renounce their United States citizenship, call themselves "American citizens" instead, and escape their tax obligations. In 2006, Cooper was given a six-month prison sentence for criminal contempt after failing to comply with that court order, which obliged him to hand over the names of his customers, among other requirements. During court proceedings, Cooper accused the judge of treason and called him a "Nazi bastard" and a "British Accredited Registry" lawyer, saying: "You people are going to destroy our country. British accredited registry bar association, you're going to destroy our country ..." 2001 barred sentence proceedings In 2017, prosecutors in Tennessee charged Cooper, who is now 69 years old, with 10 counts of forgery and filing a fraudulent lien. The case was ongoing as of January 2018. charged ongoing Warren, Charles.  "A History of the American Bar."
   Little, Brown and Company, 1911. U.K. Parliament.  "Act of Union 1707."
  U.K. Parliament.  Unknown publication date. Wickser, Philip J.  "Bar Associations."
  Cornell Law Review  (Vol. 15.3, April 1930). Babcock, Chief Judge Lewis T.  "Permanent Injunction Order, U.S.A v. Austin Gary Cooper et al."
  U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado.  20 November 2003. Morlin, Bill.  "Ten Sovereign Citizens Face 320 Felonies in Tennessee."
  Southern Poverty Law Center.  28 March 2017. In early 2021, Snopes became aware of online posts alleging narrative plot holes in the 1994 film "Forrest Gump," which American screenwriter Eric Roth created based on a novel with the same title. One Reddit thread, for example, debated the accuracy of a scene in the latter half of the movie in which the fictional protagonist, Forrest Gump, played by Tom Hanks, received a letter from the computer software company, Apple. Reddit thread Additionally, a webpage on My Daily Magazine  a digital hub of self-improvement tips and other content  alleged Gump's famous cross-country run (which came after the Apple letter scene) spanned 1.5 years, based on other context clues, though Gump said he ran for more than three years. My Daily Magazine Below, we analyzed the legitimacy of those claims, which together asserted that the movie that mixed fictional characters and ideas with real events contained at least two plot holes. Before we proceed, let us note here: We requested an interview with Roth by reaching out to the Los Angeles-based talent company, called Creative Artists Agency, which represents the screenwriter, according to IMDB. We have yet to receive a response, and we will update this report when or if we receive one. Creative Artists Agency One Reddit user alleged: "Iconic 'Forrest Gump' Scene Has One Ridiculous Flaw No One Noticed | Forest Gump is set in 1975 and he got a letter from Apple, which wasn't founded until 1981." In other words, the post claimed Gump received a letter from the tech company before it was established. The Reddit post referenced a montage scene roughly one hour and 40 minutes into the movie, when Gump explained his life after working with "Lt. Dan" as a member of his platoon and later as shrimp boat partners. Gump narrates the scene: scene As Gump mentions the "fruit company," movie viewers saw him opening a letter addressed to him with Apple's retro rainbow logo and the title "Apple Computer, Inc." We took the below-displayed screenshot of the moment, via Amazon's digital rental version of the film:   As you can see, the letter was dated Sept. 23, 1975. While the Reddit post claimed the computer manufacturing company was actually formed in 1981  which we learned was inaccurate based on evidence we outlined below  we pieced together events showing when, exactly, college dropouts Steve Jobs and Steve Wozniak created the company. As a 26-year-old engineering intern at Hewlett-Packard Company, or HP, Wozniak indeed developed a plan to build his own computer in 1975, after a New-Mexico-based tech firm announced the invention of the first-ever commercially successful microcomputer, the Altair 8800, the previous year, according to Encyclopedia Britannica and the Smithsonian National Museum of American History. Wozniak Encyclopedia Britannica Smithsonian National Museum of American History Wozniak initially pitched his design to his employer, historical records show. But after it expressed no interest in his idea, he teamed up with his former high-school classmate, 21-year-old Jobs, to act on his vision by piecing together equipment in Jobs' Silicon Valley garage. "Jobs and Wozniak named their company Apple," Britannica said.  Portrait of American businessmen and engineers Steve Jobs (left) and Steve Wozniak in 1977. (Photo by Tom Munnecke/Getty Images)  So while Wozniak first acted on a design that eventually led to the company's creation in 1975, Apple Computers, Inc, was not officially established until April 1, 1976, according to an arm of The Library of Congress that documents American business and economics, called Business Reference Services. Business Reference Services The underlying assertion of the Reddit post's claim was accurate: Jobs and Wozniak founded Apple after the date of Gump's letter. Additionally, Apple did not launch an initial public offering (IPO) of its stock  which would have hypothetically allowed Lt. Dan to invest his and Gump's money in the tech company until December 12, 1980, according to EDN, a trade magazine for electrical design and engineering news. EDN "The shares sold out almost immediately and the IPO generated more capital than any IPO since Ford Motor Company in 1956," the magazine reported. "Instantly, about 300 millionaires were created, some 40 of which were Apple employees and investors." In sum, since the letter supposedly depicting Gump's stock investment in Apple was dated in fall 1975, and the fact that Jobs and Wozniak did not officially launch the company until the following spring and allowed public shareholding years after that, it was true to say the movie scene included a narrative plot hole. The original "Forrest Gump" novel by Vietnam veteran Winston Groom, which was published about eight years before the movie's release, did not reference Apple or "some kind of fruit company" in its storyline, based on our keyword search of the text. Winston Groom, In an October 2020 slideshow of "Interesting Facts About Forrest Gump," My Daily Magazine alleged of a roughly seven-minute sequence in the movie, depicting the long run by Gump: alleged seven-minute sequence Forrest Gump said that he was running for three years and two months. But he actually started running the day President Carter collapsed from heat in October 1, 1979, and ran until he got Jenny's letter the day President Regan's [sic] assassination attempt was all over the news. Between the first and the second event, only a year and a half had passed. Put another way, the webpage claimed Gump only ran for 1.5 years  not three years and about two and a