Did Elon Musk Ban User Who Posted Video of Musk Being Booed at Chappelle Show?
On Dec. 11, 2022, comedian Dave Chappelle invited new Twitter owner Elon Musk to walk onstage during one of his stand-up performances at the Chase Center in San Francisco. The moment was met with a mix of audience reactions, including boos, cheers, and likely a bit of shouting. The event headlined both Chris Rock and Chappelle in a limited, multi-city tour. Hours after the performance ended, video of Musk's moment onstage was made available online. A Twitter user named@CleoPat48937885posted four tweets with four different videos, according to anarchive.vncapture of the profile. It's unclear if the user recorded the videos, but other tweets on the account did show prior interest in concerts in the San Francisco area, as well as Chappelle. This may very well have meant that the user shot the videos with a phone, as they claimed. archive.vn The clips were later made available on YouTube in two parts. two parts The first tweet from @CleoPat48937885 showed the caption, "Dave chappelle brought up Elon musk up on stage at the chase center. Had to pry the yonder for this ahaha pt 1." first tweet  The reference to having to "pry the Yondr" was about pouches that were supposed to secure phones during the performance. The purpose of Yondr pouches is to lock up phones, disabling the ability for people to take pictures and videos. Such pouches often help to keep stand-up comedy material from leaking out before being eventually released as stronger bits in specials. Prior to the show, the official Chase Center Twitter account described the Yondr pouches like this: described  After @CleoPat48937885uploaded all four video clips in tweets on Twitter, a Reddit user linked to the first tweet in aposton the r/videos subreddit. post Within either minutes or hours, the Twitter account for@CleoPat48937885 disappeared, which meant that the tweets were no longer available. As of Dec. 12, the account did not show a message that indicated it was "suspended," as had been seen in past years for accounts that had been suspended. Rather, the page for the account only said, "This account doesn't exist." One Reddit user commented, without citing evidence, "The fact that Elon suspended the user over it makes it even more worth sharing." Many other users across social media made the same claim, saying that Musk had suspended or banned@CleoPat48937885, perhaps in order to bury the existence of the videos. commented Another user tweeted, "Elon Musk is deleting accounts that post this video of him being booed for 10 minutes last night at a Dave Chapelle show. He can't delete us all. Retweet while you still can." The tweet received tens of thousands of engagements and was still available hours later. tweeted  We haven't yet uncovered evidence that Musk or anyone else at Twitter suspended or banned@CleoPat48937885. It's possible, yes, but there's no data that showed this rumor to be true. Another potential possibility was that the Twitter user saw how the story was blowing up on blogs and social media and feared security officials at Chase Center might be able to identifythe user with video footage from where it was recorded, or through other methods. Basically, we don't know for sure why the account no longer exists. A screenshot of the aforementioned Reddit thread was posted to Twitter with the caption, "They are blocking Twitter users who post the video." However, we found plenty of people who continually posted the videos of Musk onstage with Chappelle whose accounts were not suspended. posted At one point on Dec. 12, the day after the performance, the news was becoming so popular that Chappelle showed up as a trend in the U.S. The trend remained live on the sidebar of the website and, as of this writing, was not being removed or hidden by the platform. Chadwiko. "Elon Musk Got Booed off the Stage at the Dave Chappelle Show in SF Last Night." r/videos on Reddit.com, 12 Dec. 2022, https://www.reddit.com/r/videos/comments/zjutsq/comment/izwkk7w/. @ChaseCenter. Twitter, 11 Dec. 2022, https://twitter.com/ChaseCenter/status/1602023274258366464. "Chris Rock & Dave Chappelle at Chase Center." Chase Center, https://www.chasecenter.com/events/chris-rock-dave-chappelle-20221211. @CleoPat48937885. Twitter, https://twitter.com/CleoPat48937885/. Lehman, Gabe. "Elon Musk Stunned after Mass Booing at Chappelle SF Show." SFGATE, 12 Dec. 2022, https://www.sfgate.com/local/article/dave-chappelle-brings-elon-musk-17648515.php.
Claim:  The Coen brothers have announced plans to begin filming a Big Lebowski sequel in January 2015.  Example:  [Collected via e-mail, October 2014] Are they really making The Big Lebowski 2?   Origins:  On 10 September 2014, the National Report web site published an article positing that the Oscar-winning directorial duo of Joel and Ethan Coen had announced plans to begin filming a sequel to their popular 1998 film, The Big Lebowski, in January 2015: Exciting news for Big Lebowski fans around the world as a sequel to the cult classic has just been announced. Ethan Coen and Joel Coen, directors of the first Lebowski movie, confirmed with E! Online they will both be returning to direct the sequel. "We're thrilled to be coming back to film a second part to this classic movie," Ethan Coen said. "For years we've been staying away from doing this project but when we received this new script and the cast fell into place, it was a no-brainer. We just had to do it." By the following day links and excerpts referencing this item were being circulated via social media, with many of those who encountered the article mistaking it for a genuine news item.  However, the article was just another bit of misinformation from the National Report,  a fake news site that publishes sensational, made-up stories such as "15 Year Old Who 'SWATTED' Gamer Convicted of Domestic Terrorism," "Solar Panels Drain the Sun's Energy, Experts Say," and "Vince Gilligan Announces Breaking Bad Season 6." 15 Year Old Who 'SWATTED' Gamer Convicted of Domestic Terrorism Solar Panels Drain the Sun's Energy, Experts Say Vince Gilligan Announces Breaking Bad Season 6 The National Report's disclaimer page notes that all of the site's articles are fiction: disclaimer National Report is a news and political satire web publication, which may or may not use real names, often in semi-real or mostly fictitious ways.  All news articles contained within National Report are fiction, and presumably fake news.  Any resemblance to the truth is purely coincidental.   