Ralph Hall has never voted to raise the debt ceiling.
You have to go a long way back to trace U.S. Rep. Ralph Halls voting record. A conservative political action committee claimed theNortheast TexasRepublican has never voted to raise the debt ceiling in amail flierforwarded March 10, 2014, to PolitiFact Texas by Matt Mackowiak, an adviser to his challenger in the May 27, 2014, primary runoff for the GOP nomination. Hall, who faces former U.S. Attorney John Ratcliffe, was elected to Congress in 1980 and has served 17 terms; hes theoldestserving House member in history, as PolitiFact wrote March 20, 2014, in afact-checkrating False a charge that Hall was the oldest member in Congress ever. Since 1980, there have been more than 50 votes to raise the debt ceiling, which caps how much the U.S. government can borrow to carry out everything budgeted by Congress. And during Halls tenure, the limit has never been reduced. But did Hall, who promises in a campaignadthat he wont raise the debt ceiling, ever, never vote before to increase the cap? Debt ceiling votes tend to split on party lines. Typically, the party that controls the White House has had to push through the politically ticklish vote to raise the limit, while the other party gets a free run at criticizing the hike and voting against it.Memorably, Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., voted against raising the ceiling in 2006 when the Republican president, George W. Bush, sought an increase. Hall has been on both sides of that partisan divide, serving as a Democrat (albeit a conservative one)untilJan. 5, 2004, when heswitchedto the GOP. Clickhereto visit the Washington Posts interactive graphic on increases in the debt ceiling, updated Feb. 11, 2013 and spanning most of U.S. Rep. Ralph Halls time in Congress. We called and emailed theConservatives Acting Together PACfor information on its claim and didnt hear back. Hall campaign spokesman Ed Valentine told us by phone that the campaign wasnt involved with the mailer. Mackowiak told us by email that contrary to the PACs claim, Hall voted seven times to raise the ceiling from December 1985 through April 2005 -- twice under President Ronald Reagan, twice under President BIll Clinton and three times under Bush. Mackowiaks breakdown almost entirely holds up, though we found that some of Halls votes for raising the ceiling were wrapped into other House decisions. According to theHouse clerks officeand theCongressional Record, Hall voted five times in favor of raising the ceiling, though most of these instances were not pure votes on elevating the ceiling. Such increases were, for example, wrapped into theContract with America Advancement Act of 1996and theBalanced Budget Act of 1997. In the other two cases Mackowiak cited, one each in1985and2005, the ceiling-hike resolutions were passed by the House as a whole, rather than by individual representatives voting. This came about under theGephardt rule,named after former Rep. Richard Gephardt, D-Mo., whichoperated on the premisethat if representatives had voted for the budget, they had intended to fund everything in the budget, and it was thus not necessary to force them to take the potentially unpopular step of voting to raise the debt limit separately. In 2005, Hall votedforthe House budget measure that triggered the debt limit hike. But in 1985, he votedagainstthe original House version of the budget that was wrapped into the resolution the Senate approved -- so under the logic of the Gephardt rule, Hall presumably did not approve the debt limit increase that came with that budget. Hall votes: April 28, 2005, House Joint Resolution 47deemed passed. Hallvoted forthe budget measure that triggered it. Nov. 18, 2004,votefor Senate Bill 2986. June 27, 2002,votefor Senate Bill 2578. July 30, 1997,votefor House Resolution 2015. March 28, 1996,votefor House Resolution 3136. Aug. 14, 1986,votefor House Resolution 5395. Dec. 11, 1985, House Joint Resolution 372deemed passed.Hall voted againstHouse Concurrent Resolution 152, which was wrapped intoSenate Concurrent Resolution 32, the approval of which triggered HJR 372. Our ruling The PAC said, Ralph Hall has never voted to raise the debt ceiling. We didnt have to look further than the votes cited by his opponents campaign to find six instances from 1986 through 2005 in which Hall backed debt-limit increases. We rate this claim as False. FALSE The statement is not accurate. Click here formoreon the six PolitiFact ratings and how we select facts to check.
One of the more unusual political memes we've come across presented four different cases of tax-related financial improprieties to suggest that tax-evasion prosecutions were somehow influenced by racial bias against non-blacks:  However, the "Tax Racism" meme offered examples  not all of which were actual cases of tax evasion  so widely spaced in time and so differing in circumstances as to be non-useful in making any point at all about either tax fraud or race. Martha Stewart, the entrepreneur who rose to prominence as the author of books on cooking, entertaining, and decorating, was not charged with, or imprisoned for, non-payment of income taxes. Stewart was found guilty in March 2004 of felony charges of conspiracy, obstruction of an agency proceeding, and making false statements to federal investigators in a case related to a U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) investigation into insider trading activity: investigation Washington, D.C., June 4, 2003 -- The Securities and Exchange Commission today filed securities fraud charges against Martha Stewart and her former stockbroker, Peter Bacanovic. The complaint, filed in federal court in Manhattan, alleges that Stewart committed illegal insider trading when she sold stock in a biopharmaceutical company, ImClone Systems, Inc., on Dec. 27, 2001, after receiving an unlawful tip from Bacanovic, at the time a broker with Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith Incorporated. The Commission further alleges that Stewart and Bacanovic subsequently created an alibi for Stewart's ImClone sales and concealed important facts during SEC and criminal investigations into her trades. In a separate action, the United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York has obtained an indictment charging Stewart and Bacanovic criminally for their false statements concerning Stewart's ImClone trades. Stewart was sentenced to 5 months in prison and also settled a civil suit with the SEC by paying a $195,000 fine (a penalty that reflected four times the amount of stock value loss she avoided by taking advantage of inside information, plus interest). settled Stewart did engage in a dispute with the state of New York in 2002 over unpaid property taxes that she contended she didn't owe because she hardly spent any time in that state, and she was eventually ordered by a judge to pay $220,000 in back taxes plus penalties. But contrary to the false impression created by this meme, she was not prosecuted or jailed over that issue  the time she spent in prison was solely related to a later insider-trading case, not to tax