Woman Births Octopus
In his 1948 book The Affairs of Dame Rumor, Jacobson mentions this rumor "flooded the Atlantic states in 1934" and notes the story had been published in the Boston Traveler a few years earlier: Example: [Brunvand, 1984] This teen age girl, growing up in a California coastal town, was obviously pregnant  stomach starting to swell, morning sickness, etc. She, however, tearfully insisted to her mother that she couldn't possibly be pregnant. She had never "done it" with a boy and it just wasn't possible. As time went on, however, the signs continued. Her stomach continued to grow, her appetite increased, and so forth. Her mother insisted she was pregnant. The girl insisted it wasn't possible. She was still a "good" girl. Finally x-rays were taken and the girl was vindicated. She had a large tumor in her stomach and surgery was performed immediately. To everyone's amazement the surgeons removed not a tumor but a small, live octopus that had fastened itself to the lining of the girl's stomach. What happened to this girl supposedly is really possible. Octopus eggs are microscopic in size and laid in clusters of tens of thousands. They are usually affixed to kelp at the ocean bottom by a sticky secretion. It is not beyond the realm of possibility that a few could escape and float to the surface where they could be swallowed by an unsuspecting swimmer . . . Anyway, don't scoff, because the girl was a close friend of my older brother's girlfriend. Fishbein's 1930 book Shattering Health Superstitions includes the text of the Traveler piece: A London factory girl is reported to have swallowed something while taking a swim, and immediately after was seized with terrible pains. A local doctor and a specialist both failed to diagnose the case, but an X-ray examination finally showed that she had swallowed an octopus egg, which had hatched out inside her anatomy. Folklorist Jan Brunvand points out there is a traditional folk motif assigned to this type of tale:  B784.1.4  Girl swallows frog spawn; an octopus grows inside her with tentacles reaching to every part of her body. How an octopus can grow from frog spawn remains unexplained, however. There are numerous versions of the basic legend:  All of these tales might be considered variations of the "bosom serpent" legend, described by Harold Schecter as a tale in which "through some unfortunate circumstance or act of carelessness . . . a snake. . . is accidentally ingested by, or grows inside the body of, the unlucky individual, where it remains until it is expelled or in some way lured out of the victim's body." This motif remains popular in films such as Alien, which features a crew member "impregnated" by an alien creature; once the incubation period is complete, the alien lifeform is "born" by bursting out through his chest. As Schechter notes, "like the traditional, oral versions that have been popular for hundreds of years, [the] only purpose [of the birth scene in Alien] is to produce emotional response: shock, revulsion, morbid fascination." In June 2004 the Iranian daily Etemaad reported that an unnamed woman from the south-eastern city of Iranshahr had given birth to a frog. According to that paper, the woman's gynaecologist confirmed that the lady in question, whose period had stopped for six months, had undergone sonography in May which showed she had a cyst in her abdomen and that following severe bleeding, she gave birth to a live grey frog accompanied with mud. Numerous news outlets subsequently carried the story, but in the manner of reporting that an Iranian paper had run the item, not as a confirmation of the facts of the account. If the photo of the frog (as initially provided by the BBC  it was later stripped from their online article and replaced by a map of Iraq) was accurate, it disproved the theory that the purported mother of Kermit came by her amphibian pregnancy through having swum in or drunk frog spawn, because the lily pad jumper so pictured was of a species not native to Iran. In any event, it was always a case of news outlets repeating a weird story that had come to them, not of vetting the tale's claims. Humans cannot give birth to frogs, or snakes, or fish, or lizards, or octopuses  our biology rules it out.  Also told in:   The Big Book of Urban Legends.  New York: Paradox Press, 1994.  ISBN 1-56389-165-4  (p. 77).  The Big Book of Urban Legends   Brunvand, Jan Harold.  The Choking Doberman.
  New York: W. W. Norton, 1984.  ISBN 0-393-30321-7  (pp. 110-111). The Choking Doberman   BBC News.  "Iranian Woman Gives Birth to Frog."
  27 June 2004.   Dale, Rodney.  The Tumour in the Whale.
  London: Duckworth, 1978.  ISBN 0-7156-1314-6  (pp. 74-75). The Tumour in the Whale   Fishbein, Morris.  Shattering Health Superstitions.
  New York: Horace Liveright, Inc., 1930  (pp. 90-97).   Jacobson, David J.  The Affairs of Dame Rumor.
  New York: Rinehart & Co., 1948  (p. 23). The Affairs of Dame Rumor   Schecter, Harold.  The Bosom Serpent: Folklore and Popular Art.
  Iowa City: University of Iowa Press, 1988.
