No, Trump Isn't 'Tactically' Implementing Voter Interference Sanctions
Voting in the 2020 U.S. Election may be over, but the misinformation keeps on ticking. Never stop fact-checking. Follow our post-election coverage here. here In mid-December 2020, a copy-pasted ("copypasta") meme spread on social media platforms warning "patriots" that U.S. President Donald Trump was about to "tactically" implement elements of an executive order on election security signed in 2018, telling them to have weapons "at the ready":   copypasta The incendiary meme appears to reference an executive order signed by Trump on Sept. 12, 2018, ahead of the midterm elections. The meme claimed that Trump was to implement parts of the order at some point between Dec. 18 and Dec. 24, 2020. executive order Here is a portion of the text: This will freeze the money and assets of people and entities to include Facebook, Twitter, the Fake News Corp, AND Chinese U.S. financial accounts. Be prepared to assist the National Guard and the military commands in defense of Our nation. Make sure that you have your weapons at the ready. But DO NOT interfere with the operations of the military. During this time, local law enforcement will have no authority. So, assemble small Patriot teams to patrol and secure your own and surrounding neighbors Trump's 2018 executive order has nothing to do with military or National Guard deployment domestically, nor does it mention the broad suspension of financial assets of social media platforms and "Chinese U.S. financial accounts." The meme appears to actually be referencing extreme calls by some of Trump's supporters, echoing his false claims that the November 2020 election was beset by mass-scale fraud and advocating that Trump impose martial law in response. extreme calls The 2018 executive order  signed less than a month before the 2018 midterm elections  was meant as a deterrent against foreign election interference. The order stated that the Trump administration was ready to implement sanctions against any foreign entity that interfered in the election process. stated It's noteworthy that the order was signed ahead of the first national election since 2016, during which the Russian government interfered in an effort to sow chaos in the U.S. and help Trump's electoral efforts. Trump was under political pressure at that time to stem similar interference in 2018. effort pressure Notably, Facebook and Twitter are American companies, not foreign entities. It's unclear to us what exactly "Fake News Corp" refers to, but unsurprisingly, no such company exists. Sanctions can't be imposed on a fictional entity. The 2018 executive order relies on various department heads to make determinations about foreign election interference and potential sanctions  in other words, it doesn't give Trump unilateral authority to take action. For example, it gives the director of national intelligence 45 days to determine whether foreign interference in an election had occurred, at which point the assessment must be delivered to "the President, the Secretary of State, the Secretary of the Treasury, the Secretary of Defense, the Attorney General, and the Secretary of Homeland Security." After further consultation between these department heads, the executive order then leaves the secretary of treasury, who is currently Steve Mnuchin, to lead in the implementation of economic sanctions. The departments of Treasury and State would then assess whether additional sanctions were necessary and present their findings to the White House. The copypasta meme appears to be inflammatory fear mongering that plays on a disinformation campaign carried out by Trump and his supporters that the election was stolen by way of a massive-fraud conspiracy. Trump's own U.S. Department of Homeland Security debunked this conspiracy theory by stating that the November 2020 election was in fact "the most secure in American history." stating
On 29 February 2016, an image purportedly showing a newly hatched baby dragon was shared on Facebook:    News Flash.....  Dragons to be reintroduced to Wales after an absence of more than a 1000 years , local conservation groups say they are pleased by the move that will put a large preditor back in the food chain ....  There have been concern shown by the farming community due to the risk of predation to livestock but the Welsh assembly say they are willing to pay compesation to farmers who can prove loss, the other danger with the dragons eating habits of taking virgins is not thought to be a problem as they went extinct in Wales may years ago anyway...... shared   The above-displayed photo does not, of course, show a real baby dragon. This image was created for a 2008Photoshop contest on the web siteWorth 1000.Worth1000.com,which has since moved toDesignCrowd.com,asked digital artists to create their ownversion of the mythical creature:Dragons. Small and cuddly or big and nasty, Chinese or European, furry or scaly, slick or rough, feathered wings or bat wings, fire breathing or smoke snorting, reptile head or lion head, intelligent or instinctual, ancient or modern, living or robotic. Never has there been a fantasy creature so revered and yet so reviled. contest DesignCrowd.com The rules are thus: create a dragon of your own making. No illustrations, no modifying some else's dragon. You may not use sources from fantasy art. You may use photos of dinosaur models, but (as always) the standard copyright rules apply.   In addition to the image's source (a site dedicated to digital artcontests) and the fact that dragons don't exist, the creator of the digital baby dragon provided the source images used:  This is not the first time that rumors thatdragons actually arereal (complete with "photo proof")haveswirled around the internet. In March 2015, images of a dragon sculpture were shared as authentic, and in June 2015, a digital artist added wings to a picture of a Satanic Leaf-Tailed Geckoand thenpassed it off as a photo of a real dragon. images picture In 2009, Forbes magazine ranked Peter Lewis at #366 on its list of the richest Americans, pegging his net worth at just over $1 billion. Lewis acquired his wealth primarily through his stewardship of Cleveland-based Progressive Insurance, a company co-founded by his father in 1937. Forbes Progressive Insurance When he assumed the position of CEO of Progressive in 1965, Lewis took over a business with about 100 employees and $6 million in yearly revenue; forty years later, Progressive had become the third largest auto insurer in the United States, employing over 27,000 people with yearly revenues topping $13 billion.   