evasion. dispute By the mid-1920s, notorious Chicago mobster Alphonse Gabriel Capone was reportedly taking in nearly $60 million annually ($878 million in 2018 dollars) from a variety of illegal activities, primarily Prohibition-era bootlegging. Capone was dubbed "Public Enemy No. 1" after the 1929 Saint Valentine's Day Massacre in which gunmen allegedly hired by him posed as police officers to murder seven members of a rival gang, leading to increased public pressure on the government to rein Capone in. Federal authorities had difficulty gathering sufficient hard evidence to convict Capone on any substantial criminal charges, however, so they took what was then a novel tack: Even if they couldn't prove Capone was making his millions illegally, they could prove he wasn't paying income tax on his ill-gotten gains. Despite his obviously lavish lifestyle, Capone never filed a federal income tax return and claimed he had no taxable income, reportedly boasting at one point that, They can't collect legal taxes from illegal money. He was proved wrong. IRS and Treasury agents gathered evidence that Capone had made millions of dollars in untaxed income, and the mobster was eventually indicted on 22 counts of federal income tax evasion. After conviction he was sentenced in 1931 to 11 years in prison, fined $50,000, and ordered to pay back taxes in the amount of $215,000. Capone was released from prison in 1939 with time off for good behavior and retired to Florida, where he died in 1947 at the relatively young age of 48. conviction In a literal sense Capone was indeed jailed for non-payment of income taxes, but the tax evasion charges were essentially a proxy for prosecuting the mobster over the multitude of vastly worse and violent crimes with which he was connected (and the immense profits he derived from those criminal activities). Capone was by no means an otherwise upright and law-abiding citizen who was thrown in prison simply because he didn't pay his income taxes. At this point in our narrative we need to distinguish between different forms of tax evasion. At one end of the spectrum are those who haven't engaged in any fraudulent behavior but simply didn't or can't pay their taxes for any number of reasons  maybe they didn't plan or withhold prudently, they received poor financial advisement, they had legitimate confusion or dispute over what constituted taxable income, or they simply overspent and ended up in debt. Although non-payment of taxes is a crime, the IRS will not usually seek prosecution in these types of case and will instead work with offenders in order to facilitate payment of their back debts (rather than making repayment difficult or impossible by incarcerating them). prosecution At the other end of the spectrum are those who actively engage in fraud in order to evade the full payment of taxes: They fail to disclose their full income, hide financial transactions, claim deductions to which they are not entitled, disguise monies earned as something other than income, or otherwise file falsified tax returns. The IRS will, at their discretion, seek prosecution in egregious cases of these forms of tax evasion. Leona Helmsley, derisively known by the nickname as the "Queen of Mean," was a billionaire who  along with her husband, real estate investor and broker Harry Helmsley  owned a vast portfolio of real estate and other assets, including a chain of hotels and the iconic Empire State Building. portfolio Leona Helmsley, who once reportedly asserted that We dont pay taxes. Only the little people pay taxes, fell into the latter class of tax evader, falsely manipulating her personal finances, business expenses, and dealings with third parties in order to avoid paying immense sums of taxes: tax evader Some of [Helmsley's] luster was tarnished in 1986 when court documents and law enforcement officials said she had failed to pay sales taxes in New York on hundreds of thousands of dollars of jewelry she purchased at Van Cleef & Arpels, the exclusive Manhattan store. Two senior store officers were indicted on charges that they operated a scheme by which customers with out-of-state addresses could have their purchases recorded as being mailed to them, thus avoiding city and state taxes. In 1987 a series of adverse articles in The New York Post about the Helmsleys, set off by one of their disgruntled employees, led to a broad investigation. The following year Harry and Leona Helmsley were indicted by federal and state authorities on charges that they had evaded more than $4 million in income taxes by fraudulently claiming as business expenses luxuries they purchased for Dunnellen Hall in Greenwich, Conn, a 28-room Jacobean mansion on 26 acres with a sweeping view of Long Island Sound that they bought in 1983. In 235 counts in state and federal indictments brought by Robert Abrams, then the New York State attorney general, and Rudolph W. Giuliani, then the United States attorney and later mayor of New York, the Helmsleys were accused of draining their hotel and real estate empire to provide themselves with such extravagances at Dunnellen Hall as a $1 million marble dance floor above a swimming pool, a $45,000 silver clock, a $210,000 mahogany card table, a $130,000 stereo system, and $500,000 worth of jade art objects. Nothing was too small or personal to be billed to their businesses, from Mrs. Helmsleys bras to a white lace and pink satin dress and jacket and a white chiffon skirt  the dress and skirt were entered in the Park Lane Hotel records as uniforms for the staff. Mrs. Helmsley was also charged with defrauding Helmsley stockholders by receiving $83,333 a month in secret consulting fees. She was convicted of 33 felony counts related to her evasion of $1.2 million in federal income taxes. She was sentenced to 16 years in prison (reduced to four years on appeal), fined $7.1 million for tax fraud, and ordered to pay some $1.7 million in back federal and state taxes. She began serving her sentence in 1992 and was released from federal prison in Connecticut in 1994 after having served less than half her sentence. Where along the tax-evader spectrum between "legitimate dispute" and "willful tax fraud" civil rights activist Al Sharpton might fall is a difficult to determine. Claims were made in the press in 2014 that Sharpton owed some $4.5 million in unpaid taxes, but the accuracy of that number and how much of the monies owed might already have been repaid by Sharpton were unclear, and his tax-troubles narrative involved a muddied mixture of personal, business, and non-profit finances as well liabilities for federal taxes, state taxes, payroll taxes, and personal income taxes. Much of the dispute over the "why" and "how much" of Sharpton's unpaid tax bill stemmed from the operations of the National Action Network, a not-for-profit, civil rights organization founded by Sharpton in 1991. Sharpton contended in a 2014 New York Times account that he incurred an unexpected tax liability because he was taxed personally for income he had given to the non-profit organization, and that he was up to date on repayment plans. Officials contested that the