Is This a Newly Hatched Dragon?
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
Claim:  Photographs show a high-rise construction site flooded by waters from a nearby marina. Status:  True. Example:  [Collected via e-mail, May 2007] Nearly 100 workers at the site of the Infinity Tower escaped as excavation work on the 80-floor building was nearing completion. The incident happened as the workers were assisting the project owners and the piling contractor with the foundation works on site 20 meters below ground level. The supervision team noticed a slight movement and cracks in the diaphragm wall adjacent to the Dubai Marina and alerted management, who ordered an immediate evacuation of the site. The diaphragm wall collapsed and crumbled within 2 minutes from being noticed as the workers were scrambling over safety ladders up to the ground level. The whole site was totally flooded within 4 minutes. The construction of the tower will continue to be suspended until the site can be totally dewatered. A special diving team has been brought in to assess the situation.            Origins:  Construction projects, both large and small, can be delayed or set back for any number of reasons  labor problems, material shortages, budget overruns, economicreversals, bad weather, faulty planning, etc.  But not often do we see construction delayed in as spectacular a fashion as happened with the Infinity Tower project, an 80-story, helix-shaped high-rise building currently being erected within the Dubai Marina district of Dubai, United Arab Emirates. Infinity Tower Dubai Marina The pictures displayed above illustrate a February 2007 accident in which a wall holding back the waters of the Dubai Marina was breached, completely flooding the construction site.  As the Gulf News reported of the accident: Nearly 100 workers at the site of the 'tallest building with a twist' had a lucky escape as a wall holding back the Dubai Marina waters breached and flooded the foundation site.  Excavation work on the 80-floor Infinity Tower was nearing completion when there was a sharp and loud sound, said a worker.  "We then saw sand pouring down the sides," he said.  The workers were ordered to evacuate immediately, said the foreman.  According to a manager of Arabtec, the incident is under investigation. Additional post-accident photographs of the Infinity Tower site can be viewed at the Dubai News Online web site. photographs Last updated:  7 June 2007    Sources:   Gulf News.  "Lucky Escape for 100 Workers."   8 February 2007. DidTravis Allen, arguably the most conservative candidate for California governor, donate campaign money to three of the states leading liberal Democrats? Thats the Republican-on-Republican attack levied by John Coxs campaign for governor in arecent TV adthat goes after Allen, an Orange County assemblyman whos positioned himself as a GOP populist. Heres the full text of the ad, which includes three attacks on Allen: Narrator: For Republicans, the race for governor is crystal clear: Theres conservative businessman John Cox, leading the opposition to Jerry Browns Sanctuary State and chairman of the initiative campaign to repeal the gas tax. Then theres career politician Travis Allen. He gave campaign donations to Jerry Brown. Gavin Newsom and Barbara Boxer. And on the floor vote, Allen refused to join Republicans opposing driver licenses for illegal aliens. The conservative choice is clear: John Cox for governor. The ad was paid for by John Cox for Governor 2018. Well examine the other two attacks on Allen in future fact-checks. In this piece, well focus on the claim he donated to top Democrats. Background on GOP rivals Recent polls show growing support for Coxs campaign for governor, less than a week after President Trumpendorsedthe San Diego businessman. A surveyreleased Wednesday nightfrom the Public Policy Institute of California shows Newsom, the states lieutenant governor, leading Cox, 25 percent to 19 percent. Former Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa was third, at 15 percent, followed by Allen with 11 percent,  State Treasurer John Chiang at 9 percent and former state schools chief Delaine Eastin with 6 percent. Coxand Allen have sparred at campaign events over who is the most conservative candidate. Theyve both criticized Californias