This success spawned chain emails and memes decrying Lewis' supposed political leanings and involvement:  This is a heads up regarding Progressive Auto Insurance. You know who they are. Theyre the ones with the clever television ads featuring the perky brunette actress all dressed in white. What you might not know is that the chairman of Progressive is Peter Lewis, one of the largest funders of the left in America. He's your typical rich spoiled kid who took over the company from his father and apparently feels "guilty" for his success and now dedicates himself to making it impossible for anyone else to become wealthy.Between 2001 and 2003, Lewis funneled $15 million to the ACLU, the group most responsible for destroying what's left of America's Judeo-Christian heritage. Indeed, Lewis is himself an ACLU member. One of the ACLU projects he earmarked his funds for was an effort to sue school districts who have drug testing policies. In other words, this idiot wants teachers to be able to use drugs without fear of exposure. I wonder what he would think if all his own employees came to work drugged out every day. Lewis also gave $12.5 million to MoveOn.org and American Coming Together, two key components of the socialist left. The former group is perhaps the main group used by the Obama forces to organize their activists; the latter group is a 527 political action group that essentially served as a front for the SEIU union thugs who ran ACORN. His funding for these groups was conditional on matching contributions from George Soros, the international socialist who finances much of the Obama political network. It's disturbing that Lewis made a fortune as a result of capitalism but now finances a progressive movement that threatens to destroy the free enterprise system. He reminds me somewhat of Armand Hammer, the former head of Occidental Petroleum who did business with Joseph Stalin and became his good friend, around the same time Stalin was executing businessmen all over the USSR. What angers me further is the way this company is targeting television shows watched by conservatives such as Fox News. Peter Lewis is making a fortune off of conservative Americans so that he can destroy our country. He's banking on no one finding out who he is. I think it's time we expose this clown. Boycott Progressive Insurance Peter Lewis personally donated a good deal a money to various philanthropic efforts over the years, including hundreds of millions of dollars to Princeton and Case Western Reserve universities, and another $50 million to the Guggenheim Museum. He has also given large amounts of money to various political organizations, including donations of $7 million and $8 million to the ACLU in 2001 and 2003. (The former donation went to the Trust for the Bill of Rights, the ACLU's endowment fund; the latter was described by the ACLU as being earmarked "to fight Bush Administration policies that trample on civil liberties." According to the Boston Globe, Lewis stipulated that $5 million of his 2001 donation go "to the ACLU's drug-policy litigation project, which deals with drug-testing in schools and the medicinal use of marijuana.") Case Western Reserve $7 million $8 million Lewis also made donations of $3 million and $2.5 million (both of which were reportedly matched by billionaire activist George Soros) to America Coming Together (a liberal political action group which has since disbanded), and MoveOn.org (a progressive/liberal political action committee and public policy group) in 2004. America Coming Together MoveOn.org Among his other causes, Lewis was an advocate for the removal of criminal penalties for marijuana use, particularly for medicinal purposes (he was himself arrested and charged in New Zealand for possession of marijuana in 2000), adding his name to a 1998 letter to U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan calling for the initiation of a "truly open and honest dialogue regarding the future of global drug control policies," and becoming the largest donor (including $3 million in 2007 alone) to the Marijuana Policy Project. (The Progressive Insurance company, as opposed to Peter Lewis personally, supports multiple non-political charitable causes.) letter Marijuana Policy Project charitable However, the "heads up regarding Progressive Auto Insurance" reproduced above, originally circulated in 2010, is now woefully out of date: Lewis stepped down from his role as Progressive Insurance's CEO in 2000 and after that date was neither an executive of that company nor involved in its day-to-day management. Although after 2000 he continued to hold the position of chairman of the board of the Progressive Corporation and was that entity's single largest individual shareholder, he passed away in November 2013 and therefore obviously no longer has any connection with Progressive Insurance. As well, some of the statements made in the above-quoted call for a boycott of Progressive Insurance were inaccurate and misleading: regulations [A school board] policy required any teacher who suffered an injury on the job to submit to a drug test  even if that "injury" resulted from being punched by a student.The drug test of two-time East Baton Rouge Teacher of the Year Peggy Reno illustrates how the School Board's now defunct drug-testing policy was put into effect. Ms. Reno, a veteran and respected teacher, never in her life used an illegal drug, and her school never suspected otherwise. A student punched Ms. Reno on September 24, 2008. Although there was no suspicion that she was under the influence of drugs or alcohol, Ms. Reno was forced by a School Board official to submit to an invasive drug test. Countless other teachers who have never used drugs  and who have never been suspected of using drugs  have been subjected to similar unconstitutional searches. The Fourth Amendment to the Bill of Rights forbids government searches when there is no reasonable suspicion of wrongdoing. defend Clarke, Josie.  "Eccentric Billionaire Has High Profile at Home."
  The New Zealand Herald.  31 August 2000.

 Edsall, Thomas B.  "Soros-Backed Activist Group Disbands as Interest Fades."
  The Washington Post.  3 August 2005.
 Healy, Rita.  "Mellowing Out on Marijuana."
  Time.  8 November 2007.
 Kranish, Michael.  "Rich Activists, Hoping to Sway Voters, Give Vast Sums to 527s."
  Boston Globe.  21 September 2003  (p. A8).
 Leinwand, Donna.  "Super-Rich Trio Put Cash into Marijuana Initiatives."
  USA Today.  5 November 2002  (p. A8).
 ACLU.  "Individual Donor Sets Record with $7 Million Donation."
  18 July 2001.
 ACLU.  "$8 Million Gift Will Boost Campaign to Fight Bush Administration's Assault on Civil Liberties."
  15 January 2003.
 Forbes.  "The Forbes 400 Richest Americans 2009."
  30 September 2009.
 The Nation.  "The Beat-Bush Brigades."
  26 April 2004.
 USA Today.  "Partisan Groups' attack Ads Dodge Disclosure Rules."