amount he was in arrears for in unpaid taxes had actually grown larger, though: contended Today, Mr. Sharpton still faces personal federal tax liens of more than $3 million, and state tax liens of $777,657, according to records. Mr. Sharpton said the federal liens resulted from a demand by the I.R.S. that he pay taxes on earnings from speaking engagements that he had turned over to National Action Network. He said he was up to date on payment plans for both the federal and state liens, so, he said, the outstanding balance was much lower than records showed. But according to state officials, his balance on the state liens is actually $220,000 greater now than when they were first filed during the years 2008 through 2010. A spokesman for the State Department of Taxation and Finance said state law did not allow him to provide any further details. Sharpton then contested that news account, asserting that it referenced "old taxes" and insisting again his tax liens had been paid down below the $4.5 million debt claimed in the New York Times report that stated Sharpton's unpaid tax debt had nonetheless grown larger, not smaller: contested During a news conference at the headquarters of his National Action Network in Harlem, Mr. Sharpton sought to refute the assertion that there were $4.5 million in state and federal tax liens outstanding against him and the for-profit businesses he controls. He said that the liens had been paid down, although he declined to say by how much, and that he was current on all taxes he was obligated to pay under settlement agreements with tax authorities. Were talking about old taxes, he said, adding: Were not talking about anything new. So all of this, as if Im not paying taxes while Im doing whatever Im doing, it reads all right, but it just is not true. The accuracy of Mr. Sharptons assertion that the amount he owes the federal government is much lower than the $3.6 million shown in records could not be verified. A spokesman for the Internal Revenue Service said federal law prohibited the agency from divulging any details about individual taxpayers. As for the state tax liens, Mr. Sharptons assertion that he had paid them down conflicts with information provided by state officials. State authorities filed tax liens against Mr. Sharpton in 2008 and 2009, and again in 2010 against a for-profit business he controls, Revals Communications, all totaling $695,000. But a spokesman for the State Department of Taxation and Finance said the amount due had actually increased, to $916,000. Regardless of the numbers, Sharpton wasn't put in prison because tax officials did not deem his case to be an exceptional one of scofflaw tax fraud or evasion that merited prosecution, instead working with him to facilitate his paying down the debt. The conclusion here is a simple one: Cherry-picking four very disparate cases of financial wrongdoings spanning several decades, while ignoring the many other instances of tax evasion successfully prosecuted by the U.S. government, documents nothing about any purported racial bias in such prosecutions. tax evasion Buettner, Russ.  "Al Sharpton Criticizes New York Times Report on Unpaid Taxes."
  The New York Times.  19 November 2014. Buettner, Russ.  "As Sharpton Rose, So Did His Unpaid Taxes."
  The New York Times.  18 November 2014. Nemyaug, Enid.  "Leona Helmsley, Hotel Queen, Dies at 87."
  The New York Times.  20 August 2007. Erb, Kelly Phillips.  "Al Capone Sentenced to Prison for Tax Evasion on This Day in 1931."
  Forbes.com.  17 October 2018. Wood, Robert W.  "10 Notorious Tax Cheats: Queen of Mean Leona Helmsley Proved Little People Can Put You in Jail."
  Forbes.com.  17 April 2015. Wood, Robert W.  "Lessons From Rev. Al Sharpton's $4.5 Million Tax Bill."
  Forbes.com.  19 November 2014. Department of Justice -- Office of Public Affairs.  "Tax Crime Does Not Pay."
  10 April 2018. Johnson, Carrie.  "Stewart to Pay $195,000 in Settlement of Civil Suit."
  The Washington Post.  8 August 2006. Kratsas, Gabrielle.  "13 Infamous Tax Cheaters."
  USA Today.  28 February 2014. On Feb. 21, 2023, a Twitter user posted a video with a caption that claimed it had been recorded by NASA "eight years ago" and showed two rectangular UFOs being flown by aliens. The tweet read, "Two UFOs recorded by NASA eight years ago have finally been released. Two rectangular UFOs are fast moving through an 'atmosphereless' region of space. It turns out that it transcends the technology of NASA." The tweet ended with the hashtag, "#Aliens." Readers likely won't be surprised to learn that this was not true. [See also:Is Outer Space 'Only an Hour Away' if You Could Drive Straight up at 60 MPH?] Is Outer Space 'Only an Hour Away' if You Could Drive Straight up at 60 MPH? The video truly was released by NASA, but it had not been "recorded" with cameras. The clip showed a digital animation created byNASA's Scientific Visualization Studio thatshowed two twin spacecraft satellites from theGravity Recovery and Climate Experiment (GRACE) mission, not "two rectangular UFOs" being flown by aliens. (Twitter user @HoaxEye alsonotedthe truth behind this video.) Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment (GRACE) mission noted The part from the tweet appears at the 1:37 mark in the video's upload on theNASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory YouTube channel.  The original GRACE science mission ended in October 2017.NASApublished that its purpose had been to "study key changes in the planet's waters, ice sheets and the solid Earth": NASA An award-winning mission that's changed the way we study Earth's gravitational forces and the Earth system, the Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment, or GRACE, mission flew twin spacecraft in tandem around Earth to study key changes in the planet's waters, ice sheets and the solid Earth. In 2011, the gravity measurement technique pioneered by GRACE, which works by measuring changes in the push and pull between the twin spacecraft as they orbit Earth, was put to use on NASA's twin GRAIL spacecraft embarking on an ambitious mission to study the gravitational forces of Earth's moon. In more than 15 years of operations, the GRACE satellite mission revolutionized our view of how water moves and is stored on Earth. GRACE measured changes in the local pull of gravity as water shifts around Earth due to changing seasons, weather and climate processes. Among its innovations, GRACE has monitored the loss of ice mass from Earth's ice sheets, improved understanding of the processes responsible for sea level rise and ocean circulation, provided insights into where global groundwater resources may be shrinking or growing and where dry soils are contributing to drought, and monitored changes in the solid Earth. This story will be updated if further details come to light. "15 Years of GRACE Earth Observations." YouTube, NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory, 15 Mar. 2017, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fKVPFyu_tHQ. "Grace - Earth