If theres one thing President Donald Trump loves to boast about, its jobs, jobs, jobs. During an April 27, 2019 rally in Green Bay, Trump made sure his supporters in Wisconsin knew just how good the state unemployment rate has become. The unemployment rate for Wisconsin workers has reached historic lows, Trump told the crowd. Its never been this low before, ever, ever, ever. As of March 2019, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported Wisconsin had a 2.9 percent unemployment rate. But, was there ever a time in history when it was even lower? We decided to do some digging. The backup Historical data from the BLS shows Wisconsin has been on a downward spiral of unemployment since the height of the financial crisis in 2009. Since then, the highest unemployment rate recorded in Wisconsin reached 9.3 percent with the lowest being where it stands now at 2.9 percent. But, was there a time that its ever been below that figure? BLS spokesman Gary Steinberg says it has been close, but the 2.9 percent is the lowest unemployment rate for Wisconsin on record. Unemployment rate data for Wisconsin are comparable back to 1976, Steinberg said. The unemployment rate of 2.9 percent in both January and February 2019 are the lowest on record. National ranking Nationally, Wisconsins 2.9 percent in March 2019 left it tied with Idaho and Virginia. That means Wisconsin rankedeighthin the country. North Dakota and Vermont tied at first with a 2.3 percent unemployment rate. Alaska, meanwhile, was at the bottom with an unemployment rate of 6.5 percent. Wisconsins Department of Workforce Development reported the state added 11,400 total non-farm jobs and 19,300 private-sector jobs from February of 2018 to February of 2019. Meanwhile, Wisconsin's labor force participation rate -- a measuring stick that looks at the other side of the equation -- was 67.5 percent in February. That was more than four points better than the national rate. Our rating Trump said Wisconsin had the lowest unemployment rate ever at a recent rally in Green Bay. The available data backs up his claim that Wisconsin hasnt had a lower unemployment rate to its 2.9 percent. We rate Trumps claim True. FACT CHECK: Was Nick Hanauer's 2012 TED Talk about income inequality banned because it was "too politically controversial" to release?  Claim: A 2012 TED Talk video featuring wealthy entrepreneur Nick Hanauer speaking on the subject of income inequality was banned because it was deemed "too politically controversial."    Example: [Collected via e-mail, July 2015]   There are several articles that claim "TED Banned This Billionaire For Exposing Capitalism's Biggest Lie" or some similar wording. This is about the speech of Nick Hanauer, apparently a Seattle venture capitalist. The language of this sensational claim makes me suspicious, as does the unlikelihood of the claim. Is it true? What is the source of the rumour?   Origins: On 1 March 2012, Seattle-based venture capitalist and entrepreneur Nick Hanauer participated in the global conference series of "TED Talks." The video of his six-minute talk, widely circulated since its release, captured him addressing a spate of issues pertaining to income inequality and capitalism from the perspective of a very wealthy individual:  Not long after Hanauer's March 2012 talk was filmed, rumors began circulating claiming that TED had deliberately suppressed the clip due to its potentially offensive (to rich people) nature. On 16 May 2012, National Journal published an article contending that TED's organizers had quashed the groundbreaking talk because its content was simply too controversial to release, an odd assertion considering the 2011 emergence of a well-known (and widely reported upon) protest movement known as Occupy Wall Street): article Occupy Wall Street TED organizers invited a multimillionaire Seattle venture capitalist named Nick Hanauer  the first nonfamily investor in Amazon.com  to give a speech on March 1 at their TED University conference. Inequality was the topic  specifically, Hanauer's contention that the middle class, and not wealthy innovators like himself, are America's true "job creators." "We've had it backward for the last 30 years," he said. "Rich businesspeople like me don't create jobs. Rather they are a consequence of an ecosystemic feedback loop animated by middle-class consumers, and when they thrive, businesses grow and hire, and owners profit. That's why taxing the rich to pay for investments that benefit all is a great deal for both the middle class and the rich." You can't find that speech online. TED officials told Hanauer initially they were eager to distribute it. "I want to put this talk out into the world!" one of them wrote him in an e-mail in late April. But early this month they changed course, telling Hanauer that his remarks were too "political" and too controversial for posting. In the years since 2012, Hanauer's TED clip has paradoxically been viewed millions of times while remaining the focus of articles describing it as described as "banned," "too controversial," or the speech TED "doesn't want you to see." While it's difficult to determine the accuracy of statements about its online availability in March 2012, the clip clearly became widely available and was frequently viewed on sharing sites such as YouTube shortly thereafter, and it has remained popular ever since. But in 2015, many social media users continued to assert Hanauer's talk was banned: Banned TED Talk: Nick Hanauer  Rich People Dont Create Jobs (VIDEO) #news https://t.co/wmlAmaIZ48 #news https://t.co/wmlAmaIZ48  Hannah Kennison (@HannahKennison1) July 6, 2015 July 6, 2015   Nick Hanauer on His Banned TED Talk & Why the Middle Class are the Job Creators https://t.co/KKQOqIK5PQ https://t.co/KKQOqIK5PQ  Jonathan Goodman (@GoodmanJonathan) July 20, 2015 July 20, 2015   if you are interested in #economics, then it is worth listeningBanned TED Talk: Nick Hanauer 'Rich people don't... https://t.co/00E6rlPF1g #economics https://t.co/00E6rlPF1g  Mudassar Bashir (@mb62020) June 15, 2015 June 15, 2015   Nick Hanauer too politically controversial: rich people dont create jobs, consumers do - via Reese Jones https://t.co/9xzs0vn1kz https://t.co/9xzs0vn1kz  VritTV (@Verite_TV) June 11, 2015 June 11, 2015   In late May 2012 a contributor to TED's forums specifically asked why Hanauer's talk had been "banned," prompting a lengthy discussion during the course of which individuals affiliated with TED linked to a statement issued by TED curator Chris Anderson on why Hanauer's talk had not been promoted.     