half months, like Gump claimed in his narration of the scene  based on surrounding details of the film that depicted real historical events. (Note: Winston's novel did not include the famous cross-country run by Gump.) However, the movie's famous "run scene" began on Gump's front porch in the fictional town of Greenbow, Alabama. The character said "for no particular reason, I decided to go for a little run." Within seconds, viewers saw Gump running past a business in which at least two men were watching a television news cast. The news program said in the background of Gump's narration: "President Carter, suffering from heat exhaustion, fell into the arms of ..." President Jimmy Carter indeed suffered from heat exhaustion while running a six-mile race in Maryland on Sept. 15, 1979, according to news archives obtained by Snopes. "The President was sweating excessively and had become weak and wobbly at the 4-mile point due to heat exhaustion," The New York Times reported two days later. "Carter fell to his knees and was given smelling salts." news archives reported While it was unclear whether the news anchor in in Forrest Gump was reporting on Carter's fall live or recapping the event days after it happened, the inclusion of the detail likely meant movie producers wanted viewers to believe Gump began his run in mid-September 1979. After passing the business, Gump's narration continued as images of him running past Alabama's state line to Mississippi, and eventually reaching the Pacific Ocean in Santa Monica, California, appeared on screen. He supposedly made the same multi-state trip multiple times, only stopping to sleep, eat, and use the bathroom. Then, at one point, movie viewers saw men inside a barbershop and people inside a cafe, including Gump's love interest Jenny Curran, watching TV news programs featuring Gump's run. One news anchor said he had been running for more than two years, which would put the date in mid-September 1981 or later, based on Carter's heat exhaustion episode.  By the end of the montage, when he apparently stopped running and returned to Alabama, Gump claimed, "I had run for three years, two months, 14 days and 16 hours."  Screenshot via Amazon's digital version of Forrest Gump.  The movie's next scene showed a news program playing footage of President Ronald Reagan approaching a limousine and people ducking from gunshots. "Five or six gunshots were fired by an unknown, would-be assassin," a news anchor said, as Gump listened to the broadcast. "The president was shot in the chest." That detail again referenced a real-life event, the attempted assassination of Reagan in Washington, D.C., on March 30, 1981, according to news archives. The president was leaving a hotel speaking event when gunman John Hinkley Jr. opened fire, wounding Reagan and three administration officials. the attempted assassination John Hinkley Jr. Based on back-of-the-napkin math, only one year, six months and 15 days passed between Carter's collapse and Reagan's assassination attempt, proving the underlying claim of The Daily Magazine webpage true  Gump's alleged timeframe for the run did not align with the actual timing of simultaneously-referenced historical events. According to ScreenCraft, an organization that aims to help aspiring screenwriters, cinematic storytellers should avoid such plot errors, big or small, that expose inconsistencies in characters' motivation or storylines. ScreenCraft "Even the best screenwriters make mistakes," wrote Ken Miyamoto, a ScreenCraft blogger and former Sony Pictures screenwriter. "The small ones are those that may slip by the average audience member." Ken Miyamoto Claim:  The federal government is preventing Volkswagen's XL1 model car from being sold in the U.S. because the vehicle is too fuel-efficient.  Examples:  [Collected via e-mail, September 2013] Volkswagen's New 300 MPG Car Not Allowed In America Because It Is Too Efficient Would like to know of the article is valid. Origins:  For many years conspiracy rumors have circulated positing that a collusion between Big Oil and the U.S. government has prevented the American public from having the opportunity to purchase fully developed, market-ready automobiles capable of obtaining fuel efficiencies of 200-300 MPG.  Such rumors have taken the form of everything from mysterious forces stealing cars equipped with miracle carburetors to keep that technology's existence a secret, to the federal government's enacting regulations intended for the sole purpose of keeping high-mileage vehicles out of the U.S. market in order to protect the interests (and profits) of American oil companies. miracle carburetors high-mileage April 2014 saw the emergence of yet another entry in this vein, courtesy of Jim Stone, Freelance Journalist (the same "journalist" who promulgated the ridiculous story about a passenger on missing Malaysia Airlines Flight 370 who supposedly hid his cell phone in his rectum and used it to post a picture to the Internet after the flight was hijacked), positing that Volkswagen has a terrific 300 MPG vehicle that only costs $60,000 all ready to go, but it can't be sold (or even seen) in America because politicians in the pay of oil companies are conspiring to keep it unknown and unsellable in the U.S.: Jim Stone, Freelance Journalist ridiculous You won't find the 300 MPG Volkswagen XL1 in an American showroom, in fact it has even been denied a tour of America because it is too efficient for the American public to be made widely aware of, and oil profits are too high in America with the status quo in place. No tour has been allowed for this car because the myth that 50 mpg is virtually impossible to obtain from even a stripped down econobox is too profitable to let go of, and when it comes to corporate oil profits, ignorance is bliss. The answer is obvious. Simply for the sake of raking in huge profits from $4 a gallon gas, getting guzzled at 10X the rate it should be, the corporations have via campaign contributions and other types of pay outs succeeded in getting the FED to legislate the best cars off the road for irrelevant trumped up reasons.  Even after being hand made with "exotic" materials in an intentionally limited edition, the Xl1 still only costs $60,000. There is a lot more of a market for this car than 2,000 units at that price, have no doubt, this car is being held back on purpose. In this case the vehicle in question is the Volkswagen XL1, a two-person,  "one-liter" concept car (i.e., a vehicle capable of averaging 100 km per liter of fuel, or about 235 MPG) originally shown to the public back in 2002 and modified (and renamed) several times since over the intervening years.  