  16 March 2004  (p. A12). On 28 February 2017, Breitbart.com reported that big box retailer Target's stock had "crashed," losing a combined total of $15 billion in investor wealth, because of the chain's announcement in 2016 that it would allow transgender customers and employees to use bathrooms corresponding to their gender identity: reported Targets stock value is now down by 30 percent since it sparked a consumer boycott by embracing the transgender political agenda. That 30 percent drop has slashed investors wealth by roughly $15 billion. On Tuesday, the stock fell to $58.78, down from its April 19 high of $83.98. In contrast, WalMart is up 3 percent since April, and Kohls is down less than one percent. Company officials indirectly acknowledged the consumer boycott. Our fourth-quarter results reflect the impact of rapidly changing consumer behavior, which drove very strong digital growth but unexpected softness in our stores, Target CEO Brian Cornell said in a company statement. The company also admitted that it would likely continue to experience losses through the year. On 19 April 2016, Target announced that transgender customers and employees were free to use the restroom that corresponded to their gender identity amid a national row on the subject during the 2016 election cycle. The announcement came after North Carolina enacted the controversial HB 2 in March 2016, a law that came to be colloquially termed the "bathroom bill," and required public single-sex restrooms only be used by people of the corresponding biological sex. The controversy, and Target's definitive stance, prompted conservative groups like the American Family Association (AFA) to launch a boycott. Nearly 1.5 million people have signed the AFA's petition as of 1 March 2017. announced HB 2 boycott Target shares did plunge on 28 February 2017, but it wasn't due to its nearly year-old bathroom policy. The drop was due to 2017 guidance announced during an investor day event. Projections were far lower than expected by Wall Street analysts (the term "guidance" means projected earnings). The drop in Target stock corresponds to the announcement made at their investor event: event  Source: Yahoo! Finance  According to Edward Jones analyst Brian Yarbough, Wall Street was expecting Target to project earnings of $5.30 per share, but the company instead gave guidance of $3.80 to $4.20 per share which was "well below" expectations, prompting the drop in share value. According to Reuters, Target's dive dragged others down with it: Targets plunge prompted declines across the retail sector. Wal-Mart Stores Inc was down 2.0 percent, with Kroger Co down 1.2 percent and Macy's Inc off 1.7 percent. Dollar General Corp fell 4.2 percent. What is dogging Target and other retailers has been competition with all-online retailers like Amazon, which do not have the overhead cost of brick-and-mortar locations. Target, for example, has 1,803 stores. "Online players dont have a huge network of stores and since they dont have that cost, they can offer lower prices," Yarbough said. Customers also have the immediate ability to do price-comparisons with smart phones. These changing patterns are reflected in a statement given by Target CEO Brian Cornell: statement Our fourth quarter results reflect the impact of rapidly-changing consumer behavior, which drove very strong digital growth but unexpected softness in our stores. At our meeting with the financial community this morning, we will provide detail on the meaningful investments were making in our business and financial model which will position Target for long-term, sustainable growth in this new era in retail. We will accelerate our investments in a smart network of physical and digital assets as well as our exclusive and differentiated assortment, including the launch of more than 12 new brands, representing more than $10 billion of our sales, over the next two years. In addition, we will invest in lower gross margins to ensure we are clearly and competitively priced every day. While the transition to this new model will present headwinds to our sales and profit performance in the short term, we are confident that these changes will best-position Target for continued success over the long term. Although Target offers online shopping, profit there tends to be lower due to associated costs like shipping and price competition from the likes of Amazon. Retailers are struggling to survive with more profitable in-store sales lagging, and lower profit margins due to a growing contingency of online shoppers: Although its e-commerce operation is growing quickly, Target reported its third straight quarter of lower sales from existing stores, citing "unexpected softness" and raising new questions about the health of large national retailers in the United States. Target also forecast first-quarter profit well below Wall Street estimates. Shares sank 13 percent, on track for their biggest one-day percentage drop in more than 18 years. Target's stock has lost a quarter of its value since the 2016 holiday season started in November, and is now trading at its lowest level since August 2014. Target maintains the bathroom policy has had no effects on its business, with company spokeswoman Erika Winkels telling us in an e-mail, "We have made it clear over time that weve seen no material impact to the business based on the bathroom policy. We dont have anything new or different to share." A poor performance in the 2016 holiday season was also attributed to online sales outpacing foot traffic, but Target is, again, not the only chain feeling the effects: Department stores across the country are paying the price for underestimating Amazon this holiday season. Macy's and Kohl's both reported lower-than-expected sales during the all-important end-of-year retail period, and announced a spate of store closures that will lead to thousands of lost jobs. Sears has even been reduced to selling off one of its iconic brands after a double-digit sales slide. Industry observers blame online competition, as well as department store brands' own shortfalls in adapting to a fundamental shift in consumer behavior. Nevertheless, Neil Saunders, managing director of GlobalData Retail, told us that Target could be worse off than it is: Its in a much better position than some retailers because its balance sheet is still robust whereas Sears and Macy's are in a very difficult position. With Target, it's much more about tweaking and reinvention at the edges. [The guidance] wasnt great, but not as bad other people. Saunders told Reuters that while Wal-Mart has been buoyed by successfully offering groceries, Target has not been able to keep up on that front, calling its grocery offerings "confusing." Reuters "Target is neither a full-line grocer nor a player with lots of niche specialty products; it is neither a high-end player, nor a price focused discounter," he said. It is difficult to say with certainty whether the Target's commerce overall has been negatively affected by its policy on transgender people. Although company representatives have maintained it has not, shortly after Cornell made the announcement, USA Today reported a study that showed the percentage of people who would consider shopping there the next time they needed something dropped from 42 to 38 percent. But the retail industry as a whole is facing a dramatic shift in consumer behavior, and retailers have struggled to keep pace with it. reported Target's late February 2017 stock drop, however, was the result of announcements made during an investor day event, and cannot be attributed to their policy on bathroom use. Huston, Warner Todd.  "Target Retailer Hits $15 Billion Loss Since Pro-Transgender Announcement."
  Breitbart.  28 February 2017. Target.com.  "Continuing to Stand for Inclusivity."
  Press Release.  19 April 2016. House Bill 2.  "Public Facilities Privacy & Security Act."
  North Carolina State Legislation.  23 March 2016. American Family Association.  "Sign the Boycott Target Pledge!"