In reality, the Coen brothers proclaimed once again at the 2013 Cannes Film Festival that they had no interest in producing a Big Lebowski follow-up film: proclaimed Bummer, man  the Dude won't abide again. There will be no sequel to The Big Lebowski. That's the final word on the subject from filmmaking brothers Joel and Ethan Coen, during a press day at the Cannes Film Festival for their new film, Inside Llewyn Davis. Despite a growing fanbase for the cult 1998 comedy about Jeff Bridges' hippie bowler character Jeff "The Dude" Lebowski, and clamor for a sequel, the writer/director duo aren't interested in revisiting the past  even though actors in the film, Bridges among them, are keen to reprise their roles. "John Turturro, who wants it, talks to us incessantly about doing a sequel about his (bowler) character Jesus," Ethan Coen said. "He even has the story worked out, which he's pitched to us a few times, but I can't really remember it ... "No, I don't see it in our future." Joel Coen was even firmer: I don't think it's going to happen ... I just don't like sequels."   Last updated:  21 October 2015 In December 2016, rumors flew about Donald Trump's personal beliefs and connections as he continued to announce picks for his incoming administration. One such rumor was a meme with a quote that purported to be from the President-elect, painting him as a flat-earther: flat-earther   mocked up Speaking to reporters in Baltimore on Monday, following the 138th conference for the National Guard Association of the United States, the Republican Partys presidential nominee revealed that he is a member of a growing population known generally as flat earth truthers. I fly a lot, and I mean a lot. No one flies more than me. Listen, I own a jet. I own a 757, beautiful plane, its the best plane! If the world were round, believe me, I would know! The comments came in response to a question from AP reporter, Charles Darr, regarding the future role of the National Guard, as private companies proliferate space travel. Mr. Trump, if elected, are you willing to increase taxes in order to meet the growing budget demands of the National Guard, as existential threats from our enemies grow along with the advancement of space travel technology? Darr asked. The presidential hopeful replied that such a future is nonsense, adding that the round earth people, and you know who they are, these people have an agenda. CNN.com.de (like many pages of its ilk) is not affiliated with the legitimate news organization CNN. The site uses a web address similar to CNN.com's in order to trick readers into believe that they are reading genuine news items. However, this web site does not publish factual stories. publish While there is no disclaimer on the web site that specifically states its content is fictional, it does provide several hints that its stories are hoaxes. For instance, the provided contact number of (785) 273-0325 does not lead to CNN's, but that of the Westboro Baptist Church.  (785) 273-0325 Snopes is still fighting an infodemic of rumors and misinformation surrounding the COVID-19 pandemic, and you can help. Find out what we've learned and how to inoculate yourself against COVID-19 misinformation. Read the latest fact checks about the vaccines. Submit any questionable rumors and advice you encounter. Become a Founding Member to help us hire more fact-checkers. And, please, follow the CDC or WHO for guidance on protecting your community from the disease.  fighting Find out Read Submit Become a Founding Member CDC WHO In March 2020, cities across the United States started to implement various orders to "shelter in place," "stay at home," or "self-quarantine" in an attempt to stop the spread of COVID-19, the disease caused by the new strain of coronavirus that emerged in 2019. While these measures appeared to work in helping to "flattening the curve" of cases, they also caused a dramatic economic downturn and caused millions of people to lose their jobs.  work flattening the curve millions In mid-April 2020, U.S. President Donald Trump and the White House started working on a plan to "re-open America." Around the same time, cities such as Lansing, Michigan, started to see small, anti-quarantine protests that Trump gave verbal support to on his social media account, tweeting "LIBERATE MICHIGAN!" and "LIBERATE MINNESOTA!" and "LIBERATE VIRGINIA and save your great 2nd Amendment. It is under siege." As Trump worked toward easing social distancing measures and re-starting the economy  a decision that worried many health experts  an old tweet started to recirculate on social media that supposedly showed him criticizing governors for relaxing quarantine rules during the Ebola outbreak in 2014: worried   This is a genuine tweet from Trump. It is still available on his Twitter timeline here. An archived version of this tweet can be seen here.  here here Trump's old tweets are frequently shared on social media along with the message "There's a tweet for everything," a phrase meant to encapsulate the idea that for every current Trump statement there is an equal and opposite statement of his from another time. While many of the "there's-a-tweet-for-everything" messages point to genuine and seemingly contradictory tweets from the president's past, we've also encountered quite a few fake tweets supposedly sent from Trump.  fake tweets It should also be noted that the quarantines in 2014 during the Ebola outbreak were much different than the quarantines put in place during the COVID-19 coronavirus disease pandemic. In 2014, no state-wide "shelter-in-place" orders existed. Rather, a handful of states required people who had come in contact with someone infected with Ebola to quarantine for 21 days.  quarantine Trump, who was the host of the television show "The Apprentice" during the Ebola outbreak, frequently criticized President Barack Obama during that epidemic. On Oct. 23, 2014, for instance, he said it was "Obama's fault" after a case of Ebola was confirmed in New York.    Conversely, in March 2020, Trump said "I don't take any responsibility" when he was asked about a lack of testing to deal with the spread of COVID-19. said Guinea, Liberia, and Sierra Leone saw more than 11,000 die from Ebola between 2014 and 2016. In the United States, two people died from the disease. 11,000 die two people Infectious Disease Society of America.  "Ebola Facts."
  Retrieved 21 April 2020. Fantz, Ashley.  "'Doctor's Death Marks Second U.S. Ebola Fatality."
  CNN.  17 November 2014. Oprysko, Caitlin.  "'I Don't Take Responsibility at All': Trump Deflects Blame for Coronavirus Testing Fumble."
  Politico.  13 March 2020. Kenen, Joanne.  "Trumps Plans to Reopen the Country Face Major Obstacles." 
 Politico.  18 April 2020. Beauont, Peter.  "WHO Warns of 'Deadly Resurgence' if Coronavirus Controls Lifted Too Soon."
  The Guardian.  10 April 2020. Lambert, Lance.  "The Worst Part About the U.S. Losing 10 Million Jobs in Two Weeks? The Real Number May be Much Higher."
  Fortune.  2 April 2020. Karni, Annie; Lovett, Kenneth; Otis, Ginger.  "Travelers in Contact with Ebola Patients, Including Returning Nurse with Fever, Now Face Mandatory 21-Day Quarantine in New York, New Jersey."
  New York Daily News.  25 October 2014. Shesgreen, Deirdre and Maureen Groppe.  "Anti-Quarantine Protests, Trump Pressure Put Governors on Political Tightrope Over Coronavirus."
  USA Today.  22 April 2020. Forgey, Quint.  "Trump breaks with his own guidelines to back conservative anti-quarantine protesters."