The latest unveiled version of the XL1, already put into production, is a plug-in diesel-electric hybrid described thusly by Green Car Reports: XL1 Green Car Reports The Volkswagen XL1 is a plug-in diesel hybrid with a body seemingly beamed in from a future time. It's the physical representation of the benefits of reducing weight and improving aerodynamics. The small body may only take two people, but it's allowed for an incredibly streamlined body with a drag coefficient of only 0.189. Low weight  only 1,752 lbs  means only a small engine and electric motor is needed to deliver respectable performance. Much of the car is constructed from carbon fiber, aluminum and titanium. VW says the car will do 261 mpg, though the real figure will be lower than that should it ever be tested under EPA guidelines. Even so, it'll still use comfortably less fuel than any vehicle currently on sale. A diesel engine of only 0.8 liters and 2 cylinders capacity produces 47 horsepower, with a further 27 horses delivered by the electric motor. Power reaches the wheels via a 7-speed dual-clutch gearbox. Those figures sound miniscule by modern standards, but the XL1 should reach 62 mph in 12.7 seconds. Top speed is 98 mph. Operating alone, the small battery can deliver up to 31 miles of range, and can be charged via plug or regenerative effect. It's true that very few, if any, Volkswagen XL1s will likely be seen on U.S. roads in the immediate future, but that situation will be due to a confluence of factors that does not include a government/Big Oil conspiracy to keep them out of the U.S. First of all, it's not true that the XL1 has "been denied a tour of America because  it is too efficient for the American public to be made widely aware of."  Existing safety and traffic regulations do limit where the current XL1 models can be legally driven in public roads in the U.S., but Volkswagen has taken at least three of the vehicles on tour around the U.S., and the staff of Jalopnik drove one around Manhattan at the end of 2013. Jalopnik Second, the primary reason the XL1 won't be seen in the U.S. anytime soon is that Volkswagen is only producing 200 units for retail sale (not 2,000 as claimed above), all of them to be sold in Europe via some sort of selection (i.e., lottery) process.     200 units But why only 200 cars?  And why only in Europe? As for the first part, the answer is that new vehicles like the XL1 are expensive to develop and produce (and therefore expensive for consumers to afford), and similar forms of automobiles have not yet met with tremendous success on the commercial market, so any automotive company that puts such a model into full-blown production risks sinking a whole lot of money into something that may not sell well at all (especially in the U.S. market, where consumers have very different expectations and preferences than European car buyers do). The XL1 is in many ways still a concept/prototype vehicle, and so Volkswagen is testing the waters by putting out a limited production run to see how many consumers are really interested in shelling out the equivalent of U.S. $150,000 (not $60,000 as claimed above) for a two-person car.  And the testers at Car and Driver found that while the XL1's fuel efficiency might be superb, it might also be somewhat overblown as presented in promotional materials: Car and Driver The XL1 should run 31 miles solely on electric power, says [VW development engineer Ulrich] Mitze. But on the cold and rainy April day we drove it, the small, 60-cell, 5.5-kWh, 150-pound lithium-ion battery pack needed a recharge after only 22 miles.  According to the on-board computer, we are fuel hogs. Having started with a full tank (2.6 gallons) and fully charged batteries, we ended our trip after 67 miles; fuel consumption plummeted at one point to a dismal 128 mpg. Achieving the XL1's theoretical 749-mile range would take a right foot as light as a moonbeam. As for why only Europe, the answer is that the U.S. does have many safety standards in place (enacted many years ago a variety of reasons, none of which was to keep high-mileage vehicles off the U.S. market) that all automobile manufacturers have to meet in order to legally sell their vehicles in America, regulations that sometimes require manufacturers to modify or retrofit models that were produced for sale under less strict regulations in Europe (or other parts of the world).  If Volkswagen wants to test-market their XL1 in limited quantities, there's no reason for them to expend millions of dollars preparing and certifying those vehicles for U.S. safety standards when they can vend  their small lot of cars just as well in the European market without all the added expense.  As noted by USA Today: The XL1 [is] a spaceship-like, ultra-high-mpg, plug-in diesel-electric hybrid. VW used exotic, but obtainable, materials and technologies to craft a mileage-above-all car able to get 261 mpg in European tests, equating, very roughly, to perhaps 200 mpg in U.S. tests. Barely a real production model, it's made in a factory, but largely by hand. It couldn't meet U.S. safety rules and needed changes in German rules to be on the road there. And if one buys into the conspiracy theory that the government and Big Oil are colluding to keep high-mileage vehicles off the U.S. market in order to protect profits from gasoline sales, one has to wonder why those powerful and malevolent entities aren't doing anything to stop Americans from purchasing cars produced by Tesla, superbly-performing vehicles that use no gasoline at all yet still deliver premium performance, have great range for electric cars, have received the highest rating of any automobile ever evaluated by Consumer Reports, are top-rated for safety even under tougher U.S. standards, but are widely available for purchase in the U.S.: Tesla Most Americans may never actually see a Tesla Model S sedan in person, but you will want to know why this car is so important to the automotive industry and what all the media fuss is about. Tesla Motors was founded in 2003 by a group of intrepid Silicon Valley engineers who set out to prove that electric vehicles could be awesome. The name of the company pays homage to Nicola Tesla, a Serbian American inventor, electrical engineer, mechanical engineer, physicist, and futurist best known for his contributions to the design of the modern alternating current (AC) electricity supply system. As the California automakers first production model, the Tesla Model S is 100 percent electric, a car so advanced it sets the new standard for premium performance. This is not a hybrid, nor is it equipped with any kind of "range expanding" gasoline engine. At the heart of the vehicle is the proven Tesla powertrain, delivering both unprecedented range and a thrilling drive experience. The Tesla Model S has won the 2013 Motor Trend Car of the Year award, received the highest rating of any automobile in history from Consumer Reports (99 out of 100) and achieved the best possible US National Highway Traffic Safety Administration rating. Unlike the internal combustion engine with hundreds of moving pieces that spark, pump, belch, and groan, the Tesla motor has only one moving piece: the rotor. As a result, Model S acceleration is instantaneous, like flipping a switch. Hit the accelerator. In 5.4 seconds, Model S is traveling 60 miles per hour, without hesitation and without a drop of gasoline. As in so many cases, what is attributed to furtive conspiracy is more easily explained away as wishful thinking colliding with the hard, cold realities of economics. Last updated:  14 April 2014    Healey, James R.  "Test Drive: VW XL1 Shows How to Get 200 MPG."   USA Today.  7 December 2013.     Ingram, Antony.  "261 MPG Volkswagen XL1 Production Confirmed, Debuts Geneva."   Green Car Reports.  21 February 2013.     Ingram, Antony.  "Orders for 261-MPG Volkswagen XL1 Exceed Production of 200."   Green Car Reports.  28 October 2013.     Zoellter, Juergen.  "2014 Volkswagen XL1."   Car and Driver.  June 2013.     Green Bay Press Gazette.  "2014 Tesla Model S Sedan Takes the Electric Car to a New Level."   14 April 2014. In November 2021, rumors claiming that an unusual number of athletes had fainted or collapsed in the last year were widely circulated online. These rumors were often accompanied by fear-mongering captions that warned people against receiving COVID-19 vaccines. One video, for example, was accompanied by messages such as "Not normal ... Boost at your own [peril]," "#ATHLETES IN ALL SPORTS ARE DROPPING DEAD AND THE MASTERS FORCE VACCINES ON US ALL," and "Vaccines dropping them daily. Sick world." Not normal ... Boost at your own [peril] #ATHLETES IN ALL SPORTS ARE DROPPING DEAD AND THE MASTERS FORCE VACCINES ON US ALL Vaccines dropping them daily. Sick world This video does not show vaccine injuries or people fainting due to the COVID-19 vaccine. While this video shows real incidents from 2021, none of these incidents has been connected to the COVID-19 vaccine, other plausible explanations (such as dehydration or heat exhaustion) have been offered for these incidents, and a few of the clips in this video show athletes who were not vaccinated. There is no evidence that the COVID-19 vaccine has resulted in an increase in fainting incidents. The above-displayed video features seven fainting incidents. We've been able to source six of the seven clips. None of the fainting incidents we were able to find more information on were caused by the COVID-19 vaccine. Here's what these clips show, starting with the first one:   The first clip shows Denmark's Christian Eriksen collapsing during the Euro 2020 in June 2021 after suffering a cardiac arrest. While this incident has been used by anti-vaxxers to stir up fear over the COVID-19 vaccine, Eriksen was not vaccinated. Inter Milan team director Giuseppe Marotta said: "He didn't have COVID and wasn't vaccinated either." Giuseppe Marotta said   The second clip shows Chinelle Henry and Chedean Nation, two West Indies cricket players who fainted during a match in July 2021. While both players were taken off the field in stretchers, neither required hospitalization.; While an exact cause for this incident was not given, labeling this a vaccine injury is pure speculation. Furthermore, both players returned to the field a few days later to compete. returned to the field Both players had collapsed on the field in separate incidents during the second T20I on Friday, but were back with the team on Sunday, the day of the third game. In separate messages posted on Twitter, both said they didn't have any hospital stay or restrictions imposed on them. "I just want to thank you guys for all your concern and well wishes, and I am doing well. No hospital stay, no restrictions. Now I'm just focused on going out there and getting the series 3-nil," Henry said.   The third clip shows Moussa Dembele, a striker for Atletico Madrid, who collapsed during training in March 2021. Diario AS reported that Dembele fainted after a "sudden drop in blood pressure" but that there were no other complications. Dembele was not hospitalized and after being examined by the team's doctors drove his own car home from the field. There's no evidence that this incident was related to a COVID-19 vaccine. It's worth noting, however, that Dembele tested positive for COVID-19 a month before this incident. Goal.com reported: Goal.com reported The former Lyon forward is the fourth player with the Liga leaders to have to self-isolate, and could miss the Champions League clash with Chelsea Atletico Madrid have received their second coronavirus blow in as many days after striker Moussa Dembele tested positive, following team-mate Joao Felix.   The fourth clip shows Jack Draper, a young British tennis player, suffering from a bout of heat exhaustion at the Miami Open in March 2021. As was the case with Dembele above, it's possible that COVID-19, not a COVID-19 vaccine, contributed to this medical episode. Draper said that he was diagnosed with coronavirus in January and that the lingering effects of the disease, in addition to the heat, may have contributed to his collapse. Draper said: Draper said "I was out for two weeks with COVID in January ... I didn't move a muscle and that was after pre-season as well, so I put in a really good pre-season and then I didn't play so it's been a rough start to the year [...] I got it, it's obviously an extremely aggressive virus and you can catch it from anywhere, but I got it and it did affect me quite badly for seven days. I had bad symptoms and then I recovered pretty quickly from there, but it definitely had an effect on me. I've put in loads of great training since then, so it's no excuse, but did it have an effect on me at the time? Probably. With a lot of these things you don't know how much it really affects you."   The fifth clip in this video is the one we know the least about. It doesn't appear to be a professional badminton event. Rather, this clip appears to come from a security camera at a recreational facility. Project Comprova, a collaboration of more than a dozen news outlets around Brazil, found that this video was likely shot somewhere in Malaysia. Little is known about this incident at the time, however, so we can't say exactly what happened here. What we can say, however, is that those claiming that this shows a "vaccine injury" are doing so without evidence. Project Comprova The sixth clip shows Charles Bulu, a Ghanaian referee, collapsing in March 2021 during the final minutes of an Africa Cup match between Cote d'Ivoire and Ethiopia. Goal.com reported that Bulu was initially appointed as the fourth official, but had to step in as the main referee after a colleague tested positive for COVID-19. Goal.com reported Bulu, who was treated at a hospital according to theGhana Football Association, told the Daily Graphic, a Ghanaian newspaper, that the incident was related to a poor diet, a lack of sleep, dehydration, and excessive heat: Ghana Football Association, I didn't eat quite well both at breakfast and lunch, hoping that I would rather take in