  Petition.  20 April 2016. Naidu, Richa et al.  "Target's Profit Outlook Sinks Retail Stocks."
  Reuters  28 February 2017. Target.com.  "Target Reports Fourth Quarter and Full-Year 2016 Earnings."
  Press Release.  28 February 2017. White, Martha C.  "Department Stores Are Paying the Price for Underestimating Amazon."
  CNBC.  5 January 2017. Malcolm, Hadley.  "Target Brand Perception Falls, But It's Not 'Catastrophic.'"
  USA Today.  29 April 2016. Claim:   President Obama has limited churches to offering twice-monthly services.  Example: [Collected via Twitter, April 2015] Is this true about Obama? Is he really making people go to church two times a month instead of four times? Wtf  Origins:   On 8 April 2015, the News Examiner web site published an article reporting that President Obama had limited churches to offering twice-monthly services in order to ensure Americans worked harder: article At a press conference today, President Barack Obama announced he would be implementing a new law changing the current monthly 4-Week church services down to 2 times a month. Obama says during these rough economic times it crucial to take drastic measures so Americans can work harder and pray less. These effects are to take place May 1st of this year and analyst expect this move to increase the economy by more than 40%. Americans tend to work hard and pray harder. I'm asking them to make these changes for the good of the country during these hard times. If things don't work out within 6 months we can always switch back to the old way, but for now, lets give this a solid shot and see where it takes us. These are crucial times my friends and we must stick together as a country if we are going to succeed. If you have any questions about President Obama's new 2-week church schedule that will be taking place May 1st a hotline has been set up to answer all your questions at (785) 273-0325. President Obama could not have made any such announcement, as he has no authority to limit church services, and any attempt to do so would be an obvious violation of the First Amendment's protections of religious freedom.  The referenced article was a just another hoax from the News Examiner, a fake news site started by Paul Horner, the former lead writer for the similarly fake National Report web site, after Facebook implemented a crackdown on the posting of hoax articles that virtually destroyed the latter site's reach.   crackdown Previous hoaxes from the same site include the false claim that the world's first head transplant was successfully performed in South Africa in April 2015.  head transplant The "hotline" phone number provided in the article is actually that of the infamous Westboro Baptist Church.   Last updated:  14 April 2015 During a June 6, 2010, appearance on ABC'sThis Week, Sen. John Kerry -- who is sponsoring a comprehensive energy bill -- discussed the nation's energy future against the backdrop of the ongoing oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico.During an interview with host Jake Tapper, Kerry said, Here's what's important -- not to be throwing the blame around, but to put America on the course to true energy independence and self-reliance and to begin to wean ourselves from our addiction to oil. ... The United States is losing a major economic transformational moment. Until we begin to do something -- you know, since 9/11, we now actually import more oil than we did before 9/11. It's insulting to common sense.We decided to check whether Kerry was correct about whether the United States imports more oil today than it did before the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001.The answer is complicated, because there are at least three possible ways to measure it.The number of barrels of crude oil imported. The U.S. imported 3.32 billion barrels of crude oil in 2000 and 3.40 billion barrels in 2001. Both figures were higher than the number imported in 2009 -- 3.31 billion barrels.By this measure, Kerry is incorrect, although just slightly. Imported crude oil compared to domestic production. We wondered whether imported crude oil was still increasing as a percentage of all oil in the U.S., even as it dropped in absolute amounts. In fact, that's exactly what happened.In 2000, oil imports accounted for 61 percent of the total of imports and domestic production, and in 2001, imports accounted for 62 percent. In 2009, the percentage of imports was 63 percent -- slightly higher than it was in either of those years. The underlying cause was that domestic oil production declined between the start of the decade and the end.By this measure, Kerry is correct, though once again, the difference is modest.Imported crude oil plus imported unfinished oils. William Brown, who analyzes energy data for the federal government's Energy Information Administration, told PolitiFact that in recent years, there's been a rise in imports of unfinished oils, which are partially refined, taking the place of pure crude oil imports. So he sent us data that combined those two sets of imports.In 2000, the combination of crude oil and unfinished oils accounted for 9.54 million barrels per day, and in 2001, they accounted for 9.71 million barrels per day. In 2009, that figure was 9.86 million barrels per day.Adding in unfinished oils to the previous measure of crude oil turns an incorrect statement into a correct one.Bottom line: There are three ways to analyze the question, and with two of them, Kerry is right that imports have grown. Using the other statistic, he's wrong -- imports have declined. So we rate Kerry's statement Mostly True. Stacey Evans, a Democrat running to be Georgias next governor, claims workers are at an economic disadvantage in part because of the states minimum wage. I want Georgia to be the best place to work, live, and raise a family. Right now, it isnt,Evans saidon her campaign website. Georgia is 40th in income inequality, 40th in high school graduation, and has the lowest minimum wage in the country. We wondered if Georgia in fact has the lowest minimum wage in the nation. It does, but its not alone (tied with Wyoming), and most of hourly wage employees are paid above the states minimum wage: at least $7.25, which is also the federal minimum wage. Georgias state law sets the minimum wage at $5.15 per hour, but the federal Fair Labor Standards Act still applies, meaning most employees are covered under thefederal minimum wageof $7.25 per hour. Wyoming, which equally has a $5.15 minimum wage, alsosaysthat when the federal minimum wage is higher than the states, the federal minimum wage applies to most workers. Like Georgia, Wyoming also has a $5.15 minimum wage, the lowest in the country. And while, thankfully, many Georgians are protected by a federal wage floor, many Georgians are not, said Adam Ney, research director for the Evans campaign. The fact remains that Georgia has the lowest minimum wage in the country and that we must increase it because everybody deserves a fair days pay for a hard days work. Who doesnt get the federal minimum wage? There areexemptionsin the law for certain farm workers, seasonal workers, health aides, and workers who receive tips. In 2016, Georgia had about 2.3 million workers paid hourly rates, and 51,000 of them (or 2.2 percent) were paid below the federal minimum wage,according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. An estimated 90,000, or 3.9 percent, were paid at or below the federal minimum wage. Overall, Idaho, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, and South Carolina had the highest percentages of hourly paid workers earning at or below the federal minimum wage, at or about 5 percent, BLS said. Georgia is one of seven statesthat have either a lower state minimum wage than the federal standard, or no state minimum wage at