Missions." NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL), https://www.jpl.nasa.gov/missions/gravity-recovery-and-climate-experiment-grace. "Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment (GRACE)." NASA.Gov, http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/Grace/index.html. @HoaxEye. "That's Animated. Source." Twitter, 21 Feb. 2023, https://twitter.com/hoaxeye/status/1628273280669851651. @uBF2fV1cVQxRjQo. "Two UFOs Recorded by NASA Eight Years Ago Have Finally Been Released. Two Rectangular UFOs Are Fast Moving through an Atmosphereless Region of Space. It Turns out That It Transcends the Technology of NASA." Twitter, 21 Feb. 2023, https://twitter.com/uBF2fV1cVQxRjQo/status/1627956530774675457. An Internet meme circulating during the final weeks of the 2016 presidential campaign purported to reveal financial trickery on the part of Democratic contender Hillary Clinton, who allegedly deducted $1 million from her 2015 income tax return after donating it "to herself" via contributions to the Clinton Foundation. On the assumption that this information came from the candidate's 2015 tax filing (released to the public earlier this year), that's where we went to verify the accuracy of the claims. Our findings were these: filing 1. The return was a joint filing for both Hillary and William J. Clinton. 2. Their shared charitable donations totaled $1,042,000: $42,000 to Desert Classic Charities and $1 million to the Clinton Family Foundation. Desert Classic Charities Clinton Family Foundation   3. Declaring an amount  say $1 million  as a charitable donation only reduces your taxable income; it doesn't mean your "tax bill" is reduced by that amount. 4. The Clinton Family Foundation is a separate entity from the Clinton Foundation. Inside Philanthropy describes the Clinton Family Foundation as "a traditional private foundation that serves as the vehicle for the couple's personal charitable giving." It has neither staff nor offices.  Clinton Foundation describes 5. According to Inside Philanthropy, the Clinton Family Foundation regularly disburses contributions to scores of different charities (one of which is, in fact, the Clinton Foundation): Digging into the Clinton Family Foundation's 2014 tax return reveals that they did around $3.8 million in grantmaking and held some $5.3 million in assets. Of total grantmaking in 2014, $1.8 million went to the Clinton Foundation, just under half of total giving.  2014 tax return However, in 2013, the Clintons gave $1.8 million through their personal foundation, with only around a fifth of that money going to the Clinton Foundation, around the same share as in 2012.  So where have all the other gifts gone? To lots of different places, is the short answer. In 2014, the Clintons gave money to 70 nonprofits through their foundation. The picture looked similar the year before, with many grants falling in the range of $5,000 to $25,000.  Recipients of the Clintons' largesse via the Clinton Family Foundation in 2014 ranged from the School of American Ballet to the Arkansas Childrens Hospital Foundation to Wellesley College to the Elie Wiesel Foundation for Humanity. 2014 The foundation's 2015 tax filing has not yet been made public, so we don't have an accounting of the organizations to whom the $1 million contributed by the Clintons that year was disbursed. Regarding the apparent assumption that any monies donated to the Clinton Foundation simply end up in the Clintons' own pockets, we refer readers, once again, to Inside Philanthropy, which describes the actual work the foundation does, and to the charity rating service Charity Navigator, which gives the Clinton Foundation an overall score of 94.74 points out of 100 in terms of its financials, accountability, and transparency. Inside Philanthropy Charity Navigator  Callahan, David."What the Heck Does the Clinton Foundation Actually DO?"
Inside Philanthropy.23 June 2016. Callahan, David and Adeniji, Ade."The Other Clinton Foundation: A Look at Bill and Hillary's Personal Philanthropy."
Inside Philanthropy.29 July 2016. Claim: Kohl's is giving Facebook users a coupon for 50 percent off any purchase for liking and sharing a status.  Example: [Collected via e-mail, October 2015] There is a Yes pass from Kohl's, saying that everything is 50% off. You need to share and comment Thanks Kohl's. Is this true?? _______________________________________________________________________ Happy Thanksgiving from Kohl's. 50 % OFF of everything. Origins: In mid-November 2015, links began circulating on Facebook promising users a Thanksgiving coupon for 50 percent off all Kohl's purchases:  The appended links involved a variety of URLs (above, "couponbits.com"), and users who clicked through to claim their coupon landed on a page titled "Complete these steps below to get KOHL'S Reward!" While the page mimicked the style of Facebook-based content, it was hosted on a non-Facebook URL:   As with many similar coupon lures on Facebook, the dangled bait was based upon an actual Kohl's coupon (albeit one whose savings were far more modest):   In response to an avalanche of Facebook complaints from frustrated users who hadn't received coupons after completing the steps, Kohl's verified account replied: Please know this is not a valid Kohl's offer. Social media users are largely acquainted with survey scams of this type; Kohl's (previously), Costco, Home Depot, Lowe's, Kroger, Best Buy, Macy's, Olive Garden, Publix, Target, and Walmart are among retailers used as scam bait (by folks mining personal information and valuable page likes from Facebook users). Kohl's Costco Home Depot Lowe's Kroger Best Buy Macy's Olive Garden Publix Target Walmart bait A July 2014 article from the Better Business Bureau illustrated how folks might spot and avoid bad actors utilizing the reputations of brands on social media: article Don't believe what you see. It's easy to steal the colors, logos and header of an established organization. Scammers can also make links look like they lead to legitimate websites and emails appear to come from a different sender. Legitimate businesses do not ask for credit card numbers or banking information on customer surveys. If they do ask for personal information, like an address or email, be sure there's a link to their privacy policy. When in doubt, do a quick web search. If the survey is a scam, you may find alerts or complaints from other consumers. The organization's real website may have further information. Watch out for a reward that's too good to be true. If the survey is real, you may be entered in a drawing to win a gift card or receive a small discount off your next purchase. Few businesses can afford to give away $50 gift cards for completing a few questions. It's likely Kohl's planned to release Black Friday coupons on or around Thanksgiving, but the retailer was unlikely to do so by forcing its customers to like and share a Facebook status update.   