  Politico.  17 April 2020. On April 26, 2023, the U.S. House of Representatives, led by Republicans, narrowly passed budget legislation raising the federal government's legal debt ceiling by $1.5 trillion on the condition that deep spending cuts would also be undertaken. Democrats balked at the spending-cuts requirement, demanding instead the passage of what they called a "clean bill" without preconditions to raise the debt ceiling before the deadline of June 1, when the government would default on its debts. passed budget legislation debt ceiling Some Democrats, notably U.S. Rep. Ilhan Omar, D-Minn., claimed that by demanding budget cuts in exchange for raising the debt ceiling, Republicans were "creating an economic crisis" and "threatening default" for partisan gain. No such demands were made during the administration of former President Donald Trump, Omar argued in a May tweet: "Republicans voted to raise the debt ceiling 3 times when Donald Trump was President, with no preconditions."  argued in a May tweet   (Image Via @IlhanMN/Twitter) What exactly is the debt ceiling? This is how the U.S. Department of the Treasury defines it (emphasis added): U.S. Department of the Treasury The debt ceiling, or debt limit, is a restriction imposed by Congress on the amount of outstanding national debt that the federal government can have. The debt ceiling is the amount that the Treasury can borrow to pay the bills that have become due and pay for future investments. Once the debt ceiling is reached, the federal government cannot increase the amount of outstanding debt, losing the ability to pay bills and fund programs and services. Since 1960, Congress has acted 78 separate times to permanently raise, temporarily extend, or revise the definition of the debt limit  49 times under Republican presidents and 29 times under Democratic presidents. 78 separate times to permanently raise, temporarily extend, or revise the definition of the debt limit It is true that during the Trump administration, legislation to raise the debt ceiling and avoid default was passed three times with varying degrees of bipartisan support, according to Bipartisan Policy Center: Bipartisan Policy Center   (Image Via Bipartisan Policy Center) In 2017, 2018, and 2019, the debt limit was reset at $20.5 trillion, $22 trillion and $28.4 trillion, respectively. None of these bills, when signed into law, contained a precondition to cut spending, despite the wishes of some Republicans.  $20.5 trillion, $22 trillion and $28.4 trillion wishes It should be noted, though, that the 2019 legislation, which included hefty spending increases for defense and domestic programs, did mandate $77 billion in "offsets" for those spending increases. According to Rep. Lloyd Smucker, R-Pa., the $77 billion in offsets would be achieved in two ways: 1) "$15.5 billion from extending the expiration date of customs user fees" from May 26, 2027, to Sept. 30, 2029, and 2) $61.7 billion from "extending mandatory spending sequester" (described by the Congressional Budget Office as "automatic spending cuts that occur through the withdrawal of funding for certain but not all  government programs") from Sept. 30, 2027, to Sept. 30, 2029. These administrative offsets were described by some as "cosmetic."  $77 billion in "offsets" Rep. Lloyd Smucker, R-Pa. mandatory spending sequester By contrast, House Speaker Kevin McCarthy's "Limit, Save, Grow Act" of 2023, as passed by the House, would require broad-based spending cuts totaling $4.5 trillion, according to CBS News. As of this writing, Democratic U.S. President Joe Biden had said he would refuse to sign the act into law, and it was said to be "dead on arrival" in the Democratic-controlled Senate. Limit, Save, Grow Act spending cuts totaling $4.5 trillion Davis, Susan. "Trump, Congress Reach Agreement On 2-Year Budget Deal." NPR, 22 July 2019. NPR, https://www.npr.org/2019/07/22/744104213/hill-and-trump-administration-close-in-on-2-year-budget-deal. "Debt Limit." U.S. Department of the Treasury, 17 Apr. 2023, https://home.treasury.gov/policy-issues/financial-markets-financial-institutions-and-fiscal-service/debt-limit. Federal Debt and the Statutory Limit, February 2023 | Congressional Budget Office. 19 Jan. 2023, https://www.cbo.gov/publication/58945. Fiscal Data Explains the National Debt. https://fiscaldata.treasury.gov/americas-finance-guide/national-debt/. Accessed 3 May 2023. "House Republicans Pass US Debt Bill, Push Biden on Spending." AP NEWS, 26 Apr. 2023, https://apnews.com/article/speaker-mccarthy-debt-biden-republicans-d4995f10a26d6c8bfa89a2bbfd1de93c. Interactive: Recent History of the Debt Limit | Bipartisan Policy Center. https://bipartisanpolicy.org/debt-limit-history/. Accessed 3 May 2023. Sequestration | Congressional Budget Office. https://www.cbo.gov/topics/budget/sequestration#:~:text=Sequestration%20refers%20to%20automatic%20spending,but%20not%20all)%20government%20programs. Accessed 3 May 2023. Tausche, Kayla. "GOP Group Assembles Debt Ceiling Wish List  for 2018." CNBC, 30 Nov. 2017, https://www.cnbc.com/2017/11/29/gop-group-assembles-debt-ceiling-wish-list----for-2018.html. The Debt Limit Through the Years | Bipartisan Policy Center. https://bipartisanpolicy.org/debt-limit-through-the-years/. Accessed 3 May 2023. Torry, Harriet, and Anthony DeBarros. "WSJ News Exclusive | Economists in WSJ Survey Still See Recession This Year Despite Easing Inflation." Wall Street Journal, 15 Jan. 2023. www.wsj.com, https://www.wsj.com/articles/despite-easing-price-pressures-economists-in-wsj-survey-still-see-recession-this-year-11673723571. Trump Signs Budget Deal and Suspends Debt Ceiling until 2021. 2 Aug. 2019, https://www.cbsnews.com/news/whats-in-the-budget-deal-negotiated-by-congress-and-the-white-house/. "What's behind the Looming 'x-Date' on the US Debt Limit?" AP NEWS, 24 Apr. 2023, https://apnews.com/article/biden-mccarthy-debt-limit-ceiling-cap-2b76f685cff4a284021f9b5c2c95cd4c. Claim:  An ex-congressman who had sex with a subordinate won clemency from a president who had sex with a subordinate, then was hired by a clergyman who had sex with a subordinate. Example:  [Collected on the Internet, 2001] Jessie Jackson has added former Chicago democratic congressman Mel Reynolds to the Rainbow/PUSH Coalition's payroll. Reynolds was among the 176 criminals excused in President Clinton's last-minute forgiveness spree. Reynolds received a commutation of his six-and-a-half-year federal sentence for 15 convictions of wire fraud, bank fraud & lies to the Federal Election Commission. He is more notorious; however, for concurrently serving five years for sleeping with an underage campaign volunteer. This is a first in American politics: An ex-congressman who had sex with a subordinate won clemency from a president who had sex with a subordinate, then was hired by a clergyman who had sex with a subordinate. His new job? Youth counselor. Origins:   We can't say with absolute certainty that what's described above is "a first in American politics," since the sexual peccadilloes of American politicians were not always as widely publicized as they are now, but the gist of the piece is true (although it originally circulated back in 2001, so it now references events that occurred many years ago and not just recently):  1995-1997: President Bill Clinton's involvement with Monica Lewinsky, then a 21-year-old unpaid White House intern working in the office of Leon Panetta, Clinton's Chief of Staff, is quite familiar to anyone who follows American politics. Monica Lewinsky  January 2001: The National Enquirer revealed that Jesse Jackson had been carrying on a four-year  affair with Karin L. Stanford, a 39-year-old former aide with his Rainbow/PUSH Coalition staff, and that Jackson had fathered the child Stanford bore in May 1999.  (Jackson has been married to Jacqueline Brown since 1962.) Karin L. Stanford  January 2001: Just before leaving office, President Clinton (at the urging of Jesse Jackson, among others) commuted the sentence of former Illinois congressman Mel Reynolds, who had spent 30 months in a state prison for statutory rape (i.e., having sex with a 16-year-old campaign volunteer) and was serving a five-year sentence in federal prison for lying to obtain loans and illegally diverting campaign money for personal use. Mel Reynolds  January 2001: The Chicago Sun-Times reported that former congressman Mel Reynolds would be working as the community development director of Salem Baptist Church in south-side Chicago, and as a consultant for Jesse Jackson's Rainbow/PUSH Coalition, trying to decrease the number of young African-Americans going to prison. (Reynolds' position would be more accurately characterized as that of an advisor on prison reform rather than a "Youth counselor," however.) reported Rainbow/PUSH In February 2014, Mel Reynolds was arrested in Zimbabwe for violating immigration laws and possessing pornographic material and was later deported to South Africa.  In June 2015, Reynolds was indicted on charges of failing to file income tax returns from 2009 through 2012. arrested indicted   Last updated:  26 June 2015    Page, Susan.  "Who Gets a Pardon? It Depends on Who Asks."   USA Today.  20 March 2001  (p. A7).     Page, Susan and Mimi Hall.  "Pardon Drama Casts Wide Net."   USA Today.  23 Feburary 2001  (p. A7).     Sneed, Michael.  "Reynolds Might Be Really Enjoying the Ride."   Chicago Sun-Times.  25 February 2001  (p. 12).     Associated Press.  "Celeb Pardon Push."    Chicago Sun-Times.  "Farrakhan Back from the Brink." Claim: A photograph taken shortly after a California "UFO sighting" depicts a dead alien creature.  Example:[Collected via e-mail, November2015] Seems this is going viral on Facebook. They are talking about a missle launch and consequent "lights" then stating they heard screaming and found this "alien" or animal: "In Southern California everybody noticed a bright weird light. The government tried to tell everybody it's a testing of a missile launching. And now ppl in San Jose, CA are seeing dead aliens laying around and Facebook deleting it every time somebody mentions it."  Origins: On 7 November 2015, social media users (and subsequently, the regular news media) reported an unidentified bright light spotted and photographed in the skies above California:  The following day, Facebook user Gianna Peponis and a Reddit user shared the above-reproduced photographs, claiming the images were snapped shortly after reports about the bright lightappeared. It wasn't clear who initially uploaded the photographs to the Internet, and the images' origins were further obscured by the fact that the Facebook poster either deleted or locked the initial, most popular set of photographs. Her page sported subsequent screenshots of that initial photo set, which lacked any proof that the pictures were taken or posted after the bright light event and left open the possibility that the user exploited an extant rumor about a UFO sightingto spread photogtraphs unrelated to the incident:  Several Facebook postsand multiple e-mails we received maintainedthe photographs were "deleted" (presumably by Facebook as part of a government cover-up of extraterrestrial sightings), but the user in question herself denied her pictures were removedby a third party. On 9 November 2015, a Facebook user asked her whether the mysteriously missing first image was deleted in that fashion, to which she replied "nope." When pressed for the location of the creature seen in the images, she replied that it was "buried."The Reddit thread in question was also presented as a first-person account, titled "Friend found this outside her house. Wtf indeed..." It's worth noting that r/WTF (the subreddit in which the images gained the most traction) was rife with "karma whoring," a practice wherein users re-purpose existing photographs with a compelling backstory appended to them in order to accumulate upvotes and amplify their status on the site. Theuser who shared the images to r/WTF had a scant comment history prior to publishing the thread and did not subsequently comment on it. A separate Reddit thread on r/aliens (titled "My sisters friend found this in her yard... Anyone have any idea what it is? In San Jose CA") similarly presented the claim as a first-person one, posting a comment in that discussion to share two additional mobile phone screenshots of the purported alien.The images were originally published to Facebook on 5 November 2015 by a user in Pleasant Hope, Missouri. As such, they were demonstrably not taken at a later date in San Jose, California.The Orange County Sheriff's Department addressed the "light in the sky" rumors on Twitter shortly after calls began flooding in, and prior to the publication of photographs of the San Jose "alien" on social media:#OCSDPIO: Light seen in OC sky was confirmed through JWA tower to be a Naval test fire off the coast. No further details.   OC Sheriff, CA (@OCSD) November 8, 2015 The San Diego Union-Tribune reported on the unusual lights in the sky that same night:A mysterious light that streaked across San Diego's night sky Saturday, visible as far away as Nevada and Arizona, was a Trident missile test-fired by the Navy.Navy Strategic Systems Programs conducted the scheduled Trident II (D5) missile test flight at sea from the Kentucky, an Ohio-class ballistic missile submarine, in the Pacific Test Range off the coast of Southern California, a Navy spokesman said.The test was part of a scheduled, on-going system evaluation test, said Cmdr. Ryan Perry with the Navy's Third Fleet ... The test range is a massive area northwest of Los Angeles. The Navy periodically uses the range to test fire Tomahawk and Standard cruise from surface ships and submarines.  In fact, news of potential military activity in the airspace surrounding LAX was announced by the airport on 6 November 2015, prior to the sightings in the sky:Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) officials report that the Federal Aviation Administrations LAX Tower indicates that the military airspace to the west of LAX will be active for one week, creating traffic route limitations and requiring LAX to temporarily deviate from Over-Ocean Operations. The deviations begin tonight, November 6,and continue through November 12.LAX normally operates in Over-Ocean Operations from midnight to 6:30 a.m., wherein aircraft arrive and depart over the ocean to minimize noise disturbance to the communities directly east of the airport.Active military airspace will require the airport to temporarily deviate from this air traffic flow configuration and to remain in westerly operations (aircraft arriving and departing westbound) for the next seven nights.As a result, persons living near the airport may notice a change in aircraft flight activity and associated noise, airport officials said.  While its unlikely many folks kept abreast of LAX's latest news releases, the activity later reported as being alien-related was anticipated as part of scheduled military exercises. Here's a photograph of the phenomenon as captured by one of our correspondents in San Diego:  As with prior claims about alien corpses, the rumor's originators were unable or unwilling to produce more than a photograph of a photograph to substantiate their claims. One user stated that the remains were "buried," conveniently blocking them from any sort of examination. As one Reddit commenter pointed out, the images all closely resembled a partially consumed deer fetus more than anything else:  The 7 November 2015 "light in the sky" was not onlylater explained by the Navy, it had been previously announced by LAX. Multiple social media users claimed photographs of what looked to be a fetal deerdepicted a creaturefound dead in the area after the "sighting," even though no one stepped forward to further substantiate the assertion with additional proof or images. And although the rumor was spread in part by folks claiming the images were deleted in an attempt to conceal the discovery, that claim was contradicted by the appearance of thesame photographs across online outlets suchFacebook, Twitter, and Reddit.Last updated: 9 November 2015Originally published: 9 