Democratic leadership over the gas tax increase and sanctuary state protections. The top two candidates in the June 5 primary, regardless of party affiliation, will move on to the November runoff. Donating to Democrats? The ad accuses Allen of donating to three of the states top Democrats. The irony, of course, is that Allens run for governor has centered on criticizing those same politicians, particularly Brown and Newsom. We found clear evidence supporting the claim, though Coxs ad ignores the fact that the contributions took place nearly a decade ago, before Allen ran for elected office, and that he also donated to Republicans. Campaign finance records show that in October 2010, Allen donated $1,000 to Jerry Brown for Governor, through Wealth Strategies Group, his wealth management firm in Huntington Beach. In August 2010, Allen gave $100 to Gavin Newsom for Lieutenant Governor. And, in October 2010, he donated $250 to Barbara Boxer for Senate. SOURCE: Campaign finance records from the California Secretary of State'swebsite. Asked about this, a spokeswoman for Allens campaign said in an email that the contributions took place before Travis was an elected official, as a businessman, he purchased tickets to some events. A November 2017 Mercury-Newsarticlesummarized these and additional donations Allen made to Democrats in 2010 and 2011. He told the paper at that time: As a businessman I was invited to some events by friends, and I purchased tickets to these events. Attending these events, however, opened my eyes to the damage the Democrats were doing to California, and brought about my decision to do everything in my power to stop them, including running for public office. Similar claim In April 2016, PolitiFact California ratedMostly Truea similar claim about then Presidential candidate Donald Trump donating to Democrats. Texas GOP Sen. Ted Cruz, at the time Trumps rival for the Republican presidential nomination, claimed Trump has given $12,000 to Jerry Brown, Gavin Newsom and Kamala Harris. Campaign finance data showed the claim was accurate, though we noted Cruz left out that the donations took place long before Trump announced his run for president. The contribution to Jerry Brown took place in 2006, while the donations to the other Democrats took place in 2009, 2011 and 2013. Our ruling In a recentTV ad, John Coxs campaign for governor claimed rival GOP candidate Travis Allen donated to three of Californias top Democrats. Campaign records prove the claim, though the contributions took place a decade ago, before Allen entered politics. The statement is accurate but needs this clarification. We rate it Mostly True. MOSTLY TRUE The statement is accurate but needs clarification or additional information. Click here formoreon the six PolitiFact ratings and how we select facts to check. In July 2017, a number of right-leaning news and opinion web sites simultaneously reposted a six-month-old online editorial piece implying that former United States President Barack Obama believes the country owes him a debt of gratitude for his eight years of service in the White House. piece The reposted article is striking on various counts, not least for the fact that nowhere in it is President Obama quoted as saying such a thing. The false attribution has nevertheless been used as the headline in virtually every instance of the article's aggregation, as exemplified in these blurbs found on Facebook:   published Conservative Daily Post Discerning readers will note that in lieu of a substantive critique, the author chose to further stoke the already existing anti-Obama sentiment of his audience by piling on epithets such as "delusional," "stinks of entitlement," and "blatantly disrespectful": Obama: The Country Deserves [sic] Me A Debt Of Gratitude For My Leadership During Barack Obamas final press conference Friday afternoon, he spent a majority of the time patting himself on the back. Obama told a room full of reporters that after eight years of his presidency, the United States is stronger, in better shape, and more respected across the world than ever before. Almost every country on Earth sees America as stronger and more respected today than they did eight years ago. Compiling a list of reasons why Barack Obama is a terrible president seems like a project for a book