The service by which Anderson published the explanation (Posterous) shuttered in April 2013, taking Anderson's remarks with it. However, a cached version revealed the date (17 May 2012), title ("TED and inequality: The real story"), and content of Anderson's rebuttal. asked shuttered version Anderson opened by stating that "TED was subject to a story so misleading it would be funny... except it successfully launched an aggressive online campaign against us." He described an ensuing "firestorm of outrage" on sites including Reddit and Huffington Post, wherein TED was "accused of being cowards ... in the pay of our corporate partners ... [and] the despicable puppets of the Republican party." Anderson's account of the decision not to release Hanauer's talk differed dramatically from the circulating rumors: Here's what actually happened. At TED this year, an attendee pitched a 3-minute audience talk on inequality. The talk tapped into a really important and timely issue. But it framed the issue in a way that was explicitly partisan. (The talk is explicitly attacking what he calls an article of faith for Republicans. He criticizes Democrats too, but only for not also attacking this idea more often.) And it included a number of arguments that were unconvincing, even to those of us who supported his overall stance, such as the apparent ruling out of entrepreneurial initiative as a root cause of job creation. The audience at TED who heard it live (and who are often accused of being overly enthusiastic about left-leaning ideas) gave it, on average, mediocre ratings  some enthusiastic, others critical. At TED we post one talk a day on our home page. We're drawing from a pool of 250+ that we record at our own conferences each year and up to 10,000 recorded at the various TEDx events around the world, not to mention our other conference partners. Our policy is to post only talks that are truly special. And we try to steer clear of talks that are bound to descend into the same dismal partisan head-butting people can find every day elsewhere in the media. We discussed internally and ultimately told the speaker we did not plan to post. He did not react well. He had hired a PR firm to promote the talk to MoveOn and others, and the PR firm warned us that unless we posted he would go to the press and accuse us of censoring him. We again declined and this time I wrote him and tried gently to explain in detail why I thought his talk was flawed. So he forwarded portions of the private emails to a reporter and the National Journal duly bit on the story. And it was picked up by various other outlets. As Anderson noted, income inequality was the subject of at least one [uncensored] TED Talk video in 2011. video Much of the rumor regarding Nick Hanauer's purportedly banned TED Talk segment hinged upon the differing assertions made by TED and Nick Hanauer at the time of the controversy in 2012. However, Anderson's claims (that TED curators are tasked with promoting only the most impactful clips) weren't implausible or suggestive of a coverup. It would be difficult to determine whether Hanauer or anyone working on his behalf threatened a public relations offensive, but TED maintained that quality and not content was behind the decision not to feature the video (which clearly was not "banned" from public view but was simply not promoted by TED). Since the time of the initial debate over whether or why the TED talk was "banned," the clip has been distributed both by TED and other outlets and widely viewed by a large online audience. In August 2014, Hanauer returned for a TED Talk titled "Beware, fellow plutocrats, the pitchforks are coming." titled While it's true that TED opted not to promote Hanauer's initial appearance (during which he discussed income inequality) his segment was not banned, and the organization cited his lack of substantive content alongside his primary reliance on partisan ideas as the reason it was not curated alongside other featured TED Talks. At no point during the immediate controversy did TED appear to deny the existence of the video, remove it from the Internet, interfere with its distribution, or otherwise thwart the ideas advocated by Hanauer from spreading. The group simply chose initially not to promote the clip (as they do for a large number of TED Talks) in favor of other content selected by their curators. Last updated:  27July 2015 Originally published: 27July 2015 Claim:  Obamacare architect Jonathan Gruber said Obamacare only passed due to the "stupidity" of the American voter and a lack of "transparency," and video footage of his remarks was deleted from the Internet in an attempt to hide it. :   : Jonathan Gruber said Obamacare only passed due to the "stupidity" of the American voter and a lack of "transparency.     UNDETERMINED: Video footage of his remarks was deleted from the Internet in an attempt to hide it.  Example:  [Collected via Twitter, November 2014] Hey Media, is UPenn pulling the Gruber video where he says ObamaCare passed by Democrats lying to the public a newsworthy event? Just askin'  Jonathan Gruber, an Obamacare's architect admitted that lack of transparency/stupidity of electorate helped pass the bill   Origins:  In November 2014, a 52-second long excerpt from a video of a 2013 conferenceinvolving Jonathan Gruber, a consultant who served as a technical consultant to the Obama administration and Congress during the creation of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (also known as the ACA or "Obamacare"), began to circulate on the internet. Gruber made the remarks captured in that excerpt during the 24th Annual Health Economics Conference at the University of Pennsylvania's Leonard Davis Institute (LDI) of Health Economics in October 2013. Gruber's remarks became controversial when video of the conference was posted online thirteen months after the LDI panel on health economics took place. panel Gruber, a Massachusetts Institute of Technology professor of economics, was speaking at a panel titled "The Role of Economics in Shaping the ACA and How Economics Can Inform Inevitable Mid-Course Corrections." The footage from which the comments originated ran for nearly an hour and covered issues tangential to Obamacare, such as its classification as a tax, subsidies, and how the bill came into law. Gruber's controversial remarks come at around the 18-minute mark in the video shown below:  During the portion of the video in question, Gruber said: This bill was written in a tortured way to make sure [the Congressional Budget Office] did not score the mandate as taxes. If CBO scored the mandate as taxes, the bill dies. OK? So it's written to do that. In terms of risk-rated  subsidies, if you had a law which said healthy people are going to pay in  you made explicit that healthy people pay in and sick people get money  it would not have passed. OK? Lack of transparency is a huge political advantage. And basically, call it the stupidity of the American voter or whatever, but basically that was really, really critical to get the thing to pass. Look, I wish ... we could make it all transparent, but I'd rather have this law than not. After video of the conference was put online, Gruber elaborated on what he meant by his attention-garnering remarks and apologized for them, saying that he "spoke inappropriately": elaborated Gruber's comments were part of a broader public conversation between him and economist Mark Pauly on the economics of health care reform. Gruber was responding to a remark by Pauly about financing transparency in the law and the politics surrounding the ACA's individual mandate. The political process, he said, striking a critical tone, resulted in inefficiencies in the law which should be corrected. "In terms of risk-rated subsidies, if you had a law which explicitly said that healthy people pay in and sick people get money, it would not have passed," he said. "You can't  do it politically, you just literally cannot do it. It's not only transparent financing but also transparent spending." In the video, Gruber appeared to be speaking specifically about the political environment in 2010 and its impact on the law's funding mechanisms. Gruber takes a critical stance on some of those outcomes, calling