all, said Wesley Tharpe, research director at the left-leaning think tank Georgia Budget and Policy Institute. In practice, the vast majority of workers in every state are subject to the federal requirement of $7.25 an hour, Tharpe said. Tipped workers, including servers, are also paid a lower hourly rate in most states including Georgia, Tharpe said. Some evidence suggests their tips dont always sum to get them about the required $7.25 federal rate, he said. Evans said Georgia has the lowest minimum wage in the country. Georgias minimum wage of $5.15 per hour is the lowest in the nation, but Wyoming also has the same minimum wage. Also, most of Georgias workers paid hourly rates earn the federal minimum of $7.25. Evans statement is accurate but needs clarification or additional information. We rate it Mostly True. In late December 2020, a misleading online advertisement appeared to announce that Monica Lewinsky was dead and that her net worth stunned her family. It read: "Monica Lewinsky's Net Worth Stuns Her Family At Age 47. Monica Lewinsky Leaves Behind A Net Worth That Will Boggle Your Mind." appeared   However, this was not true. She is alive, and despite what the ad claimed, there was no indication in the resulting story that her net worth shocked her family. The ad was sponsored by the Therapy Joker website and was hosted on the Yahoo! Gemini advertising service. Readers who clicked the ad were led to a 430-page story with the headline: "The Biggest Hollywood Celebrities & Their Incredible Net Worth  Can You Guess Who Has The Biggest Bank Account?" Lewinsky's net worth appeared on page 417. This meant that readers had to click "Next Page" 417 times to reach the page for Lewinsky: page 417 Monica Lewinsky: Activist and TV Personality - $500,000 Monica Samille Lewinsky is a lady of many skills. This popular American television personality is also a successful fashion designer, activist, and a former intern at the White House. The papparazi constantly followed her and she was a regular face in the media during her time at the White House. However, she made up her mind to leave all that behind and went on to pursue a different career. Besides that, she has also authored the book, Monica: Her Story which added to her fame. The London School of Economics and Political Science alumni [sic] is now 47 years old and is a popular television personality. She took a lavish apartment on rent and had quite a luxurious lifestyle. Her fleet of cars includes a Mini Cooper and a Cadillac. We hope she has a professional financial advisor is coming to her aid as far as her banking is concerned. Currently, the media personality, activist, and fashion designer has retained her fame and we hope Lewinsky does the same for the money shes accumulated over the years. The page mentioned nothing about Lewinsky's purported death, nor did it present any information about her family being stunned by her net worth. The misleading advertisement and exceptionally lengthy article reflect a strategy known in the advertising world as "arbitrage." The Therapy Joker website's goal was to make more money from ads displayed on each of the 430 pages than it cost to lure readers with the initial "Monica Lewinsky's Net Worth Stuns Her Family" ad in the first place. The business and technology blog Margins defined "arbitrage" as "leveraging an inefficient set of systems to make a riskless profit, usually by buying and selling the same asset." Margins also referred to it as "the mythical free lunch that economics tells us does not exist." defined Lewinsky was a White House intern in the mid-1990s who became famous after her affair with former U.S. President Bill Clinton became a public scandal. In December 1998, Clinton was impeached by the U.S. House of Representatives. However, the Senate did not vote to convict and remove him from office. He served the remainder of his second term in the White House. impeached We previously covered similar misleading net worth stories for Sean Connery, Jaleel White, Richard Gere, Chuck Norris, Clint Eastwood, and Alex Trebek. Sean Connery Jaleel White Richard Gere Chuck Norris Clint Eastwood Alex Trebek 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 Any occasion on which a member of the U.S. Supreme Court leaves the bench through retirement (or death) is a significant political event, providing the incumbent president with the opportunity to nominate a successor who is ideologically congruent with the party in power and (in most cases) will remain on the bench for decades to come.  The requirement that a Supreme Court nominee be confirmed by a vote of the U.S. Senate often touches off bitter fights between the two parties on the floor of that chamber. When Justice Anthony M. Kennedy announced his imminent retirement at the end of June 2018, it set the stage for a particularly momentous shift in the makeup of the Supreme Court, as Kennedy had long been the bridge between the court's liberal and conservative sides on a number of contentious social issues:  announced Justice Kennedy, 81, has been a critical swing vote on the sharply polarized court for nearly three decades as he embraced liberal views on gay rights, abortion and the death penalty but helped conservatives trim voting rights, block gun control measures and unleash campaign spending by corporations. His replacement by a conservative justice  something Mr. Trump has vowed to his supporters  could imperil a variety of landmark Supreme Court precedents on social issues where Justice Kennedy frequently sided with his liberal colleagues, particularly on abortion. Many critics still smarting over the Republicans' successful (and unprecedented) efforts at blocking approval of Merrick Garland, who had been nominated by outgoing president Barack Obama in 2016 after the death of Justice Antonin Scalia -- thus allowing incoming president Donald Trump the opportunity to fill the vacant court seat instead -- immediately jumped on a conspiracy theory involving the timing of Kennedy's resignation and his son's employment: Merrick Garland    The details of this conspiracy theory were somewhat hazy, most versions of it seemingly implying that President Trump somehow leveraged his financial connections with Kennedy's son Justin to convince or coerce the jurist to retire ahead of the November 2018 U.S. mid-term elections (during which Democrats might pick up enough Senate seats to block confirmation of Trump's preferred nominee).   The most coherent form of the conspiracy theory posited that Kennedy's retirement was a sudden and unexpected event, a strategic move intended to allow Trump to nominate a friendly successor who would vote favorably on any issues involving Justin Kennedy that might come before the court as a result of the ongoing Mueller investigation into Russian election interference (whereas Kennedy would have to recuse himself from such issues if he remained on the bench):  As the New York Times noted, Donald Trump did have a business relationship with Deutsche Bank, where Justin Kennedy once worked (he left the company in 2009), that went back many years to a time when many other banks were leery of doing business with Trump: business [Anthony Kennedy and Donald Trump] had a connection, one Mr. Trump was quick to note in the moments after his first address to Congress in February 2017. As he made his way out of the chamber, Mr. Trump paused to chat with the justice. Say hello to your boy, Mr. Trump said. Special guy. Mr. Trump was apparently referring to Justice Kennedys son, Justin. The younger Mr. Kennedy spent more than a decade at Deutsche Bank, eventually rising to become the banks global head of real estate capital markets, and he worked closely with Mr. Trump when he was a real estate developer, according to two people with knowledge of his