rather than a column, but I am sure many of you agree that Obama will undoubtedly go down as one of the worst presidents in American history. We dont even need to choose one failure of his  the list of catastrophic failures will forever place the United States in a bad position. Our allies no long trust or respect us while our enemies no long fear us. Obama is right, he did accomplish all of that on his own. Its clear that hes been a disaster for America on a scale that few other presidents can match. Just look at his record. Whats worse, his blatantly disrespectful attitude stinks of entitlement a [sic] delusional thinking; Obama literally thinks we owe him something for his leadership. How does it make you feel to read that he thinks he will go down as one of the greatest presidents in our history? Most tellingly, the author's claim that Obama "literally thinks we owe him something" was conjured out of thin air. If the President had said or even implied any such thing, there is no evidence of it in the article, much less in the transcript of the December 2016 press conference. transcript So, what's to be gained by fabricating such a statement and attributing it to the former president? We can think of at least two motivations: politics and money (though not necessarily in that order). Some people, clearly, are ideologically motivated to share this kind of propaganda. For example, witness this true believer who converted the text into a YouTube video: video  But others, such as the Serbia-based owner(s) of The Breaking News Today, and the Macedonia-based owners of USA Breaking News, Morning News, and Infowars Today (to cite just a few examples of foreign-owned web sites promulgating the Obama story), were likely in it for the advertising revenues. Serbia The Breaking News Today Macedonia based owners USA Breaking News Morning News Infowars Today The town of Veles, Macedonia, in particular, was known to be a hotbed of young pro-Trump fake news producers, according to a 15 February 2017 feature in Wired, many of whom have become extraordinarily wealthy grinding out propaganda for U.S. consumption: feature In the final weeks of the U.S. presidential election, Veles attained a weird infamy in the most powerful nation on earth; stories in The Guardian and on BuzzFeed revealed that the Macedonian town of 55,000 was the registered home of at least 100 pro-Trump websites, many of them filled with sensationalist, utterly fake news. (The imminent criminal indictment of Hillary Clinton was a popular theme; another was the popes approval of Trump.) The sites ample traffic was rewarded handsomely by automated advertising engines, like Googles AdSense. An article in The New Yorker described how President Barack Obama himself spent a day in the final week of the campaign talking almost obsessively about Veles and its digital gold rush. Within Veles itself, the young entrepreneurs behind these websites became subjects of tantalizing intrigue. Between August and November, Boris [the pseudonym of one of such entrepreneur] earned nearly $16,000 off his two pro-Trump websites. The average monthly salary in Macedonia is $371. One might suppose that Trump's electoral victory would have been bad for business, but the U.S. market for pro-Trump fake news -- even months-old pro-Trump fake news -- is still booming, probably due to the constant storm of controversy surrounding his administration. A sharp uptick in interest in the Obama "debt of gratitude" article leading to its aggregation by more pro-Trump sites occurred during a week in which it was announced that Donald Trump, Jr. had held a previously undisclosed meeting with a highly placed Russian lawyer during the 2016 presidential campaign, GOP legislation to repeal and replace Obamacare appeared to be tanking, and the president's approval rating fell to 36 percent. Coincidence? Possibly, but we suspect not. Clement, Scott and Balz, Dan.  "Poll Finds Trump's Standing Weakened Since Springtime."
 The Washington Post.  16 July 2017. Subramanian, Samanth.  "Inside the Macedonian Fake News Complex."
 Wired.  15 February 2017. Walsh, Martin.  "Obama: The Country Deserves Me a Debt of Gratitude for My Leadership."
 Conservative Daily Post.  16 December 2016. The Breaking News Today.  "Obama: The Country Owes Me a Debt of Gratitude."