some banana just before the game, only to arrive at the Match Officials' dressing room to realise that no such provision had been made, despite we requesting for it. [...] I could not take in as much water as my body needed and with the heat and intensity of the game, I began feeling dehydrated by the 68th minute, but unfortunately, there was no Fourth Referee to step in. I was hoping I could hold on till the next water break which was around the 75th minute, but before then I just blacked out. The final clip in this video compilation shows Bert Smith as he collapsed during a March Madness game in April 2021. Smith was taken off the floor on a stretcher but he didn't require immediate hospitalization. Hours later, as a precaution, Smith decided to visit a hospital, fearing that he may have a concussion. While smith did not have a concussion, the doctors did find that he had a blood clot. The Indy Star reported that Smith was put on blood thinners and was released a few days later. It's unclear what caused the blood clot, but Smith did test positive for COVID-19 a few months earlier. reported Smith was admitted into Methodist and put on blood thinners. Two days later, clot gone, he was discharged. Where did it come from? Nobody can say. Smith tested positive for the coronavirus in August, but doctors can't say whether there's a correlation between COVID-19 and his blood clot. An athlete fainting is not a particularly rare occurrence. According to The Athletic, a player faints on the football pitch every four days. But is the problem getting worse due to COVID-19? player faints on the football pitch every four days While the above-displayed video does not show athletes who fainted or collapsed from the COVID-19 vaccine, it does show various athletes fainting in 2021. There's not enough evidence to say whether or not fainting incidents are becoming more common due to the pandemic, but here are a few things to consider. First, people infected by COVID-19 mayexperience "long Covid," or lingering symptoms from the disease after the initial infection subsides. These symptoms may include shortness of breath, fatigue, and heart palpitations. Second, one of the rare side effects of the COVID-19 vaccine is Myocarditis, an inflammation of the heart muscle. The Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA), the British regulator for drugs and vaccines, told Reuters that this is a rare side effect and its symptoms are often mild. symptoms may include shortness "Myocarditis or pericarditis remains a very rare potential risk with the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines, and the events reported are typically mild with individuals usually recovering within a short time with standard treatment and rest. The current evidence does not suggest that sporting exercise is a contributing risk for these very rare events." Dr Sonya Babu-Narayan, associate medical director at the British Heart Foundation, told the Telegraph that athletes diagnosed with COVID-19 are at a greater risk of having a heart condition than those who get the COVID-19 vaccine: Telegraph "Whilst vaccine induced myocarditis has been reported in children and young adults following the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines, it's actually quite rare ... The risk of myocarditis, myocarditis-type injury to the heart, or other cardiovascular complications is much greater if you get Covid-19. That's why it's important to avoid Covid-19, and the best way to do that is to stay up-to-date with your vaccine doses. At the moment, there's not enough evidence to suggest any connection between COVID-19, or COVID-19 vaccines, and an increase in fainting incidents. When Reuters asked FIFA about this rumor, the soccer organization said that it was not "aware of a rise in episodes of cardiac arrests" and that there had not been any cases "flagged in relation to individuals receiving a COVID vaccine." Snopes is still fighting an infodemic of rumors and misinformation surrounding the COVID-19 pandemic, and you can help. Find out what we've learned and how to inoculate yourself against COVID-19 misinformation. Read the latest fact checks about the vaccines. Submit any questionable rumors and advice you encounter. Become a Founding Member to help us hire more fact-checkers. And, please, follow the CDC or WHO for guidance on protecting your community from the disease.  fighting Find out Read Submit Become a Founding Member CDC WHO Association, Ghana Football. Public Announcement: Referee Charles Bulu Is Doing Well. https://www.ghanafa.org/public-announcement-referee-charles-bulu-is-doing-well. Accessed 30 Nov. 2021. "British Teenager Jack Draper Collapses with Apparent Heat Exhaustion at Miami Open." Sky Sports, https://www.skysports.com/tennis/news/12110/12256229/british-teenager-jack-draper-collapses-with-apparent-heat-exhaustion-at-miami-open. Accessed 30 Nov. 2021. Charles Bulu: Referee in Stable Condition after Collapsing during Cote d'Ivoire versus Ethiopia Match | Goal.Com. https://www.goal.com/en/news/charles-bulu-fifa-referee-in-stable-condition-after/140om1o7bbfd41r6tnuue97tra. Accessed 30 Nov. 2021. ---. https://www.goal.com/en/news/charles-bulu-fifa-referee-in-stable-condition-after/140om1o7bbfd41r6tnuue97tra. Accessed 30 Nov. 2021. "Chinelle Henry, Chedean Nation Taken to Hospital after Collapsing during West Indies-Pakistan Women's T20I." ESPNcricinfo, https://www.espncricinfo.com/story/wi-vs-pak-2nd-women-s-t20-chinelle-henry-chedean-nation-taken-to-hospital-after-collapsing-during-match-1268505. Accessed 30 Nov. 2021. "Dembl sufre un desmayo durante el entrenamiento." AS.com, 23 Mar. 2021, https://as.com/futbol/2021/03/23/primera/1616520284_574257.html. "Fact Check-No Evidence COVID-19 Vaccines Are Linked to Athletes Collapsing or Dying from Myocarditis." Reuters, 29 Nov. 2021. www.reuters.com, https://www.reuters.com/article/factcheck-coronavirus-sport-idUSL1N2SK160. "---." Reuters, 29 Nov. 2021. www.reuters.com, https://www.reuters.com/article/factcheck-coronavirus-sport-idUSL1N2SK160. "I'm Fully Fit and Back on Duty  Referee Bulu." Graphic Online, https://www.graphic.com.gh/sports/sports-news/i-m-fully-fit-and-back-on-duty-referee-bulu.html. Accessed 30 Nov. 2021. "Inter Director Says Eriksen Did Not Have COVID and Was Not Vaccinated." Reuters, 13 June 2021, https://www.reuters.com/lifestyle/sports/eriksens-former-cardiologist-says-he-had-no-history-heart-concerns-2021-06-13/. Millar, Colin. "Moussa Dembele Returns to Atletico Madrid Training Days after Collapsing." Football Espana, 26 Mar. 2021, https://www.football-espana.net/2021/03/26/moussa-dembele-returns-to-atletico-madrid-training-days-after-collapsing. Morgan, Tom. "Covid a More Likely Cause of Surge in Footballers Collapsing with Heart Problems than Vaccines, Scientists Believe." The Telegraph, 26 Nov. 2021. www.telegraph.co.uk, https://www.telegraph.co.uk/football/2021/11/26/scientists-rebuff-irresponsible-claims-pundits-say-covid-likely/. "Moussa