them "irrational." "I wish Mark was right and we could make it all transparent but I'd rather have this law than not," Gruber said. "That involves tradeoffs that we don't prefer as economists but are realistic." Gruber apologized for his comments during an on-air interview with MSNBC's Ronan Farrow. "The comments in the video were made at an academic conference," Gruber said. "I was speaking off the cuff and I basically spoke inappropriately and I regret having made those comments." Although Gruber apologized for the language he used, Gruber said that the larger point he was trying to make centered on the political pressures that shaped the law. He added that those pressures "led to an incomplete law with some typos." "It would have made more sense to do Obamacare the way we did in Massachusetts, which would be to just give people money to offset the cost of their health insurance," Gruber said. "That was politically infeasible and so instead it was done through the tax code." The full video of the 2013 Health Economics Conference was published by PennLDI on YouTube, and when the excerpt video of Gruber's remarks began to circulate online, many viewers assumed the comments to be recent (they were not), and others maintained PennLDI then removed the clip from the Internet due to the political controversy. On the latter point, several Twitter users posted screenshots of a YouTube error page that indicated the source video had been (at least briefly) removed by the University after Gruber's remarks became a focus of attention: recent  However, it isn't yet clear whether the PennLDI video was deliberately pulled from the Internet due to the political controversy it created, or whether it was made unavailable at some point after it was initially posted for unrelated reasons (e.g.,  error, copyright issues, technical problems).   It appears the comments made by Gruber entered the stream of social media hot topics when they were spotted and excerpted from the longer PennLDI video by Philadelphia investment adviser Rich Weinstein, then posted to the YouTube channel of the American Commitment 501(c)(4) (i.e., a politically active nonprofit organization), whose Phil Kerpen tweeted: Rich Weinstein American Commitment My wife texts to say the latest Gruber video we posted is lighting up her Facebook feed... excellent... Phil Kerpen (@kerpen) November 10, 2014 My wife texts to say the latest Gruber video we posted is lighting up her Facebook feed... excellent...  Phil Kerpen (@kerpen) November 10, 2014 November 10, 2014  The claim that the University of Pennsylvania deliberately tried to scrub the clip from the Internet may also have stemmed from Kerpen or the PAC: Um, hey, University of Pennsylvania: Pulling the Gruber video now really doesn't help your cause. https://t.co/KoW7Kx2WLb Phil Kerpen (@kerpen) November 10, 2014 Um, hey, University of Pennsylvania: Pulling the Gruber video now really doesn't help your cause. https://t.co/KoW7Kx2WLb https://t.co/KoW7Kx2WLb  Phil Kerpen (@kerpen) November 10, 2014 November 10, 2014  Last updated:  12 November 2014 At the end of his 24-year congressional career, Rep. Jim Moran Jr. is returning to his athletic roots. Moran, D-8th, is the son and namesake of Jim Moran Sr., who played professional football with the Boston Redskins in the mid 1930s. The congressman, himself, played football at the College of the Holy Cross in the mid 1960s. Moran, who retires Jan. 3, introduced legislation this fall that would create a commission to look into the policies of the NCAA after myriad college sports scandals. The resolution calls for the panel to make recommendations to improve the interaction of athletics and academics on campuses. That includes examining the graduation rates of student athletes, rules restricting athletes abilities to earn money, and the wherewithal of universities to finance broad athletic programs. We have a system now where in 40 states, the highest-paid public employee is the state universitys head football or basketball coach, and yet only 20 schools in the Football Bowl Subdivision have athletic departments with revenue exceeding expenses, Moran said in a Facebook post. We rated Morans statement about coaches pay as Mostly True. Now, well look at his claim that only 20 athletic departments at  the nations largest universities are making a profit. Lets start with a definition of the Football Bowl Subdivision -- the term Moran used to qualify his statement. There are1,083colleges and universities competing in sports that fall under the NCAAs governance. They are grouped into three divisions, that are defined by athletic scholarship rules and the amount of money the schools spend on sports. For example, Division I schools -- which are typically large -- can offer many full athletic scholarships, Division II schools can offer partial athletic scholarships and Division III schools are not allowed to offer sports  scholarships. There are 346 Division I schools. Of them, 123 are classified as members of the Football Bowl Subdivision, the top tier of sports competition. These are colleges and universities that are eligible to compete in bowl games and have average attendance of at least 15,000 at their home games. So Moran is generally talking about the athletic department finances at large universities that field football teams. Morans spokesman, Thomas Scanlon, said the congressmans claim was based on anNCAA studyon Division I athletic department budgets that was released in April. The report says, A total of 20 athletics programs in the FBS reported positive net revenues for the 2013 fiscal year. The study deals in broad statistics and does not identify schools that are in the black or the red. Only two sports were profitable at FBS schools, according to the report. Football programs netted a median profit of slightly more than $3 million and mens basketball netted a median $340,000. But the profits at most schools quickly vanished after paying for a long list of other intercollegiate teams, all of which lose money. The median loss among of athletic departments was $11.6 million. Here are some other findings from the NCAA report: According to the report, all athletic departments outside of the FBS operate in the red. In other words, only 20 of the 1,083 college sports programs in the nation are profitable. Our ruling Moran said only 20 FBS schools generate more money from athletics than they spend. We rate his statement True. The super PAC Ending Spending Fund is broadcasting another attack ad against Michelle Nunn, a politically pedigreed Democrat hoping to succeed Republican Saxby Chambliss as a U.S. Senator from Georgia. This time, its aradio adsimulating a man-on-the street interview with a potential female voter. In the ad, the announcer says: According to news reports, shes acknowledged allowing a convicted felon who is well known for his radical anti-American statements to actually hold a fundraiser for her. He then asked the unidentified woman: Is there any wisdom in that thinking? Im going to say None, the woman responds. Its part of a new campaign by Ending Spending that plays off Nunns well-known name. Her father, Sam Nunn was a respected moderate Democrat in the U.S. Senate for 24 years, from 1972 to 1997, who some considered White House or vice presidential material. The ad follows the theme of the super PACs new website,www.AbsolutelyNunn.com, which answers