November 2015 subsequent screenshots    Several Facebook postsand multiple e-mails we received maintainedthe photographs were "deleted" (presumably by Facebook as part of a government cover-up of extraterrestrial sightings), but the user in question herself denied her pictures were removedby a third party. On 9 November 2015, a Facebook user asked her whether the mysteriously missing first image was deleted in that fashion, to which she replied "nope." When pressed for the location of the creature seen in the images, she replied that it was "buried." The Reddit thread in question was also presented as a first-person account, titled "Friend found this outside her house. Wtf indeed..." It's worth noting that r/WTF (the subreddit in which the images gained the most traction) was rife with "karma whoring," a practice wherein users re-purpose existing photographs with a compelling backstory appended to them in order to accumulate upvotes and amplify their status on the site. Theuser who shared the images to r/WTF had a scant comment history prior to publishing the thread and did not subsequently comment on it. A separate Reddit thread on r/aliens (titled "My sisters friend found this in her yard... Anyone have any idea what it is? In San Jose CA") similarly presented the claim as a first-person one, posting a comment in that discussion to share two additional mobile phone screenshots of the purported alien. thread karma whoring history thread comment The images were originally published to Facebook on 5 November 2015 by a user in Pleasant Hope, Missouri. As such, they were demonstrably not taken at a later date in San Jose, California. published The Orange County Sheriff's Department addressed the "light in the sky" rumors on Twitter shortly after calls began flooding in, and prior to the publication of photographs of the San Jose "alien" on social media:#OCSDPIO: Light seen in OC sky was confirmed through JWA tower to be a Naval test fire off the coast. No further details.   OC Sheriff, CA (@OCSD) November 8, 2015 The San Diego Union-Tribune reported on the unusual lights in the sky that same night:A mysterious light that streaked across San Diego's night sky Saturday, visible as far away as Nevada and Arizona, was a Trident missile test-fired by the Navy.Navy Strategic Systems Programs conducted the scheduled Trident II (D5) missile test flight at sea from the Kentucky, an Ohio-class ballistic missile submarine, in the Pacific Test Range off the coast of Southern California, a Navy spokesman said.The test was part of a scheduled, on-going system evaluation test, said Cmdr. Ryan Perry with the Navy's Third Fleet ... The test range is a massive area northwest of Los Angeles. The Navy periodically uses the range to test fire Tomahawk and Standard cruise from surface ships and submarines.  In fact, news of potential military activity in the airspace surrounding LAX was announced by the airport on 6 November 2015, prior to the sightings in the sky:Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) officials report that the Federal Aviation Administrations LAX Tower indicates that the military airspace to the west of LAX will be active for one week, creating traffic route limitations and requiring LAX to temporarily deviate from Over-Ocean Operations. The deviations begin tonight, November 6,and continue through November 12.LAX normally operates in Over-Ocean Operations from midnight to 6:30 a.m., wherein aircraft arrive and depart over the ocean to minimize noise disturbance to the communities directly east of the airport.Active military airspace will require the airport to temporarily deviate from this air traffic flow configuration and to remain in westerly operations (aircraft arriving and departing westbound) for the next seven nights.As a result, persons living near the airport may notice a change in aircraft flight activity and associated noise, airport officials said.  While its unlikely many folks kept abreast of LAX's latest news releases, the activity later reported as being alien-related was anticipated as part of scheduled military exercises. Here's a photograph of the phenomenon as captured by one of our correspondents in San Diego:  As with prior claims about alien corpses, the rumor's originators were unable or unwilling to produce more than a photograph of a photograph to substantiate their claims. One user stated that the remains were "buried," conveniently blocking them from any sort of examination. As one Reddit commenter pointed out, the images all closely resembled a partially consumed deer fetus more than anything else:  The 7 November 2015 "light in the sky" was not onlylater explained by the Navy, it had been previously announced by LAX. Multiple social media users claimed photographs of what looked to be a fetal deerdepicted a creaturefound dead in the area after the "sighting," even though no one stepped forward to further substantiate the assertion with additional proof or images. And although the rumor was spread in part by folks claiming the images were deleted in an attempt to conceal the discovery, that claim was contradicted by the appearance of thesame photographs across online outlets suchFacebook, Twitter, and Reddit.Last updated: 9 November 2015Originally published: 9 November 2015 #OCSDPIO: Light seen in OC sky was confirmed through JWA tower to be a Naval test fire off the coast. No further details. #OCSDPIO    OC Sheriff, CA (@OCSD) November 8, 2015 November 8, 2015   The San Diego Union-Tribune reported on the unusual lights in the sky that same night:A mysterious light that streaked across San Diego's night sky Saturday, visible as far away as Nevada and Arizona, was a Trident missile test-fired by the Navy. reported Navy Strategic Systems Programs conducted the scheduled Trident II (D5) missile test flight at sea from the Kentucky, an Ohio-class ballistic missile submarine, in the Pacific Test Range off the coast of Southern California, a Navy spokesman said. The test was part of a scheduled, on-going system evaluation test, said Cmdr. Ryan Perry with the Navy's Third Fleet ... The test range is a massive area northwest of Los Angeles. The Navy periodically uses the range to test fire Tomahawk and Standard cruise from surface ships and submarines.   In fact, news of potential military activity in the airspace surrounding LAX was announced by the airport on 6 November 2015, prior to the sightings in the sky:Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) officials report that the Federal Aviation Administrations LAX Tower indicates that the military airspace to the west of LAX will be active for one week, creating traffic route limitations and requiring LAX to temporarily deviate from Over-Ocean Operations. The deviations begin tonight, November 6,and continue through November 12. announced airport LAX normally operates in Over-Ocean Operations from midnight to 6:30 a.m., wherein aircraft arrive and depart over the ocean to minimize noise disturbance to the communities directly east of the airport. Active military airspace will require the airport to temporarily deviate from this air traffic flow configuration and to remain in westerly operations (aircraft arriving and departing westbound) for the next seven nights. As a result, persons living near the airport may notice a change in aircraft flight activity and associated noise, airport officials said.   