 18 July 2017. Infowars Today.  "Obama: The Country Owes Me a Debt of Gratitude."
 15 July 2017. Morning News.  "Obama: The Country Owes Me a Debt of Gratitude."
 15 July 2017. Politico.  "Full Transcript: President Obamas Final End-of-Year Press Conference."
  16 December 2017. USA Breaking News.  "Obama: The Country Owes Me a Debt of Gratitude."
 15 July 2017. Winnebago County Executive Mark Harris, a Democratmulling a run for governorin 2014, contends that his private-sector experience would put the state on a better course. Making the media rounds thissummer, the former bank trust officer has gently criticized Gov. Scott Walker and other Republicans for what he views as overly exuberant tax cuts and borrowing. Harris, as you might expect, thinks his own record on fiscal issues is more responsible. Ive got the spending down, Ive got the debt down a little bit, Ive got the reserves up, Harristold journalist Mike Goushaon WISN-TVs Upfront show July 21, 2013. Harris was first elected county executive in 2005 and previously served as mayor of Oshkosh and on the Oshkosh City Council and Winnebago County Board. He has worked as a certified public accountant in Michigan and Indiana, was a lawyer in Indiana, and worked as a trust officer and vice president at Associated Trust Company in Oshkosh from 1995 until 2005. With Harris pledging to decide on running by Labor Day, we thought it was the right time to check the books on his claims. Heres what we found: Reserves Average year-end reserves are up considerably in the Harris era, compared with the final four budget years of his predecessor, county financial records show. Under Harris, the county often has kept reserves in excess of its goal of having a cushion totalling one month of the countys annual spending. The average annual reserve is up more than 50% on average, and in 2012 reserves swelled to nearly two months of spending, prompting the county to suspend new borrowing in 2013. The increase in unrestricted reserves has not been a steady march, but the trend is clear. Spending Harris pointed us to numbers showing that the 2013 adopted county budget set operating spending at 1 percent less than the 2005 budget -- the last one adopted before his election. We confirmed those figures, and found a four-year trend of declining or flat expenditures from 2010-13, so Harris has some backup. The countys finance director, Charles Orenstein, told us savings came in part from reining in fringe benefit costs, consolidation and efficiency moves in county facilities, and savings on court and jail costs through technology. But, looking more broadly, the spending trend lines look like a roller-coaster ride. Spending went up in Harris first four years. In fact, only in 2013 could Harris make the claim that spending is lower compared with when he came in. In every other year but this one under Harris, the countys annual spending total was higher than in the last pre-Harris budget. Harris acknowledges that Walkers curbs on collective bargaining saved the county money, but he contends that state aid cuts offset most if not all of the savings, at least in 2012. The countys property tax levy has increased 24 percent in eight years under Harris as aid from other levels of government -- a category including the state -- fell off markedly, county budget records show. The property tax levy has fallen the last two years amid tight property tax caps imposed by Walker. Debt Harris said he got the countys debt down a little. Yes and no. Harris notes that Winnebago Countys outstanding general-obligation debt totalled $59.6 million at year-end 2012, down from $63 million in December 2004, months before he took office in April 2005. In noting that, he uses 2005 as his first year and 2004 as the baseline year. His numbers are correct, and defensible to a point. But, under the countys capital improvement process, many debt-funded capital projects would have received approval before Harris took office. So both the previous county executive and Harris can claim an influence on the outstanding debt level in 2005. Keeping that in mind, if you instead use 2005 as the baseline year, Harris debt claim fails. Debt added up to $57 million in 2005, slightly lower than the mark under Harris in 2012. Harris claim, though, is on target by two other measures, average annual debt per capita, and average annual debt in raw dollars. In general, this is a difficult area to judge because huge projects -- a new nursing home built on Harris watch, for instance -- spike borrowing in certain years. The Credit Game One final issue. Harris credited himself for driving the fiscal trends. But he acknowledged that the County Board deserves some credit as well. And two veteran Winnebago County Board leaders, David Albrecht and Patrick Brennand, told us that former County Executive Jane Van De Hey and others also helped instill a cautious approach to spending. Theres also the effect of the state budget, which helped the county drive down costs while also cutting aid to the county. Our rating Harris said, Ive got the spending down, Ive got the debt down a little bit, Ive got the reserves up. He was referring to his tenure as Winnebago County executive from April 2005 to the present. He makes the best case on reserves, which clearly have risen. Spending is down when viewed narrowly. The debt burden has dropped by some measures but not by all. Harris deserves some credit for the trends, but not all. We rate his claim Mostly True. A popular meme in March 2019 questioned why Bill Clinton had "paid Paula Jones $850K to go away" yet the FBI hadn't raided his lawyer's office. The meme was an obvious reference to two completely unrelated issues separated by decades: a 1994 lawsuit involving Clinton and a search warrant executed by the FBI in April 2018 at the office of President Donald Trump's attorney, Michael Cohen.  