the question, is there any reason for Georgians to vote for her? But, PolitiFact Georgia wondered, is Nunn working with felons to win office? First, lets look at Ending Spending Action Fund, formed by TD Ameritrade founder Joe Ricketts. As of Sept. 11, the group has spent nearly $2.8 million -- more than any other outside group -- on Georgias Senate race, according to OpenSecrets.org. The PAC favors Nunns GOP opponent, businessman David Perdue. Some of its money paid for ads during the contentious Republican primary earlier this year. The race is being closely watched, and heavily funded, nationally because of the tight battle for control of the U.S. Senate. Its also a priority for state Democrats eager to reclaim a major statewide office. The Nunn-Perdue battle has drawn the fifth-most money from outside groups in Congressional races across the nation this year, $12.4 million on ads from both sides. That brings us back to the ad, which is a reference to the July 8 Washington, D.C. fundraiser that featured Sam Nunn as a special guest. Virtual Murrell is listed as one of the co-hosts of the event, giving $2,600 to Nunns campaign for the honor. Guests paid at least $250 to the campaign to attend, according tothe invitation. Two days after the fundraiser, the conservative National Review broke the story that Murrell, now a political consultant, had pleaded guilty in 1995 to accepting a bribe while working as an Oakland (Calif.) City councilmans aide. He was sentenced to a year in prison. Nunn expressed surprise at the news of Murrells history, which also includes a stint in the 1960s as a leader in the Black Panther movement. Her campaign declined this week to make her available to discuss the fundraiser and its fallout. Spokesman Nathan Click referred us to a statement released in July, which said Nunn was unaware of Murrells record and promised to return contributions linked to him. Click, however, declined to confirm the exact amount of money the campaign said was returned or to disclose how much money was tied to Murrell. We didn't deposit any contributions from him or anything he raised for the event, Click said in a statement. We reached out to Murrell via email, to confirm that Nunn returned his donation and other he raised. He did not respond. We also contacted Brian Baker, Ending Spendings president, who said Nunn has acknowledged Murrell, a convicted felon, co-hosted a fundraiser for her. That is exactly what we say in the ad, Baker said. The ad is 100 percent factual. The event wasnt the campaigns only embarrassing moment. In late August, a series of confidential memos were leaked, revealing Nunns campaign strategy and vulnerabilities. Ironically, those documents may support the campaigns contention that Nunn didnt know Murrells background. On page 57 of the 144-page document  after listing vulnerabilities such as being linked to President Obama and before several pages laying out campaign issues  is a category called Vetting. It takes up less than a quarter of the page, most notably this one-sentence paragraph: Currently, there are no plans to vet donors to the campaign, the memo said. Baker said finding out Murrells background didnt require a complicated vetting process and was accessible with a basic Google search. PolitiFact Georgia has reviewed previous ad claims from the group, with mixed results. In August, Ending Spending ads claim that Michelle Nunns foundation directed grants to an Islamic group tied to radical terrorists earned aMostly False. In July, we rated asMostly Truean Ending Spending claim that Nunn earned as much as $300,000 from Points of Light around the time it laid off 90 workers due to its merger with the nonprofit Hands on Network. Available information on the latest claim suggests Ending Spendings new ad uses guilt by association in a bid to suggest Nunn knowingly wooed an inflammatory ex-convict to raise cash for her Senate bid. Nunn has repeatedly said she did not know Murrells history when she attended the fundraiser. She pledged to give back the money he raised, though the campaign and Murrell have not confirmed how much was determined to be linked to Murrell. Most of the statement from the Ending Spending attack ad is correct. A convicted felon did host a fundraiser for Michelle Nunn. Nunn has said she did not know anything about the mans criminal background. And there is evidence from a leaked memo that her campaign was not vetting donors. The claim is accurate. But it leaves out some relevant details. We rate it Mostly True. On 27 February 2016, the World News Daily Report web site published an article positing that a retired postman had fathered more than 1,300 illegitimate children: An 87-year-old former postman has been proven to have fathered over 1,300 illegitimate children after a private investigator hired by a Tennessee family discovered the shocking truth. Contraception wasnt very popular in those days, he told local reporters in his defense. I have nothing to be ashamed of. The 60s were the good old days and I did a great Johnny Cash impression which played out real good with the ladies, he explained. Some even thought I was Johnny Cash for real, he recalls laughingly. I dont know if they really believed it or if they were trying to convince themselves, but who was I to say no to a quickie? he acknowledged. There was no truth to thisstory, which originated with World News Daily Report (WNDR), a fake news site that does not publish factual stories (as noted in their disclaimer): WNDR assumes however all responsibility for thesatiricalnature of its articles and for the fictional nature oftheir content. All characters appearing in the articlesin this website  even those based on real people  areentirely fictionalandany resemblance between them and any persons, living, dead, or undead is purelya miracle. In addition to the disclaimer, thefake news story about a postman's fathering 1,300 illegitimate children was given away as fiction because it featured two unrelated images that were lifted (like all of WNDR's photographs) from other sites:   The first image, which purportedly depicts the prolific postman, actually shows a 97-year-old World War II veteran. The second image, which supposedly captures the reporter who uncovered the story, is actually picture of David Stockman, the budget director during the Reagan administration. shows picture Claim:   Video clip shows Tacoma  housing development "built for illegal immigrants" who are receiving "refugee pay."  Example:  [Collected via e-mail, July 2011] I want to move to Tacoma.. to the good life!  Here is a development in Tacoma WA (Salishan) that was built for Illegal Immigrants! 1325 Homes created! Refugee Pay offers them $2642 per month in SSI benefits, plus Food Stamps, plus Section 8 Housing. You will see new expensive cars in this video. Wouldn't you like to get a free ride like the illegals?  