role. During Mr. Kennedys tenure, Deutsche Bank became Mr. Trumps most important lender, dispensing well over $1 billion in loans to him for the renovation and construction of skyscrapers in New York and Chicago at a time other mainstream banks were wary of doing business with him because of his troubled business history. And, of course, many news outlets have reported on the potentially suspect coincidence that right about the time Trump was sworn in as U.S. president, Deutsche Bank was fined an aggregate $630 million for their involvement in a $10 billion Russian money-laundering scheme  and Deutsche Bank's records were later reportedly subpoenaed by special prosecutor Robert Muellers investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 U.S. elections: reported $630 million subpoenaed [Trump] took out two mortgages against a resort in Miami and a $170 million loan to finish his hotel in Washington, D.C. According to Bloomberg, by the time Trump was elected president of the United States in November 2016, he owed Deutsche around $300 million, an unprecedented debt for an incoming president. (His June financial disclosure showed he owes the bank $130 million, which is due in full in 2024.) The loans to Trump werent the only abnormal behavior at Deutsche. Around the same time he received his new line of credit, the bank was laundering money, according to the New York State Department of Financial Services (DFS). Russian money. Billions of dollars that flowed from Moscow to London, then from London to New York  part of a scheme for which European and American regulators eventually punished the bank. Was the timing of this illicit operation and the loans to Trump coincidental? Or evidence of something more sinister  a critical chapter in the presidents long history of suspicious business deals with Russian and post-Soviet oligarchs? Little hard evidence suggests that the Kennedy rumors are more than political conspiracy-driven speculation, however.  Justin Kennedy left Deutsche Bank before the money laundering activity referenced above took place, and some sources have asserted that Justin Kennedy had little or no involvement with Trump's Deutsche Bank dealings: MSNBC host Stephanie Ruhle, who worked for eight years at Deutsche Bank before joining the news network, cautioned about reaching conclusions because there are multiple parts of the bank that "can easily get confused and lumped together." "While I know and it has been well-reported, Deutsche was a massive lender to Mr. Trump, I want to put a new context," she said. "A lot of this comes from multiple sides of the bank, specifically the private bank, and that was not where Mr. Kennedy worked." Citing two former members of senior management, Ruhle said, "a lot of the recent lending comes from the private bank ... most of which was done after Justin left the bank." "The business Mr. Kennedy ran was part of a real estate team that did some business. It was not part of the private bank business," Ruhle continued. "To say that he was the point guy that lent all of this money to Trump, I think, is short-sided. It's a lot more complicated." The level of engagement Justin Kennedy might have had with Donald Trump's financial dealings at Deutsche Bank remains ambiguous for now, but the New York Times gave little weight to the notion that Anthony Kennedy was directly pressured into retiring, observing that it's not unusual for presidents to be mindful of when an open seat on the Supreme Court bench might be in the offing and strategize around the possibility: There were no direct efforts to pressure or lobby Justice Kennedy to announce his resignation, and it was hardly the first time a president had done his best to create a court opening. In the past half-century, presidents have repeatedly been dying to take advantage of timely vacancies, said Laura Kalman, a historian at the University of California, Santa Barbara. When Mr. Trump took office last year, he already had a Supreme Court vacancy to fill, the one created by the 2016 death of Justice Antonin Scalia. But Mr. Trump dearly wanted a second vacancy, one that could transform the court for a generation or more. So he used the first opening to help create the second one. He picked Justice Neil M. Gorsuch, who had served as a law clerk to Justice Kennedy, to fill Justice Scalias seat. And when Justice Gorsuch took the judicial oath in April 2017 at a Rose Garden ceremony, Justice Kennedy administered it  after Mr. Trump first praised the older justice as a great man of outstanding accomplishment. Throughout his nearly 30 years on the Supreme Court, Mr. Trump said, Justice Kennedy has been praised by all for his dedicated and dignified service. There is reason to think, then, that Mr. Trumps praise of Justice Kennedy was strategic. Then, after Justice Gorsuchs nomination was announced, a White House official singled out two candidates for the next Supreme Court vacancy: Judge Brett M. Kavanaugh of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit and Judge Raymond M. Kethledge of the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, in Cincinnati. The two judges had something in common: They had both clerked for Justice Kennedy. Moreover, Politico reported back in April 2017 (before the Mueller investigation into Russian interference was even underway) that the Trump White House might have been utilizing connections between Trump's and Kennedy's children to ease the elder Kennedy into retirement.  Notably, Politico referenced Justin Kennedy's having a connection with Donald Trump, Jr., not President Trump himself, and made no mention of Deutsche Bank: reported While the White House is focused on shepherding Trumps first Supreme Court nominee, Neil Gorsuch, through the Senate confirmation process, the president and his team are obsessed with the next possible vacancy. The likeliest candidate is Kennedy, who has sat at the decisive fulcrum of the most important Supreme Court cases for more than a decade. Replacing him with a reliable conservative would tip the court to the right, even if no other seat comes open under Trump  whose team has taken to exploring every imaginable line of communication to keep tabs on the justice and to make him comfortable as he ponders a potential retirement. One back channel is the fact that Kennedys son, Justin, knows Donald Trump Jr. through New York real estate circles. Another is through Kennedys other son, Gregory, and Trumps Silicon Valley adviser Peter Thiel. They went to Stanford Law School together and served as president of the Federalist Society in back-to-back years, according to school records. More recently, Kennedys firm, Disruptive Technology Advisers, has worked with Thiels company Palantir Technologies. The White House has also closely monitored retirement chatter by tapping into the network of former Kennedy clerks, a group that includes Gorsuch himself. Some in the legal world viewed Gorsuchs selection  he would be the first Supreme Court clerk to serve alongside a former boss  as an olive branch to Kennedy that, should he retire next, his seat would be in reliable presidential hands. Those close to Trumps judicial-selection process stress that theyre not pressuring Kennedy to hang up his robe, only seeking to put him at ease. It may be true, as outlined above, that members of the Trump administration undertook efforts to "assure Kennedy that his judicial legacy would be in good hands should he step down at the end of the courts [current] term." But no substantive evidence yet suggests anything more than that President Trump and other members of his administration might have sought to curry favor with a justice who was already mulling retirement to influence the timing of that event. Arons, Steven.  "Deutsche Bank Records Said to Be Subpoenaed by Mueller."