In short, the major differences in the cases referenced by the meme  one of which involved an FBI raid on a lawyer's office and the other not  were as follows: Clinton openly paid Jones $850,000 to settle a sexual harassment lawsuit well after he became president and well after Jones had had a chance to air her allegations to the public, press, and court system, while Trump secretly used an intermediary to pay hush money to porn actress Stormy Daniels just ahead of a presidential election in order to keep her allegations that she had an affair with him from reaching the public and influencing the election results against him. Nothing Clinton did in settling Jones' civil lawsuit was illegal (or even potentially illegal), but Trump's payment of hush money to Daniels through his lawyer was possibly an illegal act on the part of Trump and/or Cohen, hence the raid on the latter's office but not the office of Clinton's lawyer. On 6 May 1994, Jones, a former Arkansas state employee, filed a sexual harassment lawsuit against Clinton just days before the statute of limitations would have expired. In her lawsuit, she maintained that on 8 May 1991, she was working the registration desk at Excelsior Hotel in Little Rock, Arkansas, where the Third Annual Governor's Quality Management Conference was being held, an event Bill Clinton (then governor of Arkansas) attended to deliver a speech. Jones alleged that an Arkansas state trooper, Danny Ferguson, approached her at the registration desk, told her that Clinton would like to meet with her, and escorted her to a business suite in the hotel where Clinton was staying. lawsuit According to Jones, once she entered Clinton's hotel suite he complimented her on her physical appearance, put his hand on her leg, attempted to kiss her on the neck, asked her if she was married, and finally lowered his trousers to expose his erect penis and asked Jones to "kiss it." When Jones rebuffed Clinton's advances, she said, he told her to "keep this between ourselves" and suggested that, in her words, he "could damage her in her job and even jeopardize her employment." Jones did not publicly discuss the incident until The American Spectator referenced it in a January 1994 article, apparently based on information provided by Trooper Ferguson: The American Spectator account asserts that a woman by the name of "Paula" told an unnamed trooper (obviously Defendant Ferguson), who had escorted "Paula" to Clinton's hotel room, that "she was available to be Clinton's regular girlfriend if he so desired," thus implying a consummated and satisfying sexual encounter with Clinton, as well as a willingness to continue a sexual relationship with him. These assertions are untrue. The American Spectator account also asserted that the troopers' 'official' duties included facilitating Clinton's cheating on his wife ... Since Jones ("Paula") was one of the women preyed upon by Clinton and his troopers, including by Defendant Ferguson, in the manner described above, those who read this magazine account could conclude falsely that Jones ("Paula") had a sexual relationship and affair with Clinton. Jones' reputation within her community was thus seriously damaged. Several months later, Jones filed her lawsuit against Clinton and Ferguson, seeking a total of $750,000 in compensation for damages and attorneys' fees on counts of sexual harassment, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and defamation. The issue of whether Jones could sue a sitting president went all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court, who upheld an appellate court decision that "the President, like all other government officials, is subject to the same laws that apply to all other members of our society," and allowed Jones' case to proceed. However, Judge Susan Webber Wright of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas dismissed the lawsuit on 1 April 1998, holding that "the governor's alleged conduct does not constitute sexual assault," that "plaintiff's allegations fall far short of the rigorous standards for establishing a claim of outrage under Arkansas law," that "plaintiff has failed to demonstrate that she has a case worthy of submitting to a jury," and that "there are no genuine issues for trial in this case." dismissed When it came to light a few months later that Clinton had lied under oath about his relationship with Monica Lewinsky during proceedings in Jones' lawsuit, Jones filed an appeal to reverse the dismissal and have her claims reinstated. On 13 November 1998, Clinton settled the matter by offering to pay Jones $850,000 in exchange for her agreement to drop her appeal, without admitting to or apologizing for the conduct alleged by Jones. appeal Porn actress Daniels (the stage name of Stephanie Clifford) said she first met Trump at a celebrity golf tournament in Nevada in July 2006. The two engaged in sex