Dembele: Atletico Madrid Striker Collapses in Training and Requires Medical Attention." Sky Sports, https://www.skysports.com/football/news/11838/12254909/moussa-dembele-atletico-madrid-striker-collapses-in-training-and-requires-medical-attention. Accessed 30 Nov. 2021. "No h relao entre casos de mal sbito em atletas e vacinas contra covid." Projeto Comprova, https://projetocomprova.com.br/publicaes/nao-ha-relacao-entre-casos-de-mal-subito-em-atletas-e-vacinas-contra-covid/. Accessed 30 Nov. 2021. "---." Estado Verifica, https://politica.estadao.com.br/blogs/estadao-verifica/atletas-mal-subito-vacina/. Accessed 30 Nov. 2021. "NCAA Tournament Referee Who Collapsed during Elite Eight Game Says Medical Incident Saved His Life." CBSSports.Com, https://www.cbssports.com/college-basketball/news/ncaa-tournament-referee-who-collapsed-during-elite-eight-game-says-medical-incident-saved-his-life/. Accessed 30 Nov. 2021. "Referee Bert Smith's Fall in Men's NCAA Tournament Game Didn't Kill Him. It Saved His Life." Indianapolis Star, https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/ncaab/2021/04/09/ncaa-tournament-referee-bert-smith-collapse-game-saved-life/7148461002/. Accessed 30 Nov. 2021. Taylor, Daniel. "A Man Collapses on a Football Pitch Once Every Four Days. Is the Threat of Cardiac Arrest Getting Worse?" The Athletic, https://theathletic.com/2963733/2021/11/19/someone-collapses-football-pitch-every-four-days/. Accessed 30 Nov. 2021. In its latest print advertisement, placed Oct. 5 in 41 newspapers statewide, the Back to Basics PAC angles to turn Gov. Rick Perry's favorite selling point against him: the Texas economy. Perry often touts job gains on his watch; in a recent TV spot, titled Texas: Open for Business, he says Texas has gained more jobs than all other states combined from January 2001 to June 2010, a statement we recently ratedTrue. Yet the latest Back to Basics ad finds fault, pointing out that Perry fails to acknowledge that lawmakers balanced the latest state budget partly by accepting billions of dollars in federal stimulus money. The ad then lists some economic changes that have occurred since the governor wrote President Barack Obama in February 2009 assuring him that the state would accept the federal dollars. Punch line: Perry won't tell you that the Texas unemployment rate has even grown more than the nations as a whole. Really?On its website, Back to Basics points to statistics from the federal Bureau of Labor Statistics showing that the Texas unemployment rate between February 2009 and August 2010 rose from 6.8 percent to 8.3 percent, up 1.5 percentage points. During the same period, the U.S. unemployment rate grew from 8.2 percent to 9.6 percent, up 1.4 percentage points. The number of jobless people in Texas grew by 204,400 during that time  an increase of 26 percent. Meanwhile, the nation as a whole experienced a 17 percent increase. We checked with Cheryl Abbot, a bureau economist in Dallas, who told us that the figures used by Back to Basics were correct. She also told us that there were no statistical or logical problems with comparing the increase in the state's unemployment rate with that of the United States. I would probably phrase (the statement) more correctly as 'the unemployment rate has increased at a faster rate in Texas,' but saying that it's grown more, there's probably nothing wrong with putting it that way, Abbot said. We asked Abbot how best to interpret the 0.1 percentage point gap between the changes in the national and state unemployment rates. She said there is very little difference between 1.5 and 1.4 in this context, noting that one interpretation of the numbers could be that during those 18 months, Texas' job performance was about the same as the nation's. That's part of Back to Basics' point, said Cliff Walker, the group's director. Those numbers show Perry isn't as good as he says he is, he said. Next, we looked into whether changing the time period for comparing unemployment rates also changes the result. We tried five different starting points -- January 2009, December 2008, November 2008, January 2007 and December 2000 -- and in all those cases, the Texas unemployment rate increased by the same number of percentage points as the national rate, or less. (December 2000 was when Perry entered the governor's office, and January 2007 was the beginning of his current term.) When we asked Walker why Back to Basics started its time period of comparison with the month of Perry's letter to Obama, he told us that the group is trying to draw attention to the fact that Perry took federal stimulus dollars  a fact that many Texans, more than a year and a half later, still do not know. Our take: Back to Basics' statement accurately recaps a specific time period  the 18 months following Perry's acceptance of federal stimulus aid for Texas in February 2009  that shows unemployment rising faster in Texas than the nation as a whole. As our analysis shows, though, lengthening the time period often yields a different result, with unemployment in Texas rising more slowly than the nation. We rate the statement Mostly True. A few days before the release of "A Beautiful Day in the Neighborhood," a movie starring Tom Hanks about children's television host Fred Rogers, a representative for Ancestry.com told CBS News that the two men were related: CBS News Tom Hanks bears a shocking resemblance to children's television star Fred Rogers, who he plays in the upcoming film "A Beautiful Day in the Neighborhood." But the similarities are more than just good casting  the performers are actually related, according to a discovery made by Ancestry.com. Hanks is sixth cousins with Rogers, and they share the same great-great-great-great-great grandfather, Johannes Mefford, a company representative told CBS News. The company utilized its database of over 20 billion online historical records to form Hanks' family tree, the representative said. We have no reason to doubt Ancestry.com's claim. However, some readers may not quite understand just how distant a distant cousin really is.  The genealogy website reported that Rogers and Hanks are sixth cousins who share a 5x great-grandfather (or a great-great-great-great-great-grandfather). Here's how Ancestry.com described Hanks relationship to Rogers:    Fred Rogers and Tom Hanks are sixth cousins sharing the same 5x great-grandfather, Johannes Mefford, who immigrated from Germany to America in the 18th century. Johannes raised a family of patriots; three of his sons (including Tom Hanks and Fred Rogerss ancestors) served in the Revolutionary War. Fred Rogerss 4x great-grandfather, William Mefford, served in the navy and was captured by the British in 1782. He endured life on a prison ship in Barbados and Antigua until he was released ten months later. Tom Hankss 4x great-grandfather, Jacob Mefford, joined the War as a private and participated in a skirmish at Chesapeake Bay. So, Rogers and Hanks not only share the same ancestor, they also descend from two brothers who fought for Americas independence. While it may be "true" to say that Hanks and Rogers are related, phrasing their relationship this way is a bit misleading.  