  Bloomberg.  4 December 2017.

 Mullen, Jethro.  "Deutsche Bank Fined for $10 Billion Russian Money-Laundering Scheme."
  CNN Money.  31 January 2017.
 Harding, Luke.  "Is Donald Trump's Dark Russian Secret Hiding in Deutsche Bank's Vaults?"
  Newsweek.  21 December 2017.
 Liptak, Adam and Maggie Haberman.  "Inside the White Houses Quiet Campaign to Create a Supreme Court Opening."
  The New York Times.  28 June 2018.
 Liptak, Adam.  "Study Calls Snub of Obama's Supreme Court Pick Unprecedented."
  The New York Times.  13 June 2016. The Washington Post.  "The Path Ahead for Trumps Second Nominee to the Supreme Court."
  29 June 2018.
 de Vogue, Ariane.  "Justice Anthony Kennedy to Retire from Supreme Court."
  CNN.  27 June 2018. Shear, Michael D.  "Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy Will Retire."
   The New York Times.  27 June 2018.


 Goldmacher, Shane.  "Trumps Hidden Back Channel to Justice Kennedy: Their Kids."
  Politico.  6 April 2017.
 Tarlo, Shira.  "Did Anthony Kennedys Son Loan Donald Trump $1 Billion?"
  Salon.  29 June 2018. Ohio Republican Sen. Rob Portman questioned Democrats who want to raise the federal minimum wage and offered a flurry of statistics to help make his point. Speaking Sunday on ABC'sThis Week, Portman suggested that raising the $7.25 an hour minimum wage could force employers to cut jobs. If you want to deal with income inequality, the No. 1 way to do it is to get people to work. That's what all the statistics show. About 2 percent of Americans get paid the minimum wage. Of that group, by the way, less than .3 of 1 percent of Americans are both under poverty -- under the line of poverty and on minimum wage. So it's a lot of young people. About 50 percent of them are between 16 and 24 years old. For a lot of them, it's a part-time job. So what you don't want to do is raise the minimum wage to the point that you're actually losing jobs. That exchange includes a bunch of different statistics, but here well be checking this one: About 2 percent of Americans get paid the minimum wage. We wont get into the question of what this means for minimum-wage policy here; for now, well just look at the numbers. To do so, we turned to a study published by Bureau of Labor Statistics -- the federal governments official chronicler of employment and wage data -- titled, Characteristics of Minimum Wage Workers: 2012. It was released on Feb. 26, 2013. The study found that a little under 3.6 million workers were paid either at or below the federal minimum wage. (The study did not look at whether workers were paid higher minimum wage rates set by their state, as many states have done.) To determine the percentage,we looked at the number of Americans employed. That number ranged between about 133 million and 134 million during 2012. If you divide the two numbers, it turns out that, by the official statistics, roughly 2.6 percent of all American workers were earning the minimum wage in 2012. Thats slightly higher than Portman indicated, but his estimate was definitely in the ballpark. That said, we do see a few caveats, none of which strike us as particularly troublesome for the accuracy of his comment. Portman said 2 percent of Americans, but to be entirely accurate, he really should have said 2 percent ofworkers. To figure out the percentage of Americans earning the minimum wage, we turned to the U.S. Census Bureau, whichestimatedthat the U.S. population in 2012 was 313,914,040. That would mean that minimum-wage workers accounted for just over 1 percent of Americans. That said, dividing by the number of Americans would not be a very useful number -- it includes a lot of people who arent old enough to work or who have retired. Portman referred to people who get paid the minimum wage. Actually, the numbers he cited refer to Americans who either get paid the minimum wage or get paidless thanthe minimum wage. How can you get paid less than the minimum wage? The minimum-wage law actuallyexempts whole classes of workersfrom the $7.25 standard -- vocational education students, full-time students employed by retail or service establishments, agriculture, or institutions of higher education, and those impaired by a physical or mental disability. This is not a trivial population -- for 2012 at least, the number earning less than the minimum wage (about 2 million) actually exceeded the number who earned the minimum wage exactly (about 1.6 million). In addition, its worth noting that workers in tipped professions, such as wait staff, get a legal minimum wage thatswell below $7.25. By factoring in tips earned, the employer only has to pay workers a minimum of $2.13 an hour. One other note: The BLS offers some words of caution about its data. It counted only minimum-wage workers who are actually paid by the hour. Salaried and other non-hourly workers are excluded from the BLS analysis. BLS says the number of salaried workers earning at or below the minimum wage is probably modest, but the data is sufficiently opaque that the agency warns that the actual number of workers with earnings at or below the prevailing federal minimum is undoubtedly understated. BLS also warns that this study is based on a sample, and samples are imperfect. Our ruling Portman said that about 2 percent of Americans get paid the minimum wage. He didnt word the statement with complete accuracy; he would have been better off saying that, according to official statistics, about 2 percent of American workers get paid at or below the federal minimum wage. Still, his number is close to accurate, and his general point -- that workers who are paid the federal minimum-wage represent a small percentage of the entire working population -- is backed up by official data. We rate his claim Mostly True. Claim:  Photographs show an F-15 fighter jet breaking up in mid-air.   . Example:  [Collected via e-mail, March 2008] What a ride !!!!   