While its unlikely many folks kept abreast of LAX's latest news releases, the activity later reported as being alien-related was anticipated as part of scheduled military exercises. Here's a photograph of the phenomenon as captured by one of our correspondents in San Diego:  As with prior claims about alien corpses, the rumor's originators were unable or unwilling to produce more than a photograph of a photograph to substantiate their claims. One user stated that the remains were "buried," conveniently blocking them from any sort of examination. As one Reddit commenter pointed out, the images all closely resembled a partially consumed deer fetus more than anything else:  The 7 November 2015 "light in the sky" was not onlylater explained by the Navy, it had been previously announced by LAX. Multiple social media users claimed photographs of what looked to be a fetal deerdepicted a creaturefound dead in the area after the "sighting," even though no one stepped forward to further substantiate the assertion with additional proof or images. And although the rumor was spread in part by folks claiming the images were deleted in an attempt to conceal the discovery, that claim was contradicted by the appearance of thesame photographs across online outlets suchFacebook, Twitter, and Reddit.Last updated: 9 November 2015Originally published: 9 November 2015   As with prior claims about alien corpses, the rumor's originators were unable or unwilling to produce more than a photograph of a photograph to substantiate their claims. One user stated that the remains were "buried," conveniently blocking them from any sort of examination. As one Reddit commenter pointed out, the images all closely resembled a partially consumed deer fetus more than anything else:  The 7 November 2015 "light in the sky" was not onlylater explained by the Navy, it had been previously announced by LAX. Multiple social media users claimed photographs of what looked to be a fetal deerdepicted a creaturefound dead in the area after the "sighting," even though no one stepped forward to further substantiate the assertion with additional proof or images. And although the rumor was spread in part by folks claiming the images were deleted in an attempt to conceal the discovery, that claim was contradicted by the appearance of thesame photographs across online outlets suchFacebook, Twitter, and Reddit.Last updated: 9 November 2015Originally published: 9 November 2015 alien corpses    The 7 November 2015 "light in the sky" was not onlylater explained by the Navy, it had been previously announced by LAX. Multiple social media users claimed photographs of what looked to be a fetal deerdepicted a creaturefound dead in the area after the "sighting," even though no one stepped forward to further substantiate the assertion with additional proof or images. And although the rumor was spread in part by folks claiming the images were deleted in an attempt to conceal the discovery, that claim was contradicted by the appearance of thesame photographs across online outlets suchFacebook, Twitter, and Reddit.   Last updated: 9 November 2015 Originally published: 9 November 2015 Democratic Congressman Jim Moran didnt want tax cuts then, and he doesnt want them now.Explaining his vote against any extension of the Bush-era cuts, Moran paints the acts in 2001 and 2003 as abject failures.When the Bush plan was first proposed in 2001, the great cost of those tax cuts was sold to the public as a means of generating economic growth. That has proven to be false. The decade that followed the 2001 tax cuts featured the slowest average annual growth since World War II, he said in a Dec. 2 press release.Moran continues: Nor did lower taxes increase employment. Work-force participation fell in 2001 and has never returned to the record level set in 2000  before the tax cuts took effect.We were intrigued by the Congressmans correlation between employment and the tax cuts. So we looked into the numbers.Asked for a source, Morans chief of staff, Austin Durrer, sent us aNew York Times business blog postby David Leonhardt, which does reinforce the congressmans statement. Getting to the bottom of Moran's claim required us to examine two contentions in the congressman's statement: 1) That overall U.S. employment was not increased by the Bush tax cuts; 2) That work-force participation actually fell. These two contentions may sound similar, but in the specialized world of economists they are defined differently and involve separate sets of statistics.EmploymentNor did lower taxes increase employment, Moran said.There were 132 million Americans employed when the first round of Bush tax cuts passed in June, 2001, according to the federal Bureau of Labor Statistics. There were 130.5 employed at the end of last month. Thats a decrease of 1.5 million workers. So technically, Moran is correct. But he omits an important consideration: After the more-sweeping second round of tax cuts took effect in June 2003, there was a significant increase of jobs that lasted until recessions onset at the end of 2007.There were 129.8 million Americans employed in June, 2003 and almost 138 million with jobs in December, 2007. Thats an increase of 8.2 million workers.The recession at the end of the decade is the great equalizer that makes Morans statement factually accurate. But you cant dismiss that the number of workers steadily increased for better than four years after the second Bush tax cut.So wed rate Morans statement that lower taxes did not increase employment Half True.Work-force participationWork-force participation fell in 2001 and has never returned to the record level set in 2000 -- before the tax cuts took effect, Moran said.Work-force participation is the percentage of the population 16 and older that is employed. Most economists regard it as a more meaningful measure of employment than the total number of Americans working. Heres why:The total employment figure does not take into account that the United States population is growing and additional workers enter the job market every day. The U.S. has to create about 125,000 new jobs a month just to keep its employment and unemployment rates steady.The measure of work-force participation includes population growth.Moran is correct in saying work-force participation peaked in 2000. The high-water mark came in April that year when 64.7 percent of the U.S. population -- 16 and older -- had jobs.In June, 2001, when the first Bush  tax cuts were approved, participation was at 63.7 percent. Last month, it was 58.2 percent -- the lowest measure since mid-1983.The participation percentages varied slightly from passage of the second Bush tax cuts to the start of the recession. In June, 2003, participation was 62.3 percent; it was 62.7 percent in December, 2007.Economists caution against measuring the success or failure of tax cuts by employment figures.The point of the tax rate cuts was to increase incentives for working, saving, and investing -- and therefore productivity and growth, said Brian Riedl, lead budget analyst for the conservative Heritage Foundation. Labor Force Participation is just one variable. There is also job totals, work hours, investment, productivity, etc. Those variables all responded well.Gary Burtless, a senior fellow specializing in labor market policy with the left-leaning Brookings Institution, says Morans point is valid. But he, too, says labor force growth is a small component in measuring the effectiveness of tax cuts.Tax changes can affect participation rates, though their impact has often been greatly exaggerated, especially by folks self-identifying as supply siders, he said.So its fair to argue that the merits of tax cuts should not be reduced to employment figures. But Moran is accurate when he says work-force participation fell after 2000 and the tax cuts did not restore them to previous highs. We rate this part of his statement True.SummaryMoran says the Bush tax cuts failed to boost jobs. He cites two measurements.As he notes, total employment didnt go up over the decade. But he neglects to mention numbers were on the rise before the advent of the worst economic downturn in 80 years. Hes half right here.Hes correct in saying work-force participation fell since a record in 2000.When you put both parts of his statement together, we rate it Mostly True. In December 2019, readers asked us about reports that claimed the administration of U.S. President Donald Trump had proposed changes to the way Social Security disability payments are made, which could cause thousands, even hundreds of thousands, to lose their benefits.  