Origins:  As noted by Kathleen Merryman of the Tacoma News Tribune the video clip linked above about the Salishan housing development on Tacoma's East Side has garnered a good deal of attention for that community: William B. Mount is going viral on Salishan. The Tacoman once used public access television to air his world view, and now posts videos on YouTube. About five months ago, he and a woman named Jane drove through Salishan on Tacoma's East Side with a video camera and a big box of misinformation. They delivered a 10-minute commentary on the mixed use and mixed-income redevelopment of the worn-out public housing site and posted it on the video sharing site. The stew of untruths simmered there. It's at a boil now. Tacoma Housing Authority (THA) and Tacoma City Council members are getting e-mails from people hot over what he calls misuse of Social Security funds. As Ms. Merryman described in considerable detail in an excellent analysis of the video, virtually all of the claims made within it regarding Social Security, foreigners, and illegal immigrants are false: analysis  Claim: "What you are looking at is a $225 million complex, $225 million complex, of housing out of the Social Security budget for 1,300 units." False: No Social Security funds were used to redevelop Salishan. Claim: "All welfare housing. All Social Security housing for foreigners will get $2,642 a month. All of that comes out of the Social Security budget."  False: Of Salishan's renters, 97 percent are citizens of the United States, according to THA Executive Director Michael Mirra. "We know of no government program that pays $2,642 per month to foreigners," Mirra said. Claim: "The average income in here is about $13,000 per year, not including welfare, not including Social Security refugee pay, not including Women, Infants and Children."  False: The $13,000 figure is based on out-of-date 2000 Census data. As for the other sources, Mirra said: "We do not know of anyone who gets something called 'Social Security refugee pay.'"  Claim: "This school was built by Tacoma specifically to house foreigners and welfare recipients."  False. Lister Elementary School does not "house" any foreigners or welfare recipients.  Claim: "They mollycoddle these foreigners who come across the border illegally."  False. THA does not rent to people who are in this country illegally, and 97 percent of Salishan residents are U.S. citizens.  Claim: "And they don't pay taxes. This housing is free if you are on Social Security refugee pay."  False. Anyone who buys non-food goods and services in Washington State pays sales tax, and every Salishan household with earned income is subject to federal income taxes. Every Salishan rental household with an income pays rent. For complete information, we recommend reading the News Tribune's thorough debunking of the video. debunking Last updated:  28 July 2011 In October 2018, a series of mail-bombs sent to high-profile Democratic party figures including former President Barack Obama and former First Lady Hillary Clinton prompted intensive news coverage, especially after investigators arrested 56-year-old Florida man Cesar Sayoc, a supporter of President Donald Trump who promoted right-wing conspiracy theories online.  Cesar Sayoc Although none of the 13 homemade bombs detonated or caused any physical injury, Federal Bureau of Investigation Director Christopher Wray emphasized that the packages were "not hoax devices." emphasized Along with widespread news coverage, the episode engendered several conspiracy theories, most notably one which held that the bombing campaign was a hoax and a "false flag" operation orchestrated not by a right-wing extremist, but rather by liberals hoping to artificially stoke outrage against President Trump and his supporters, to the benefit of Democratic candidates in the November 2018 elections.  Promoters of the "false flag" theory claimed that their proof lay in the fact that United States Postal Service workers do not directly deliver mail to the homes of Secret Service protectees like Obama and Clinton, and that the stamps on one of the packages were not postmarked, which purportedly meant the package couldn't have been mailed via USPS, and that the story was therefore a hoax.  deliver stamps On 27 October, another strand to this theory emerged when social media users began sharing a photograph which appeared to show Sayoc posing with another man, named as "Izzy Hernandez," who the viral memes claimed was a "known Democrat" donor or supporter. According to conspiracy theorists, this proved that the pipe-bombing suspect was connected with the Democratic party, and that the entire affair was therefore a liberal-orchestrated "false flag" operation. On Facebook, Alan Reynolds posted the photograph along with this description: PIPE BOMBER SUSPECT pictured last year with Izzy Hernandez. Sayok [sic] does not appear destitute. In addition, why would a Trump enthusiast attend a banquet and have a photo OP with a Democrat Donor/Supporter? Facebook keeps trying to take down this photo,,,pls share this ASAP! The following day, the Twitter account @WhoWolfe posted a similar explanation: The fake bomber suspect is pictured here with Izzy Hernandez just last year. He doesn't appear to be destitute. Why would an alleged @realDonaldTrump enthusiast attend a banquet and take pictures in a photo OP with a known Democrat? Facebook has been taking this picture down. That version of the theory was retweeted by the prominent right-wing commentator Ann Coulter: Why do Facebook & Twitter immediately delete accounts of nuts at all? So we can rely on the media to tell us what they've posted? Why not let everyone see? https://t.co/qhmvFshdaw https://t.co/qhmvFshdaw  Ann Coulter (@AnnCoulter) October 28, 2018 October 28, 2018   Background The photograph is authentic, and appears to have been taken from Sayoc's Facebook profile before administrators removed it in the aftermath of his arrest. It does indeed show Sayoc posing with Izzy Hernandez, but there is a perfectly simple explanation for the connection between the two men, one which does not require any dark, politically-motivated conspiracy to subvert democracy in the United States -- they played soccer and went to college together.  Israel Abel "Izzy" Hernandez is a 2009 inductee into the North Carolina Soccer Hall of Fame, primarily for his accomplishments as a coach, but also as a player. His Hall of Fame profile describes his career as follows: Hall of Fame Izzys record of achievement is long: 9 womens high school state titles & 2 mens state titles & final NSCAA national # 1 ranking of high school teams twice, in 2006 with the girls and in 2007 with the boys & Broughton girls nationally ranked 15 consecutive years & 3 girls youth state championships (twice with the 77 CASL Spartans in U16 and U18 and once with the U18 Durham/Chapel Hill Triangle Strikers) & 2 boys youth state championships (76 Raleigh Rowdies in U13 and 74 Raleigh Express in U15) & US Youth Soccer Southern Regional champion and National Champion in 1995 with the 77 CASL Spartans, North Carolinas first youth national championship in soccer & NC Soccer Coaches Association regional coach of the year & Broughton Sports Hall of Fame & News and Observer Tar Heel of the Week.  As a young man, he played soccer for Elon College (now Elon University) in North Carolina, and before that, from 1980 to 1982, for Brevard College, a small liberal arts college in Brevard, North Carolina. One of his teammates at Brevard was Cesar Sayoc.  