Just flying along, enjoying the ride ... Oh my, this is so much fun ... it's so great being a pilot.        Hmmm, something feels different ...Hey, why am I looking up?        Oops, my controls aren't working?Where's my F-15?        Oh, there it is ...I think I'm having separation anxiety.        OK, I'm out here, but first the canopy has to go.   Glad that worked!        That's it ... now I'm gone   Can you imagine what was going through this poor pilot's mind? AND, just what caused the mid air break up..... U.S. Air Force's announcement on Thursday said that a Missouri National Guard F-15 jet broke apart in midair on Nov. 2, 2007; the pilot evacuated the plane safely. The breakup in mid air was blamed on parts that didn't meet specifications; which raises issues ranging from national security to potential legal action and even foreign sales. Origins:  It's a common phenomenon that when a spectacular disaster strikes, "real" photographs of it begin to circulate via e-mail that are actually recycled images from earlier, similar events (such as this set of storm photos) or images that aren't actually photographs (such as these movie stills passed off as photographs of the Space Shuttle Columbia exploding).  The images displayed above fit that latter category: The underlying incident they depict is a real one, but the images shown here aren't photographs of that incident, nor are they photographs at all. storm stills On 2 November 2007, a Boeing Co. F-15C Eagle fighter jet flown by the Missouri Air National Guard crashed during a training exercise. The following day, the U.S. Air Force grounded the country's global fleet of 676 F-15s out of "airworthiness concerns" while they conducted inspections to investigate a possible structural failure in the aircraft.   An animated video simulation of the Missouri F-15's mid-air breakup was prepared during the course of the investigation, and the images displayed above are frames taken from that simulation: simulation  The Air Force ultimately determined that the cause of the accident was a defective metal support beam: A failure of the upper right longeron, a critical support structure in the F-15C Eagle, caused the crash of a Missouri Air National Guard F-15C, four miles south-southeast of Boss, Missouri, Nov 2.  According to the Air Combat Command Accident Investigation Board report released Jan. 10, a technical analysis of the recovered F-15C wreckage determined that the longeron didn't meet blueprint specifications. This defect led to a series of fatigue cracks in the right upper longeron. These cracks expanded under life cycle stress, causing the longeron to fail, which initiated a catastrophic failure of the remaining support structures and led to the aircraft breaking apart in flight. At the time this report was issued in January 2008, about 60 percent of the Air Force's F-15 fleet had cleared inspection and been returned to service; approximately 40 percent of the inspected aircraft were found to have at least one longeron that did not meet blueprint specifications, and nine of them were discovered to have longeron fatigue-cracks: The Air Force's 224 newer F-15E fighter jets do not have the same flaws and have been returned to service. This week, the Air Force returned 261 F-15 A-Ds to service after they were cleared for flight. Although some of the flawed beams  known as longerons  have been deemed just millimeters off of their blueprint specifications, Air Force officials said they are not taking chances with aircraft that could be susceptible to the same cracks that led to the dramatic crash last year. Nine of the  F-15 A-D models have been grounded because of actual cracks in the aircraft; Air Force officials said yesterday that they are weighing the possibility of replacing the longerons on the other defective planes or giving up on the aircraft in favor of $132 million F-22s, a cutting-edge fighter that the Air Force prefers. Lt. Gen. Donald J. Hoffman, a military deputy in the Air Force acquisition office, said the Air Force is beginning to investigate potential liability on the part of the manufacturer, but Air Force officials also said they are having difficulty locating the original contracting paperwork and are unsure whether McDonnell Douglas made the specific part that is failing or whether it was made by another vendor for inclusion in the airplanes. Boeing officials said they have been working with the Air Force to determine the extent of the problem, and the Air Force said Boeing tests led to the discovery of the manufacturing defect after the November crash. By failing to conform to blueprint specifications, the metal beams in some cases weakened and cracked after years of experiencing high speeds and G-forces, according to the accident investigation. [Boeing spokesman Paul] Guse said Boeing is gathering data from its F-15 inspections and expected it to take about four weeks to determine a course for fixing the aircraft. Despite the spectacular nature of the accident, the pilot was able to eject safely and suffered only the (relatively) minor injuries of a dislocated shoulder, a broken arm, and some cuts and bruises. Last updated:  6 May 2008    Sources:   Borak, Donna.  "Air Force Grounds F-15s in Wake of Training Crash."   The [Cleveland] Plain Dealer.  6 November 2007.    Buzanowski, J.G.  "Air Force Leaders Discuss F-15 Accident, Future."   Air Force Link.  10 January 2008.    Lardner, Richard.  "Defective Part Cited in F-15 Jet Crash."   ABC News.  10 January 2008.    White, Josh.  "Air Force Indefinitely Grounds Many F-15 Jets."   The Washington Post.  11 January 2008  (p. A3).    Air Force Link.  "Air Combat Command Clears Selected F-15s for Flight."   9 January 2008.    Air Force Link.  "F-15 Eagle Accident Report Released."   10 January 2008.    KSPR-TV  [Springfield, MO].  "Air Force Releases F-15 Crash Animation."   10 January 2008.