On Dec. 12, the Philadelphia Inquirer and Chicago Tribune posted an article with the headline "Trump Administration Proposes Social Security Rule Changes That Could Cut Off Thousands of Disabled Recipients." The article reported that: Inquirer Tribune "The Trump administration is proposing changes to Social Security that could terminate disability payments to hundreds of thousands of Americans, particularly older people and children. The new rule would change aspects of disability reviews  the methods by which the Social Security Administration determines whether a person continues to qualify for benefits. Few recipients are aware of the proposal, which is open for public comment through January." The left-leaning website Common Dreams published an article with the headline "'A National Disgrace': Trump Proposes Social Security Change That Could End Disability Benefits for Hundreds of Thousands.'" That story reported: article "Activists are working to raise public awareness and outrage over a little-noticed Trump administration proposal that could strip life-saving disability benefits from hundreds of thousands of people by further complicating the way the Social Security Administration determines who is eligible for payments." On the face of it, the changes proposed by the Trump administration would not, in fact, directly or immediately strip disability benefits from thousands of would-be recipients, rather the changes would introduce more (and more frequent) eligibility reviews for those who wish to receive them. However, some critics have argued that those increased bureaucratic requirements would over-burden some would-be recipients, in particular especially vulnerable recipients, and would ultimately (albeit indirectly) result in thousands losing disability benefits.  The Social Security Administration distributes disability benefits in two principle ways: Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI), which typically provides benefits to people based on their previous Social Security tax contributions and history of work, and is paid out of the Social Security insurance fund; and Supplemental Security Income (SSI), which typically provides benefits to people based on their disability status and inability to work, and is paid out of general tax coffers.  ways In order to prevent potential abuse and waste in the system, the Social Security Administration conducts "continuing disability reviews," essentially investigating whether each recipient still has a disabling condition, and if so, which kind. Those reviews take place more or less frequently, depending on the nature of each individual's disability, broken into three "medical diary categories," as follows: reviews In November, the Social Security Administration published its proposals to make several changes to the review system. The most significant proposal was to add a fourth medical diary category, "Medical Improvement Likely." Recipients placed in that category would undergo a review every two years. proposals According to a document accompanying the proposals, the decision to introduce the fourth category was made, in part, because the administration saw a pattern whereby some in the "Medical Improvement Expected" category were being prematurely subjected to re-evaluation, after six-18 months, before a medical improvement had the chance to take hold, and some in the "Medical Improvement Possible" category had successfully treated their impairment comfortably within the three-year review interval. The introduction of the new category would therefore mean the bureaucratic burden on some recipients would actually be lessened, since they would be subject to review less frequently, though clearly it would also mean others would be subject to more frequent reviews. On the whole, the administration has estimated that, between 2020 and 2029, the new category would tend towards requiring more frequent reviews for those currently in the "Medical Improvement Possible" category, rather than less frequent reviews for those currently in the "Medical Improvement Expected" category:   The administration expects the introduction of the "Medical Improvement Likely" category to lead to an 18 percent increase in the total number of reviews undertaken over the next decade. This would therefore lead to an increased up-front cost in administering the disability benefits programs, and an increased aggregate bureaucratic burden to recipients (even if some individual recipients would actually undergo reviews less frequently).  Greater scrutiny of individual cases, and enhanced enforcement of eligibility criteria, results in some recipients no longer being deemed eligible, and no longer receiving either SSDI or SSI, which saves money for the Social Security insurance fund and the Treasury, respectively. For the 2015 fiscal year, for example, the Social Security Administration calculated a 19.9:1 return on investment rate for disability benefits enforcement  meaning that for every $1 spent on performing reviews, the government would save $19.90 on disability benefits that would otherwise have been paid, over the course of a lifetime, to recipients who are now deemed ineligible. To be specific, the administration estimated that the $717 million spent on reviews in 2015 would ultimately save $14.3 billion in lifetime disability benefit payments.  calculated So the introduction of the Trump administration's proposals is highly likely to ultimately lead to thousands of disability benefits recipients no longer receiving those benefits  both because some will be overburdened by the bureaucratic demands of more frequent reviews, and because some recipients whose medical status no longer meets the eligibility criteria will have that ineligibility discovered sooner. A considerable measure of truth, therefore, exists in the reports published by the Philadelphia Inquirer and Common Dreams. However, those articles failed to mention an important component to the administration's proposals: They would not change how a recipient's eligibility is determined, only how often that determination takes place. As the proposal stated: "We are not changing the Medical Improvement Review Standard that we use to determine whether a person continues to meet the disability requirements of the Act." This means that, while the proposed increase in the number and frequency of reviews was highly likely to ultimately cause thousands to lose their benefits, that loss of benefits would not be arbitrary, or based on an application of a new and different standard for determining whether someone's health has improved. The standards and criteria for assessing whether an improvement has taken place would be the same as currently exist, and only the frequency of those reviews would change. In other words, some recipients would be subject to more frequent reviews, but if those more frequent reviews result in a finding that the recipient still has a qualifying disability or impairment  based on the same criteria as currently apply  the recipient would continue to receive disability benefits.  It could be that, as some critics have argued, the proposal represents an elegant way for the administration to save money by removing thousands from the recipient rolls without having to change eligibility criteria  the latter a move that would be more likely to cause public outrage or political opposition. However, on its face at least, the proposal involves enhanced enforcement of existing eligibility standards and criteria. That's an important distinction, and a significant omission from news articles that reported, with some justification, that the Trump administration had proposed changes to Social Security disability benefits that would cause thousands to be stripped of those benefits.  argued Lubrano, Alfred. "Trump Administration Proposes Social Security Rule Changes That Could Cut Off Thousands of Disabled Recipients."
 The Philadelphia Inquirer/The Chicago Tribune. 12 December 2019. Johnson, Jake. "'A National Disgrace': Trump Proposes Social Security Change That Could End Disability Benefits for Hundreds of Thousands."
 Common Dreams. 16 December 2019. Social Security Administration. "Proposed Rule -- Rules Regarding the Frequency and Notice of Continuing Disability Reviews."