We found varying estimates about just how closely related sixth cousins really are, but the general conclusion was that these "relatives" were very distant. For instance, a study by Ancestry DNA in 2014, based on British birth rates and census data, found that the average person in Britain had about 175,000 sixth cousins.  found While it's true that Hanks and Rogers are related, they are distant cousins who probably don't share much in terms of DNA. But don't let that take away from Hanks' performance as Rogers in "A Beautiful Day in the Neighborhood":  We reached out to the Association of Professional Genealogists and the International Society of Genetic Genealogy. We will update this article when more information becomes available. Garrand, Danielle.  "Tom Hanks Discovers He's Related to Mister Rogers Days Before 'A Beautiful Day in the Neighborhood; Released."
  CBS News.  20 November 2019. Mirror.  "Average British Person Has 193,000 Living Cousins Says New Research."
  17 June 2015. Correction [21 November 2019] A table about the probability of sixth cousins sharing DNA was mischaracterized and removed from the article. Economic stagnation is an issue that has become a major talking point for both parties. Take President Barack Obamas most recent State of the Union address, in which he said that during the past four years, average wages have barely budged. We rated that claimTrue. Now, Sen. Rob Portman, R-Ohio, has offered an even more ominous statistic for working Americans. The average family, he said in the March 8, 2014, weekly Republican address, is now bringing home $4,000 less than they did just five years ago. We wondered whether Portmans claim was correct, so we turned todata from the U.S. Census Bureau. The bureau collects data on family income and found that Portman is correct as long as the dollar amounts are adjusted for inflation. We looked at both the mean family income (that is, total family income divided by the number of families) and the median family income (the middle value when all family incomes are lined up from biggest to smallest). For the inflation-adjusted mean, family income fell from $87,312 in 2007 to $82,843 in 2012, the most recent year available. Thats a drop of $4,469, making Portman correct. In fact, he underestimated a bit. The difference is even more stark if you use the inflation-adjusted median. By that measure, family income dropped from $67,943 to $62,241 over the same period. Thats a drop of $5,702 -- an 8.3 percent decline over five years. So Portmans only shortcoming is to lowball the size of the family-income decline. We should note that choosing 2007 as the starting year maximizes the decline, since the last recession began in December 2007. But we have no quarrel with the use of this period, because when looking at income trends, it seems reasonable to look at how big an impact the recession has had. Well also note that Portman wouldnt be correct if non-inflation-adjusted figures are used. Without an inflation adjustment, both mean and median family incomes went up from 2007 to 2012 -- about 5 percent for mean family income, and 1.4 percent for median family income. But economists generally prefer inflation-adjusted data for situations like this, since the adjusted data takes into account the most important aspect of income -- what it can actually purchase. Our ruling Portman said the average family (is) now bringing home $4,000 less than they did just five years ago. According to Census Bureau data, the decline is even greater, making Portmans overall point even stronger than the data he offered. We rate his claim True. On 18 April 2017, the entertainment website World News Daily Report (WNDR) published a fake news article claiming that Bruce Franklin, a Philadelphia man, killed and ate his wife after being stuck in an elevator for 71 hours: published 44-year old Bruce Franklin was arrested this morning, after he confessed to killing his wife and eating her flesh while he was stuck with her in an elevator. According to the Philadelphia Police Department, the partially devoured corpse of his wife was lying next to him when he was rescued after being stuck for three days in an elevator. There is no truth to this story. WNDR is a well-known satirical website with a long history of peddling fictional news articles. The site carries this disclaimer: well-known history World News Daily Report assumes all responsibility for the satirical nature of its articles and for the fictional nature of their content. All characters appearing in the articles in this website  even those based on real people  are entirely fictional and any resemblance between them and any person, living, dead or undead, is purely a miracle. As with many of its fake news stories, WNDR used photographs from unrelated events in order to lend credence to its claims:       Although we have not been able to uncover the exact source for the mugshot, that image has been online since 2011 when it was included in a gallery of "funny hair" mugshots. online Another image in the article shows Philadelphia Police Deputy Commissioner Richard Ross, correctly identified by WNDR, but the photograph was taken during a City Council budget hearing in April 2016, not a press event concerning a man who just ate his wife. photograph The final photograph in the article, of the elevator shaft, was taken inside the National Lift Tower in Northampton, England. National Lift Tower President Donald Trump disputed theNew York Times' reportthat he paid little to no federal income taxes in many years,claimingin the first presidential debate with former Vice President Joe Biden that he actually paid millions of dollars in federal income taxes. At the same time, Trump also said he tries to reduce what he pays through legal tax maneuvers, and he blamed Biden for the laws that let him do so. I dont want to pay tax, Trump said at one point. Like every other private person, unless they're stupid, they go through the laws, and that's what it is, Trump said. (Biden) passed a tax bill that gave us all these privileges for depreciation and for tax credits. We built a building, and we get tax credits like the hotel on Pennsylvania Ave.  