Last updated: 19 November 2015 Originally published: 19 November 2015 As social media users sorted through a flurry of news articles, opinion pieces, calls for boycotts, and other hot takes in September 2018 about Colin Kaepernick's involvement in a new Nike ad campaign, some stumbled across what appeared to be a news article reporting that Ford USA was following Nike's example by making the former NFL quarterback the face of their new ad campaign: articles   This item was not a social media link to a genuine news article, nor did the featured image show a genuine Ford advertisement featuring Colin Kaepernick. This item was created as a joke for the political humor section of the Reddit social news site. Kaepernick became a controversial figure in 2016 when he started kneeling during the pre-game performance of the U.S. national anthem in protest of racial inequality and police brutality. A number of conservative football fans, including President Trump, maintained that Kaepernick's protest was disrespectful to veterans, so when Nike announced that the former football star would be featured in their latest ad campaign, social media users urged each other to boycott the brand and started posting images purportedly showing them destroying various pieces of Nike apparel. 2016 Twitter user @Patterico apparently found the videos of people burning their shoes to be amusing but noted that the entertainment value would increase if people were burning Ford F-150 trucks instead: I'll pay Ford $10 if they put Kaepernick in a commercial for F-150s so I can watch some dumbass torch his pickup on Twitter, who's with me  Patterico (@Patterico) September 4, 2018 September 4, 2018  Reddit user u/fakenewsanchorman saw this tweet and decided to create a fake news item (note the username) stating that Ford USA had indeed named Kaepernick as their new brand ambassador. On 5 September 2018, his meme was posted to the Political Humor subreddit under the title "Please Make This Actually Happen." Political Humor That Reddit user admitted in the comments section that his image did not reflect a genuine news item, but we double-checked with FoxNews.com to see if reporter Judson Berger had filed any such report. This article does not appear on Berger's author page nor anywhere else on the Fox News web site. author page This bit of fake news may have sparked sparked interest in a genuine, albeit outdated, article about Ford's stance on the national anthem protests. In September 2017, the company officially took the side of the protesting players, saying that they respected the "individuals' right to express their views": article "We respect individuals' rights to express their views, even if they are not ones we share," the company said. "That's part of what makes America great" ... Martha Firestone Ford, owner and chairwoman of the Detroit Lions and a member of the Ford family, issued a statement criticizing President Trump for his comments. "Our game has long provided a powerful platform for dialogue and positive change in many communities throughout our nation," she said. "Negative and disrespectful comments suggesting otherwise are contrary to the founding principles of our country, and we do not support those comments or opinions." Abad-Santos, Alex.  "Why the Social Media Boycott Over Colin Kaepernick Is a Win for Nike."
  Vox.  6 September 2018. Sandritter, Mark.  "A Timeline of Colin Kaepernicks National Anthem Protest and the Athletes Who Joined Him."
  SB Nation.  25 September 2017. Wiener-Bronner, Danielle.  "Ford: We Respect the Right of NFL Players to Protest."
  CNN.  25 September 2017. Scammers and malware purveyors are always looking for ways to entice online users into following web links that will lead those victims into the traps set for them, and offers of free products are prime bait in that pursuit of prey. One common method such predators use is establishing fake Facebook accounts mimicking those of well-known vendors of consumer products (typically of the edible variety, such as Starbucks, Taco Bell, McDonald's, KFC, Wendy's, Burger King, Whole Foods, Safeway, Food Lion, and Little Caesars) and posting bogus offers for "lifetime passes" or other dispensations of free product as part of a supposed company anniversary or birthday celebration (e.g., "Starbucks is giving away free lifetimes in celebration of the brand's 44th anniversary"). The primary type of free product fraud is the "sweepstakes scam," which is intended to lure victims into completing numerous surveys, disclosing a good deal of personal information, and then agreeing to sign up for costly, difficult-to-cancel "Reward Offers" hidden in the fine print. The scammers spread links via e-mail and Facebook that purport to offer free product to those who follow those links. These web pages (which are not operated or sponsored by the companies they reference) typically ask the unwary to click what appear to be Facebook "share" buttons and post comments to the scammer's site (which is really a ruse to dupe users into spreading the scam by sharing it with all of their Facebook friends). Those who follow such instructions are then led into a set of pages prompting them to input a fair amount of personal information (including name, age, address, and phone numbers), complete a lengthy series of surveys, and finally sign up (and commit to paying) for at least two "Reward Offers" (e.g., Netflix subscriptions, credit report monitoring services, prepaid credit cards): Pursuant to the Terms & Conditions, you are required to complete 2 of the Reward Offers from the above. You will need to meet all of the terms and conditions to qualify for the shipment of the reward. For credit card offers, you must activate your card by making a purchase, transferring a balance, or making a cash advance. For loan offers you must close and fund the loan. For home security and satellite tv offers you must have the product installed. You may not cancel your participation in more than a total of 2 Reward Offers within 30 days of any Reward Offer Sign-Up Date as outlined in the Terms & Conditions (the Cancellation Limit). Not only that, but the fine print on the "free" product offers typically states that by accepting its terms, the user agrees to receive telemarketing phone calls and text messages from a variety of different companies:   Similar phony free product lures are used to spread malware. In those versions of the scam, those who attempt to reach the URL provided for the purpose of claiming the free products are instead victimized by a Facebook "lifejacking" attack, a malicious script that takes over a user's Facebook profile without their knowledge and propagates itself to their friends' accounts as well. lifejacking In short, those who seek "free" merchandise generally end up paying a dear cost for it. A common and perhaps reasonable assumption is that people who are poor dont have jobs. But in anAug. 