 Federal Register. 18 November 2019. Recently, activists have shown up at Hillary Clintons campaign events to urge her to bring back Glass-Steagall. What is Glass-Steagall? Its the Depression-era bank regulation that kept different types of financial institutions separate; then-President Bill Clinton signed legislation reversing it in 1999. Some Glass-Steagall supporters argue that its demiseled to the 2007 financial crisis, and some Democrats have put a good amount of effort into restoring it -- such as presidential candidates Martin OMalley and Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt. But Hillary Clintonwon't pledge to reinstateGlass-Steagall if she becomes president. And Bill Clinton says criticism over the laws repeal is unfounded. Look at all the grief I got for signing the bill that ended Glass-Steagall, Bill Clinton said in an interview with Inc. magazinefor its September issue.There's not a single, solitary example that it had anything to do with the financial crash. Given the significant attention on Glass-Steagall among Democrats, we wondered if its true that it didnt have anything to do with the financial crash. Our research shows the laws demise was part of a broad deregulatory push that greatly contributed to the financial crisis. But Clinton has a point that a direct line from the 1999 repeal to the market crash in 2007-08 is hard to identify. Too big to fail Congress passed Glass-Steagall in 1933, in the wake of the 1929 stock market crash that led to the Great Depression. The law kept commercial banks (where customers deposit money and take out loans) separate from investment firms (which hold securities and make investments) -- more colloquially, the law separated Main Street from Wall Street. Some experts and lawmakers want to keep these kinds of activities separate, because theyre worried that merging them could put the publics money at risk. Heres a simple hypothetical: A bank merges with an investment firm to create a massive company. The investment side makes a huge bet on an investment that fails big time, so the commercial bank sides money -- money individuals have deposited for safe-keeping -- could be at risk. Because those deposits are federally insured, it might require a government bailout. (Think too-big-to-fail.) Supporters of the law say keeping these activities separate prevents this kind of domino effect. Is this what caused the most recent financial crisis? Theres plenty of room for debate here, given that thereisnt a single what-caused-the-crisis narrativethat every economist accepts. Its safe to say, though, that there is not a prominent group of economists who argue but for the 1999 repeal of Glass-Steagall, the crisis would not have happened. Lawrence White, an economist at New York University, doesnt see Glass-Steagall playing any role in the financial crisis whatsoever. He pointed to the crisis biggest culprits: firms such as Lehman Brothers, Bear Stearns, Goldman Sachs and AIG, to name a few. He added that much of the crisis hinged on activity by these institutions that would have been possible with or without Glass-Steagall, such as mass investment in notoriously bad mortgage loans. (Clintons staff linked us to commentary by several other experts who share Whites view.) We also contacted Barry Ritholtz, a wealth management expert and commentator, whosaidGlass-Steagall would have done nothing to stop the financial crisis, but not having it made the crisis worse. It encouraged banks to get bigger and to take on riskier investments, so the ripple effects of the crisis were bigger than they would have been otherwise, he said, adding that itwasnt just the headline-making banksthat struggled. The extent over Glass-Steagalls effect on the financial crisis is a topic on which reasonable people can disagree. More so in Clintons favor is the fact that Glass-Steagall was a shadow of its former self by the time 1999 rolled around. Deregulating like its 1999 A few decades out from the Depression, starting in earnest in the 1970s, there was a push to roll back financial regulations that continued throughout the administrations of former presidents Ronald Reagan, George H. W. Bush, Bill Clinton and George W. Bush. As part of that movement, banks and lawmakers steadily chipped away at Glass-Steagall and took advantage of loopholes. Banks were engaging in the kinds of activity Glass-Steagall was intended to stop even though the law was still on the books. By the time Clinton signed the Financial Services Modernization Act, commonly known as Gramm-Leach-Bliley, repealing the key components of Glass-Steagall in 1999, the regulation was nearly toothless. The law was simply catching up to what the market had already accomplished in the previous 10 to 15 years, said Kathleen Day, a lecturer at Johns Hopkins University and an expert in financial crises. Take for example the poster child of the end of Glass-Steagall: The merger of Citicorp, a bank, and Travelers Group, a financial conglomerate, was announced in 1998 before Glass-Steagall was repealed. Even though this was the exact type of merger Glass-Steagall was intended to halt, the financial industrydid not see many obstaclesfor the creation ofCitigroup. Citigroup and others wanted and got the repeal of Glass-Steagall in order to validate what they had already been allowed to do, said Simon Johnson, an economics professor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. So the overall, decades-in-the-making decline of Glass-Steagall might have contributed to the financial crisis and its fallout, as it was part of the deregulatory push. But Clinton putting pen-to-paper on the repeal of Glass-Steagall in 1999 probably didnt make any meaningful difference. But Clintons hands arent clean of the financial crisis, because his administration played no small part in the longer term deregulatory trend. Clinton and his administration did not make an earnest attempt to maintain oversight over the big, hybrid banks created by the demise of Glass-Steagall, Day said. Additionally, the administrations firm decision not to regulate other aspects of the financial market played a meaningful role in the crisis -- for example, the absence of regulations regarding over-the-counter derivatives, which were becoming increasingly prevalent,despite internal warnings. Clintons claim might be technically true, but its a sin of omission, Day said. Our ruling Clinton said, There's not a single, solitary example that signing the bill to end Glass-Steagall had anything to do with the financial crash. By focusing on the bill that officially repealed Glass-Steagall, Clinton's statement ignores the fact that the demise of Glass-Steagall took place over decades, amid a deregulatory push in which the Clinton administration played a role. By the time the law to repeal hit his desk, Glass-Steagall had been whittled down so much that it wasnt very meaningful. It's a matter of debate how much of a role the overall demise of Glass-Steagall had in causing the financial crisis, but we couldn't find any economists who argue that the regulation was the sole linchpin keeping the financial system stable until its official repeal in 1999. Overall, we rate Clintons claim Mostly True. Singer-songwriter Adele did not endorse keto weight loss gummies on "The Ellen DeGeneres Show." The claim appeared in an article on the scammy website newsurvey22offer.com. We first looked into the matter in May 2022. It's unclear just how long the article had been around. Adele keto Ellen DeGeneres article newsurvey22offer.com The page appeared to load one of four different fake keto gummies endorsement articles, depending on when we refreshed it. One mentioned Oprah Winfrey, which we already reported on. Another mentioned Adele. The other two showed fake keto gummies endorsements from the cast of the reality television series, "Shark Tank." keto One Oprah Winfrey already reported on Adele other two Shark Tank The article featuring Adele looked to have been purposely designed to trick readers into believing they were reading an Us Weekly story. In reality, the publisher had nothing to do with newsurvey22offer.com. The headline read, "Adele Told Us About Her Daily Keto Routine That Melted 87 Pounds In Just Few Weeks!" Adele Us Weekly Keto  The product name mentioned in the body of the article appeared to change depending on either the time the page was refreshed or the location from which we accessed it. For example, the page falsely claimed that Adele had endorsed Keto Start ACV, Gemini Keto, Kwazi Keto Gummies, Slim Mediq Keto Gummies, Trim Life Keto + ACV Gummies, and perhaps other similar products. Adele Within the fake Us Weekly article, Adele supposedly told DeGeneres on her daytime talk show that the secret to her weight loss wasn't diet or exercise, but rather keto gummies. Adele DeGeneres keto However, here's the truth. In November 2021, Women's Health reported that while Adele's weight loss regimen had little to do with what she ate, it had just about everything to do with exercise. She "worked out three times a day" with trainers, often including working with weights, going for hikes, and boxing. Nowhere in the Women's Health article did the word "keto" appear even once. reported weight loss The fake Us Weekly article also included a fake tweet that was never posted to Adele's Twitter account. It read, "If you ain't on Keto, you're missing out! I've been eating burgers, fries, cakes - pretty much everything since I'm supposed to be dieting in January. If you don't believe me, give it a try I promise you won't be disappointed." Twitter  The rest of the page falsely claimed that other celebrities also endorsed keto weight loss gummies, including Dr. Oz, Drew Barrymore, Kelly Osbourne, Rachael Ray, and Wendy Lopez. Other similar keto gummies scams made the same false endorsement claims about Melissa McCarthy, Drew Carey, Jennifer Hudson, and the cast of "Shark Tank." Dr. Oz Drew Barrymore Kelly Osbourne Rachael Ray Other similar keto gummies scams Melissa McCarthy Drew Carey Jennifer Hudson Shark Tank In sum, no, Adele never endorsed keto gummies, nor did she ever say they helped her with weight loss. Source: Miller, Korin, and Sarah Felbin. Adele, 33, Deadlifts 170 Pounds On The Regular At The Gym. Womens Health, 15 Nov. 2021, https://www.womenshealthmag.com/weight-loss/a30443070/adele-weight-loss-diet/.