Trumps claim that he paid millions of dollars in federal income taxes in 2016 and 2017 is countered by the New York Times, which obtained years of his tax-return data. But we wondered about the presidents claim about a Biden-passed tax bill. Asked what Trump was referring to, the Trump campaigncited a passagein the Times report, which described how Trump got a $72.9 million tax refund due to a change made under President Barack Obama. The change was part of a law enacted during the Great Recession. It allowednet operating lossesincurred by businessesin 2008 and 2009to be deducted from tax liability for the previous five years, rather than the prior limit restricting such carrybacks to two years. Biden was vice president at the time the provision kicked in. Now business owners could request full refunds of taxes paid in the prior four years, and 50 percent of those from the year before that, the Times wrote. Trump took advantage of this change to wipe out the federal income taxes he paid from 2005 through 2007 with the tax refund, which he claimed and received starting in 2010, according to the Times. The refund is the subject of an audit by the Internal Revenue Service. What does that have to do with depreciation and tax credits? Without access to Trumps tax returns and financial records, its difficult to know what privileges Trump was talking about. The Trump campaign did not respond when PolitiFact asked if there were other tax bills or privileges linked to Biden that Trump was referencing. But tax experts said Trumps mention of the historic preservation tax credit he received for his hotel in Washington appears to jumble the details between the tax refund he got and other tax deductions or credits he may have taken to reduce his tax liability over the years. One could view the statement (from Trump) as simply confused and getting the details badly wrong, said Daniel Shaviro, a professor of taxation at New York University School of Law. Trumps debate-night claim has to do with theprovision passed under Obamathat allowed losses from businesses to be used to recoup taxes paid in the previous five years. The provision was part of theWorker, Homeownership and Business Assistance Act of 2009. A business can only carryback or carryforward certain amounts, and that bill removed some of those restrictions temporarily for 2008 and 2009, said Joseph Bishop-Henchman, the vice president of tax policy and litigation at the National Taxpayers Union Foundation. Its an efficient, relatively hidden way to help certain rich people, added Edward McCaffery, a professor of law, economics and political science at the University of Southern California, whonoted in an op-edthat a similar provision was included in the coronavirus relief bill from March. Joe Biden speaks at a panel on the economy in Washington on Nov. 5, 2009, one day before the Worker, Homeownership, and Business Assistance Act of 2009 was signed into law. (AP) In Trumps case, the change let him request the tax refund that is now being scrutinized by the IRS and a congressional tax committee. If the IRS decides the refund was illegitimate, the Times reported Trump could owe the government more than $100 million. The audit dispute over Trumps tax refund may center, according to the Times, on Trumps declaration in his 2009 tax return of more than $700 million in business losses. The Times said the materials it obtained did not show which business or businesses created those losses. The carryback rule would have allowed losses incurred for any reason to be applied to income up to five years in the past, McCaffery said, including losses from depreciation, or the reduction in the value of property or an asset over time. But its unlikely that all Trumps losses are from depreciation, experts told PolitiFact. The Times reported that Trumps records show that his casinos, golf courses and other interests lose real money, and that he has lost chunks of his fortune even before depreciation is figured in. We'd have to know precisely where the excess losses that he had circa 2009 came from, McCaffery said. The fact that this is what the IRS is auditing strongly suggests its not simply depreciation, which would be based on easily audited facts. Theres a lot more to what hes done than just using depreciation and tax credits, added Steven Rosenthal, a senior fellow at the Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center. Other tax maneuvers documented by the Times included questionable write-offs for business expenses and a charitable tax deduction. But the $700 million in losses appears to correspond with Trumps decision to part ways with his casinos in Atlantic City, N.J., the Times reported. Theres no obvious connection between the 2009 bill, whichdoesnt mentiondepreciation, and other depreciation deductions or tax credits Trump may have applied. Garrett Watson, a senior policy analyst at the Tax Foundation, said the change to carryback rules was not a tax credit. Trumps reference to his hotel in Washington, D.C., further muddles the facts. The exterior of the Trump International Hotel in Washington on Oct. 26, 2016. (AP) A 2015reportby Sen. James Lankford, R-Okla., found that the Trump Organizationgot $40 millionin the form of a historic preservation tax credit for renovating the Old Post Office into a hotel, which the Times said he has used to reduce his tax liability in more recent years. But that type of credit has beenon the bookssince 1976. This didnt have to do with any policy change on the part of the Obama administration or Congress, Watson said. Laws enacted under Obama didcreate or extendseveral tax credits. Bishop-Henchman noted that Obamaseconomic recoverypackagesextendedprovisions allowing businesses todeduct 50% of the costof certain properties up front, rather than write all costs off over time. As a U.S. senator representing Delaware, Biden also voted yes on a pair of bipartisan tax laws in1981and1986that overhauled the depreciation system, Watson said, while also noting that depreciation existed in a slightly different form before 1981. We dont know how those particular changes impacted Trumps specific tax situation, Watson added. Depreciation changes in the code are generally changes in timing of when expenses associated with an investment are deducted, so they do not impact total tax paid in the long run. Regardless, Biden was just one senator. Its always peculiar when Trump is blaming Biden for legislation that happened to be enacted when Biden was in office as a senator or the vice president, Rosenthal said, noting that there are many more people involved with tax legislation. Trump said Biden passed a tax bill that gave us all these privileges for depreciation and for tax credits. We built a building, and we get tax credits like the hotel on Pennsylvania Ave. A 2009 provision enacted under Obama allowed losses to be used to reduce tax liability for up to five previous years. The Times reported that Trump used this provision to claim a major tax refund. At the time, Biden was vice president. Other depreciation deductions and tax credits that Trump may have applied  including the decades-old tax credit for his hotel in Washington  are not clearly linked to Biden or to the 2009 provision that let Trump claim his refund. Overall, Trumps claim is partially accurate. We rate it Half True.