Brevard College's 1981 yearbook shows the two sitting next to each other in the front row of the soccer team photograph, with Hernandez wearing the number 20, and Sayoc wearing the number 12: yearbook photograph   Hernandez and Sayoc were also members of the Brevard College Catholic Club together, in 1981. (Hernandez is circled on the left, Sayoc is circled on the right): Catholic Club   Some 34 years later, Hernandez and Sayoc were photographed together again at a 2 October 2015 event in which their former soccer coach Bob Scarborough was inducted into Brevard College's Athletic Hall of Fame. inducted A photograph posted to Flickr by Brevard College shows Hernandez and Sayoc (second and fourth from left) celebrating with Scarborough (third from left.) posted  Brevard College/Flickr  In the 2015 photograph, Sayoc and Hernandez are wearing the exact same outfits shown in the photograph that went viral as part of the "false flag" conspiracy theory, strongly indicating that the two men were photographed together at no more than a celebration in honor of their former college soccer coach Bob Scarborough.  This also disproves the claim that the photograph showed the two men together "just last year." In fact, the photograph was taken in 2015, not 2017.  In the aftermath of Sayoc's arrest, Scarborough told the Raleigh, North Carolina TV station WRAL that his former player had kept in touch with him over the years, providing intermittent updates on his life and career developments, but that he hadn't heard from him since the October 2015 Hall of Fame induction celebration: WRAL Not only is there no evidence whatsoever that Sayoc and Hernandez are co-conspirators in a liberal plot to generate outrage against President Donald Trump and Republicans by engaging in a mail-bombing hoax, the only piece of evidence cited as proof of that claim actually points firmly in a very different direction. 'A Known Democrat' There is also no evidence to support the second component of this particular strand of the "false flag" conspiracy theory -- that Hernandez is a Democratic donor or supporter -- and there is some evidence to contradict it.  As we have shown, Sayoc and Hernandez knew each other from playing soccer together at college in the early 1980s, so even if either or both men were at some point supporters of or contributors to either the Democratic or Republican party, their having been photographed together could easily be explained by something other than a political conspiracy.  Even so, Hernandez does not appear to be a Democrat, at least not in any formal sense. According to records held by the North Carolina State Board of Elections and Ethics Enforcement, Israel Abel Hernandez is registered in Wake County as an "unaffiliated voter" (that is, as an independent.) registered His voting history shows that, aside from general elections, his only participation in a partisan primary came on 15 March 2016, when he cast a ballot in North Carolina's Republican presidential primary. In North Carolina, unaffiliated voters can only vote in one party's primary election, not both.  history primary Despite searching campaign finance records held by both the Federal Election Commission and the North Carolina State Board of Elections and Ethics Enforcement, we could find no record whatsoever of Hernandez having made any donations to a political candidate or committee of any kind.  We are emphatically not suggesting that Izzy Hernandez's voting history or political affiliation (or lack thereof) is of any particular meaning or relevance. However, the lack of any evidence that he is a Democratic supporter or donor even further undermines the October 2018 meme which took a photograph of two old soccer teammates reunited three decades after their college days, and attempted, without any factual basis, to twist it into a dark and violent political conspiracy. Biesecker, Michael; Braun, Stephen. "Bomb Suspect: Ex-Stripper With Cash Problems, Trump Devotion."
 The Associated Press. 28 October 2018. MacGuill, Dan. "Does USPS Never Deliver Mail Directly to People Under Secret Service Protection?"
 Snopes.com. 26 October 2018. Mikkelson, David. "Do Uncancelled Stamps Prove Mail Bombs Were Not Sent Through USPS?"
 Snopes.com. 27 October 2018. North Carolina Soccer Hall of Fame. "Israel 'Izzy' Hernandez."
 Unknown publication date. Brevard College. "The Pertelote."
 1981. Brevard College. "College Honors Distinguished Alumni, Faculty and Athletes."
 October 2015. Sweat, Candace. "'I Could've Talked Him Out of It: Former Soccer Coach Remembers Mailing Bomb Suspect."
 WRAL. 26 October 2018. Claim:  Protest against federal spending encourages Americans to mail tea bags to the White House.  Example:  [Collected via e-mail, March 2009] Mailing Tea Bags to Washington, DC What a wonderful idea, I just wish it had been mine. I have a feeling that USPS is going to have a hell of a lot of tea to contend with, after all it only costs 42 cents to send a message, hopefully heard round the world!!! So please mark your Calendars There's a storm abrewin'. What happens when good, responsible people keep quiet? Washington has forgotten they work for us. We don't work for them. Throwing good money after bad is NOT the answer. I am sick of the midnight, closed door sessions to come up with a plan. I am sick of Congress raking CEO's over the coals while they, themselves, have defaulted on their taxes. I am sick of the bailed out companies having lavish vacations and retreats on my dollar. I am sick of being told it is MY responsibility to rescue people that, knowingly, bought more house than they could afford. I am sick of being made to feel it is my patriotic duty to pay MORE taxes. I, like all of you, am a responsible citizen. I pay my taxes. I live on a budget and I don't ask someone else to carry the burden for poor decisions I may make. I have emailed my congressmen and senators asking them to NOT vote for the stimulus package as it was written without reading it first. No one listened. They voted for it, pork and all. O.K. folks, here it is. You may think you are just one voice and what you think won't make a difference. Well, yes it will and YES, WE CAN!! If you are disgusted and angry with the way Washington is handling our taxes. If you are fearful of the fallout from the reckless spending of BILLIONS to bailout and "stimulate" without accountability and responsibility then we need to become ONE, LOUD VOICE THAT CAN BE HEARD FROM EVERY CITY, TOWN, SUBURB AND HOME IN AMERICA. There is a growing protest to demand that Congress, the President and his cabinet LISTEN to us, the American Citizens. What is being done in Washington is NOT the way to handle the economic free fall. So, here's the plan. On April 1, 2009, all Americans are asked to send a TEABAG to Washington, D.C. You do not have to enclose a note or any other information unless you so desire. Just a TEABAG. Many cities are organizing protests. If you simply search, "New American Tea Party", several sites will come up. If you aren't the 'protester' type, simply make your one voice heard with a TEABAG. Your one voice will become a roar when joined with millions of others that feel the same way. Yes, something needs to be done but the lack of confidence as shown by the steady decline in the stock market speaks volumes. This was not my idea. I visited the sites of the 'New American Tea Party' and an online survey showed over 90% of thousands said they would send the teabag on April 1. Why, April 1?? We want them to reach Washington by April 15. Will you do it? I will. Send it to; 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. Washington, D.C. 20500. Forward this to everyone in your address book. Visit the website for more information about the 'New American Tea Party'. I would encourage everyone to go ahead and get the envelope ready to mail, then just drop it in the mail April 1. Can't guarantee what the postage will be by then, it is going up as we speak, but have your envelope ready. What will this cost you? A little time and a 40 something cent stamp.. What could you receive in benefits? Maybe, just maybe, our elected officials will start to listen to the people. Take out the Pork. Tell us how the money is being spent. We want TRANSPARENCY AND ACCOUNTABILITY. Remember, the money will be spent over the next 4-5 years. It is not too late. Of course, if you agree with the way things are being done now, just delete!!!!! Origins:   On the evening of 16 December 1773, a group of American colonists who called themselves "The Sons of Liberty" furtively boarded the ship Dartmouth, which was docked in Boston harbor with a load of East India Company tea.  