7, 2013, infographicon its website, the left-leaningOregon Center for Public Policywrote that 7 out of 10 Oregon families living in poverty have at least one parent who works. Was this the debunking of a common myth about those in poverty? Do a full 70 percent of Oregon families in poverty have a parent who works? We first rang Chuck Sheketoff, the executive director of the Silverton-based center, who said that the figure was part of the centersJune 27, 2013, Working But Still Poor fact sheet. Work is not a sure path out of poverty, it said. A pie chart on the second page says that 69 percent of families in poverty were working families, composed of 22 percent who had at least one parent working full time and 47 percent who had at least one parent working less than full time. About 31 percent of the families had no parent working. The numbers were from the centers analysis of theU.S. Census Bureaus2011 American Community Survey data. Sheketoff pointed us to Jason Gettel, the centers policy analyst who crunched those numbers. Gettel explained that he usedDataFerrett, a free data analysis program promoted on the Census Bureaus website. DataFerrett allows users to analyze all of the survey responses to carve out data in different ways. We wanted to see what proportion of families in poverty had a worker present to show that people do live in poverty despite the fact that they work, Gettel said. Theyre there because some jobs pay too little, or theyve been laid off for some period of time, but not because they dont put forth a work effort. Gettel walked us through DataFerrett and showed us how he selected certain variables in order to limit the survey responses to arrive at the 7 out of 10 number. He limited the data to only the Oregon families who are in poverty with a related child. He then searched for types of work experience by different family members, such as householder worked full-time in the past 12 months and spouse worked full time in the past 12 months or female householder worked less than full-time in the past 12 months and no spouse present. Finally, the numbers were weighted to more accurately reflect statewide numbers, since the American Community Survey does not count as many people as the 2010 U.S. Census. The analysis showed that there were 437,991 families with children in Oregon. Of those, 86,255 were in poverty. This is the pool of Oregon families we would use for further calculations. Next we did some simple addition and subtraction. We first added up the 3,042 families where neither the householder nor the spouse worked; the 4,429 families where single male householders did not work; and the 19,339 families where single female householders did not work. This showed us that 26,810 of the 86,255 Oregon families with children had a parent who did not work in the previous year, roughly 31 percent. Put another way, 59,445 Oregon families with children in poverty  69 percent  had a parent who worked at least part time in the previous year. Its worth noting here that the Census data only breaks down work experience by three different types and only over a 12-month period: full-time work, less than full-time work, or no work. That means somebody who last worked a one-month retail job during the 2012 holiday season would qualify as a less than full-time worker. Were not sure that most people count that as a parent who works. Indeed, government officials generally categorize people unemployed for six months or longer as long-term unemployed. We also want to note that poverty is defined as the federal poverty threshold. For 2011, that threshold was $18,123 for a single parent with two children and $22,811 for a two-parent family with two children. The threshold varies depending on the number of adults and children and whether the adults are under 65 years old. Next we wanted to verify that Gettel had used the right variables to arrive at the right numbers. DataFerrett, to put it nicely, is not the most intuitive program for the average user. We called the U.S. Census Bureau, where a survey statistician in the poverty statistics branch also used DataFerrett to check our variables and numbers. The process that was used was the correct process, said Robert Bernstein, a bureau spokesman. The end result was this 69 percent figure. Lastly, we wondered if similar studies had been done. Again, we turned to the Census Bureau. One table indicated that nearly 64 percent of Oregon families with income below the poverty level in the previous year had a worker in the family. Those data were from the 2011 American Community Survey. Another 2011 Census table based on national data showed that, of the 33.1 million people in families in poverty, 21.1 million individuals were in families with at least one worker  about 64 percent. Neither of those studies was limited to families with children. We looked at some other studies, too, and saw similar percentages. None of these studies is a perfect apples-to-apples comparison to the Oregon Center for Public Policys data, but they show that the Oregon centers numbers are within range of what similar studies have found. The Oregon Center for Public Policy wrote that 7 out of 10 Oregon families living in poverty have at least one parent who works. We checked Gettels analysis and confirmed his results. We also confirmed the analysis and numbers with the U.S. Census Bureau. While the numbers are accurate, under the survey design, somebody classified by federal employment officials as long-term unemployed could be counted as working under the Census definition. We think thats an important clarification. We rate this statement Mostly True. In July 2017, social media users shared videos and images of burning trees and melting streetlights, the purported results of a record-breaking heatwave in Kuwait during which temperatures soared to 62 Celsius (143.6 Fahrenheit). First of all, a 62 Celsius day has never been recorded. The highest temperature on record, according to the World Meteorological Organization, was 56.7C (134F) on 10 July 1913 in Furnace Creek, California. The highest temperature in Kuwait, 54C, was recorded in Mitrabah in July 2016. Although the footage of trees burning is likely real, the claim that these fires were caused by 62 Celsius temperatures is unfounded. temperature recorded The weather in Kuwait hovered around 50C during July 2017: hovered   The web site Frontnews.eu shared one of the most popular videos of this claim, showing a tree burning on the side of the road along with the report that the temperature had reached 62C in Kuwait: shared In Kuwait, the air temperature in some places reached 62 degrees Celsius in an open area where there is no shadow. Users of social networks share videos of burning trees, bushes, and also note that because of the heat, gasoline in the car tanks exploded.  This video was actually shot in Madinah, Saudi Arabia, and captured a palm tree that was struck by lightning, as the website alweeam.com reported (translated by Google Translate and edited for clarity): actually Madinah struck A thunderbolt struck a palm tree on the famous Sultana Street in Madinah. Following the heavy rains in the region today and some of its provinces, the fire broke out in the entire palm before the civil defense fire brigade began its work. A video clip was documented by a citizen. The burning process started gradually with the burning palm tree, and quickly spread to the whole of the surrounding area, causing danger to the firefighters before the fire brigade put out the fire in the palm and the surrounding trees.                                         .                                               . A second video purported to show a plant burning due to Kuwait's high temperatures:  Although this video was shot in Kuwait, we found no evidence to suggest that the plant burst into flame solely because of high air temperatures. Local news reports (translated by Google Translate and edited for clarity) noted the cause of the fire was unknown: reports Firefighters extinguished a fire in a number of trees on the first ring road near the Martyr's Park. In the details, a report was sent to the operating room stating that a fire broke out on the first ring road. The Shuwaikh industrial fire station was called and the fire was extinguished. Firefighters are currently investigating.                .                           .        . A photograph of a melting traffic light also appeared alongside the claim about the high temperatures: alongside   Although this image was taken in Kuwait, it dated back to 2013 and showed a street light that reportedly melted due to a nearby car fire. 2013 reportedly One final image was circulated as "evidence" that temperatures had reached 62C in Kuwait:   According to the Kuwait Times, however, this image was manipulated. Meteorologist Adel Al-Saadoun, head of the Fintas Weather Observatory, explained that the temperature has never reached 62C in Kuwait and that such reports were just "fake news": explained Do not believe in fake news, warned meteorologist Adel Al-Saadoun, head of the Fintas Weather Observatory, as he debunked social media reports that temperatures in Kuwait reached 62 degrees. It is fake news  not true, Saadoun told Kuwait Times. Kuwait has only recorded temperatures of a maximum of 52 degrees centigrade. Never in history has the temperature in Kuwait reached 62. As we speak now, the temperature is 49 degrees Celsius (at 2 pm yesterday), but people have been posting images of 54, 56 degrees  the temperature inside the car is higher, but not as per our weather monitoring system. Saadoun said the mercury will continue to rise in the next few days till the end of July, but by the beginning of August, the heat will start subsiding. This has been the usual weather in Kuwait. This period is called the summer solstice. This is the period when the sun is right next to us up there, and we expect such weather in July, he said. World Meteorological Organization.  "High Temperatures and Extreme Weather Continue."
  7 July 2017. Chand, Eudore.  "Shrubs, Palm in GCC on Fire Due to Heat? Watch Videos."
  Emirates 247.  7 August 2017. Garcia, Ben.  "62 Degrees Centigrade Temperature Untrue, Fake News."
  Kuwait Times.  2 July 2017. Texas Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick said in a nationally broadcast interview that Planned Parenthood does little more than profit from killing babies. Patrick, a Republican,appeared Oct. 19, 2015, on Your World with Neil Cavuto, a Fox News program. That wasthe day a Texas state official moved to cut off$3.1 million in annual Medicaid funding to Planned Parenthood, 90 percent of it federal aid, for contraception and health services. That came as a result, the official said, of videos showing doctors for the group altered abortion procedures to procure intact fetal tissue for researchers in violation of federal law. Planned Parenthood, denying misconduct, commented that it was considering its options, including a lawsuit. Patrick, talking to Cavuto, said: Were not going to tolerate Planned Parenthood pretending, Neil, to be something theyre not... Cavuto: Do you think that Planned Parenthood does anything good? Patrick: No. I dont think they do anything good. Look, theyre nothing more than a referral service. They pretend to care about womens health. But they dont have professionals even giving any information to women except referring them to another clinic. They dont  have equipment. They dont do anything except profit from killing babies and then selling body parts of those aborted babies. Cavuto: Well, I understand your passions, sir. But they do a little bit more than that. Patrick: Very little. Theres been debate about what the videos taken with hidden cameras by the Center for Medical Progress, an anti-abortion group, show about sales of fetal tissue. But on Oct. 7, 2015,PolitiFact Florida rated Falsea claim that Planned Parenthood has now (been) found to also illegally sell baby parts. Federal law permits fetal tissue donations to researchers. Abortion providers also are allowed to charge a fee for facilitating such donations. We focused our sights on whether Patrick is right that Planned Parenthood solely provides abortions. To our request for backup information, Patricks spokesman, Alejandro Garcia, said by phone: We dont have anything further to add. Past fact checks In August 2015, PolitiFactrated Pants on Firea claim by Jeb Bush that Planned Parenthood is not actually doing womens health issues. That story said Planned Parenthood offers contraception, sexually transmitted infection testing and treatment, pregnancy testing, prenatal services and cancer screenings, including breast exams, though not mammograms. In September 2012, PolitiFact Georgiarated Truea claim that Planned Parenthood does not provide mammograms. Planned Parenthood refers women to mammography providers. Earlier, in April 2011,PolitiFact rated Falsea claim that abortion services are well over 90 percent of what Planned Parenthood does. That story, citing a Planned Parenthood fact sheet, concluded that abortions accounted for just under 3 percent of the procedures Planned Parenthood provided in 2009, then the most recent year for which the group was reporting statistics. There is lately more up-to-date information. On Planned Parenthoods website, we spotted aBy the Numbers documentlast updated in July 2015 stating that 34 percent of its health services are contraceptive services and 3 percent are abortions. Another document,Services,states that in 2013, Planned Parenthood provided more than 4.4 million services related to testing men and women for sexually transmitted infections or diseases; more than 3.5 million contraception services; more than 935,000 services related to cancer prevention and detection; some 1.1 million pregnancy and prenatal services; 327,653 abortions; and nearly 132,000 other services. The most prevalent listed contraception service was reversible contraception for women (2.1 million services). The most common cancer screening was breast exams/breast care (487,029 services). That story said that a Planned Parenthood spokeswoman said doctors and nurses at Planned Parenthood health centers provide clinical breast exams and refer patients to facilities with technicians for mammograms based on breast exams, age or family history; she said Planned Parenthood also refers women to breast specialists when a potential abnormality is found and follow-up tests are needed. According to the July 2015 list, Planned Parenthoods most common pregnancy services in 2013 were pregnancy tests (1.1 million services). Other identified services include HIV tests (704,000 services); emergency contraception kits (1.4 million services) and Pap tests (378,692 services). A longer view: Nationally from 2006 through 2013, the number of abortions provided by Planned Parenthood essentially held steady, with marginal increases and a modest peak in 2009, according to an Oct. 1, 2015,PolitiFact article. That story presented a chart showing how the number of specific services provided by Planned Parenthood went up or down from 2006 to 2013, based on Planned Parenthoods annual reports from 2006 to 2013 (though a report from 2008 didnt turn up): Another chart, likewise drawing from the annual reports, showed counts for abortion and non-abortion services provided by the group:  Caveats Per all these figures, its worth repeating caveats offered by PolitiFact in 2011: --First, many people would acknowledge a difference between providing an abortion and, say, handing out a pack of condoms or conducting a blood test. The former is a significant surgical procedure, whereas the latter are quick and inexpensive services. So Planned Parenthoods use of services as its yardstick likely decreases abortions prominence compared with what other measurements would show. Using dollars spent or hours devoted to patient care would likely put abortion above 3 percent in the calculations. --Second, Planned Parenthood self-reported these numbers, though the group says each affiliates numbers are independently audited. This basically means observers must accept their accuracy more or less on faith. Planned Parenthood In Texas To our inquiry about Patricks claim, Yvonne Gutierrez of Planned Parenthood Texas Votes,which saysit battles to protect womens health care access, said the same range of services are offered in Texas by the group. Gutierrez emailed us an undatedPlanned Parenthood documentindicating that in 2013, its Texas clinics had 150,710 patients including 108,533 contraception patients. The document showed state-by-state counts in those categories and for Pap tests plus tests for sexually transmitted infections, breast exams and sex education and outreach. Gutierrez also emailed us achart, attributed to state agencies, distributed by the Texas Health and Human Services Commission. The chart shows $3.1 billion in Medicaid spending on Planned Parenthood-provided services in the fiscal year through Aug. 31, 2015. That spending covered Medicaid reimbursements and payments through health plans for patients who went to Planned Parenthood clinics, Gutierrez said. We also asked Gutierrez about Planned Parenthood in Texas making fetal tissue available for research. Planned Parenthood Greater Texas and Planned Parenthood South have never participated in fetal tissue research projects, she replied by email, and have no plans to do so. While Planned Parenthood Center for Choice (in Houston) does not currently participate in a fetal tissue study, they have taken part in such worthy studies in the past, following all laws and the highest medical and ethical standards. These studies hold the potential to cure disease and save lives. They last partnered with UTMB, the University of Texas Medical Branch, on a study to prevent miscarriage. Our ruling Patrick said Planned Parenthood is nothing more than a referral service. They dont do anything except profit from killing babies and then selling body parts of those aborted babies. To the contrary, Planned Parenthood provides family planning and other womens health services, including abortions and theres been no confirmation it sells body parts. We rate this incorrect and ridiculous statement Pants on Fire. PANTS ON FIRE The statement is not accurate and makes a ridiculous claim. Click here formoreon the six PolitiFact ratings and how we select facts to check. Clint Eastwood's Academy Award-winning work includes four Oscars: Best Director and Best Actor in a Leading Role for both 1993's "Unforgiven" and 2004's "Million Dollar Baby." Eastwood's work spans decades, and some of his roles were uncredited. For example, he briefly appeared in 1995's "Casper." Also, since at least September 2020 he appeared uncredited in none other than an online advertisement that read: "Clint Eastwood's Net Worth Left His Family In Tears." appeared an online advertisement Of course, Eastwood had nothing to do with the dubious ad. Further, he was not dead. As of December 2020, Clint Eastwood was alive and filming a new movie during the COVID-19 pandemic. The 90-year-old actor was born on May 31, 1930. filming a new movie The misleading advertisements that falsely claimed Eastwood's net worth "left his family in tears" led readers to a seemingly endless, multi-page story on refinancegold.com. The headline for the slideshow-style article read: "Special Celebs & Their Incredible Net Worth." story Clint Eastwood's name finally appeared on page 225 after readers had clicked "Next" 225 times, right before the end of the story. The page included no mention of his family being left "in tears." Clint Eastwood ~ $375 Million  (Photo by Frazer Harrison/Getty Images for AFI)  Clint Eastwood is Hollywoods 70s star who has had a long and fruitful acting career in succeeding decades, mostly portraying rough-and-tough characters in Western settings. These days, he is one a highly accomplished director. He is best known for his roles in the Dollars Trilogy and Dirty Harry films. With a $375-million net fortune in his bank account from his long career as an actor, producer and director in show business, he will never need to ask for a loan in his life ever again. We previously covered other misleading net worth advertisements for Alex Trebek, Sean Connery, Jaleel White, and Richard Gere. White and Gere were both still alive. Alex Trebek Sean Connery Jaleel White Richard Gere On the TrustPilot.com reviews website, a user named Paul H. posted a one-star review for refinancegold.com, the website that created the misleading Clint Eastwood advertisement: posted a one-star review Hurtful Misleading Ad to Draw You In Their morally despicable ad to draw you to their website should warn you right off of having anything to do with this company. The hook was:"Clint Eastwood's Net Worth Left His Family in Tears" (accompanied by a pic of Clint looking distraught and at death's door - the sort of pic we could all be caught with at the wrong time of the day). I'm not particularly a fan of Clint Eastwood but as far as I know he's very much alive and not going bankrupt any time soon. I'm sure he doesn't need me to defend him, but this sort of ad is hurtful to those who love him, deceitful and without conscience. Avoid this company like the plague, how far can you trust people who are willing to draw you in with that sort of ad? Snopes debunks a wide range of content, and online advertisements are no exception. Misleading ads often lead to obscure websites that host lengthy slideshow articles with lots of pages. It's called advertising "arbitrage." The advertiser's goal is to make more money on ads displayed on the slideshow's pages than it cost to show the initial ad that lured them to it. Feel free to submit ads to us, and be sure to include a screenshot of the ad and the link to where the ad leads. submit ads to us