Working  through the night, the colonists dumped over 45 tons of tea into the waters of the harbor as a protest against the Tea Act passed by the British government.  The event, which came to be known as "The Boston Tea Party," was one of the seminal events of the American Revolution and remains one of the most iconic moments in all of U.S. history. In 2009, the iconic status of that event was referenced in the name of the New American Tea Party, described as a "coalition of citizens and organizations concerned about the recent trend of fiscal recklessness in government" who have begun coordinating events around the U.S. with the announced goal of protesting largesse in federal spending.   The item quoted above seeks to take up the "Tea Party" spirit by encouraging Americans to mail tea bags to the White House on 1 April 2009 (in order to arrive by 15 April, the day on which income tax filings are due) as a form of symbolic protest against "the way Washington is handling our taxes."  (The concept is vaguely reminiscent of a 1955 campaign that had citizens mailing small bags of wheat to President Eisenhower to encourage the U.S. to provide surplus food to flood victims in China.) New American Tea Party events wheat Of course, everyone is free to choose whether or not to participate in symbolic protests, so such actions don't have much in the way of verifiable "true" or "false" aspects  the only issue is how effective the chosen form of protest is likely to be.  With that in mind, we offer a few caveats for those inclined to participate:  An entry in the New American Tea Party blog states that they don't endorse the effort: entry We have received hundreds of questions about an email circulating that urges folks to send tea to Washington on April 1st or April 15th.  This effort is not endorsed by the New American Tea Party, so we can't answer any questions about it.  Given the more stringent security procedures for mail handling enacted after 9/11, there are no guarantees envelopes containing mailed teabags will get through to the White House without being discarded or significantly delayed, something also noted in the New American Tea Party blog: It is a neat idea, but things like that will likely either be held up getting scanned or end up getting thrown away due to security precautions. (A subsequent New American Tea Party blog entry suggested that just mailing the labels from tea bags might be a way of avoiding this potential pitfall.) entry  Envelopes that cannot be run through USPS sorting machines are subject to an additional 20 postage surcharge. A mailed item is considered  nonmachinable if: nonmachinable  It is a square letter (the minimum size for a square envelope is 5 x 5 inches) It is too rigid  does not bend easily It has clasps, string, buttons, or similar closure devices It has an address parallel to the shorter dimension of the letter It contains items that cause the surface to be uneven The length divided by height is less than 1.3 or more than 2.5  The specific aims of the tea bag protest are not clearly articulated in the e-mail quoted above, so senders might wish to include explanatory notes with their envelopes stating the desired outcome, such as: "I enclose this teabag as a protest against the passage of any further economic stimulus packages that provide money to businesses without provisions for strict transparency and accountability in how that money is to be spent" or  "I enclose this teabag as a protest against the passage of any further economic stimulus packages that include earmarks." Last updated:  12 March 2009    Idaho Statesman.  "Local Group Stages 'Reckless Federal Spending' Protest."   27 February 2009.    WJXT-TV [Jacksonville, FL].  "'Tea Party' Protests Wasteful Spending."   MSNBC.  2 March 2009. Claim:  In June 2012, 79% of General Motors' sales were made to the U.S. federal government.  Examples:  [Collected via e-mail, August 2012] I just received the following & while it seems phony, I sure would liketo know.  "79% of GM's sales last month were government purchased" Remember how obama keeps telling us how he saved GM, and how our economy is getting better, it seems the car company he bought is being saved by Govt employees using our tax money to buy new cars. 79% of GMs sales last month was government purchased.  Origins:  In July 2012 the above-referenced item began circulating (based on information propagated by web sites such as this one), claiming that a whopping 79% of automobile manufacturer General Motors (GM) sales in June 2012 came from purchases of vehicles by the (federal) government and suggesting that the Obama administration had engineered such purchases in order to make GM "appear financially strong" just in time for its upcoming quarterly report  all to justify the President's 2009 decision to provide billions of dollars in federal aid to allow GM and Chrysler to restructure after government-backed bankruptcies. this one However, a closer reading the source material on which the claim was based reveals that it is not true that "79% of GM's sales [in June 2012] were government purchased."  The 79% figure refers to the percentage by which GM's government fleet sales increased for the month, not to the proportion of GM's overall sales that came from government purchases. Moreover, the phrase "government purchases" doesn't refer only to the federal government: state, county, and municipal governments  whose purchasing decisions are not directed by the White House  are also large automotive fleet sales customers. source material fleet sales A General Motors spokesman maintained in a response that the percentage of GM's overall June 2012 sales attributable to government purchases was rather low and the bulk of those purchases were from non-federal government agencies: GM sales spokesman, Jim Cain, points out that total government sales for GM in June were still below 5% of total sales and [the] majority of government sales increases were attributed to state and local governments. Bloomberg news reported that all fleet sales (including purchases by rental car companies, typically the largest fleet customers) made up only 32% of GM's overall sales in June 2012.  This number was comparable to that reported by Ford, who said  fleet sales accounted for 35% of their deliveries that month. Last updated:  10 September 2012    Trudell, Craig.  "Auto Sales in June Provided Bright Spot for U.S. Economy."   Bloomberg.  3 July 2012.    Press Release.  "GM Reports June U.S. Sales Up 16 Percent."   General Motors.  3 July 2012.