in Trump's hotel room, she claimed, and continued an "intimate relationship" into the following year. Daniels discussed her relationship with Trump in a 2011 interview for In Touch magazine, but the interview was not published at that time, reportedly because Trump's personal attorney, Michael Cohen, threatened to sue over it when the magazine reached out to ask for comment. threatened In January 2018, the Wall Street Journal reported that Trump's personal attorney, Cohen, had arranged to pay Daniels $130,000 just weeks before the 2016 U.S. presidential election in exchange for her signing a nondisclosure agreement related to her alleged 2006 affair with Trump. reported The following month, Cohen confirmed that $130,000 had been paid to Daniels, but he maintained that he had used his personal funds for the payment, and that "Neither the Trump Organization nor the Trump campaign was a party to the transaction with Ms. Clifford, and neither reimbursed me for the payment, either directly or indirectly." On 5 April 2018, Trump denied to reporters that he knew about the payment to Daniels. When pressed about why the payment had been made, Trump replied, "You'll have to ask Michael Cohen" and asserted he didn't know where the $130,000 had come from. Four days later, acting on a warrant from federal prosecutors in New York's Southern District obtained in part on a referral from special counsel Robert Mueller's office, FBI agents seized a variety of material from Cohen's New York City office, home, and hotel room, including documents related to Cohen's payment to Daniels and to Karen McDougal, another woman who had alleged an affair with Trump. denied A month later, former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani, now a member of Trump's legal team, said that Trump had personally repaid Cohen for the $130,000 payment to Daniels, and that the reimbursement had been "funneled through a law firm." The following day, Trump contradicted his earlier claim that he didn't know about the payment by acknowledging that he had repaid Cohen, but he asserted the money "had nothing to do with the campaign." Rudy Giuliani contradicted In August 2018, Cohen pleaded guilty to eight charges, including five counts of tax evasion, one count of making a false statement to a financial institution, one count of being a "willful cause" of an unlawful corporate contribution, and one count of making an excessive campaign contribution, the latter two stemming from the "hush money" payments made to Daniels and McDougal. Prosecutors held that the payments made by Cohen violated federal campaign finance laws because they were meant to benefit the campaign but did not come from campaign contributions and were not reported to the Federal Election Commission (FEC). The payments therefore constituted illegal in-kind contributions to the Trump campaign that violated laws limiting such donations to $2,700 and requiring their disclosure to the FEC. Whether Trump himself could be charged with engaging in a criminal scheme to violate campaign finance laws for his involvement in the hush money payments is still a matter of legal debate, but the issue took a dramatic turn in February 2019 when Cohen revealed before Congress that he was paid reimbursement for the hush money directly from Trump's personal bank account after Trump became president. legal debate revealed "Cohen's public testimony directly implicates Trump in serious campaign finance violations," former FECGeneral Counsel Lawrence Noble told the Washington Post. "Assuming Cohen is telling the truth about the purpose of the checks, the checks are documentary evidence supporting the allegation that Trump had Cohen pay Daniels $135,000 in hush money and then reimbursed Cohen." Washington Post All in all, events proved the FBI had good reason to raid Cohen's office, as they gathered evidence of multiple federal crimes (beyond just campaign finance violations) to which Cohen pleaded guilty. Bill Clinton's payment to Paula Jones was a settlement of a civil lawsuit that did not involve any criminal matter or criminal wrongdoing, and thus it was of no legitimate interest to law enforcement. The only commonality between the two cases was that they involved payments by politicians to women, but for very different reasons and circumstances. federal crimes Dowd, Katie.  "Are These the Checks Donald Trump Gave Michael Cohen for the Stormy Daniels Payment?"   San Francisco Chronicle.  27 February 2019. Goodman, Ryan and Andy Wright.  "Mueller's Roadmap: Major Takeaways from Cohen and Manafort Filings."   Just Security.  December 8, 2018 Rupar, Aaron.  "What's illegal About Trump's Hush Payments to Women, Briefly Explained."   Vox.  12 December 2018. Kelly, Matthew.  "In-Kind Contributions Are Boring ... Until Stormy Daniels Gets Involved."   OpenSecrets.org.  3 April 2018. Lord, Debbie.  "Michael Cohen Plea Deal: How Were Campaign Finance Laws Broken?"   The Atlanta Journal-Constitution.  22 August 2018. Associated Press.  "A Timeline of Key Moments in Trump-Stormy Daniels Saga."   4 May 2018. Kirby, Jen.  "A Timeline of Trumpworld's Changing Story on Stormy Daniels."   Vox.  4 May 2018. Samuels, Brett.  "Timeline: Trump, Cohen, Stormy Daniels and $130,000."   The Hill.  4 May 2018. Theobald, Bill.  "Why Hush Money Michael Cohen Paid Stormy Daniels Was an Illegal Campaign Donation."   USA Today.  14 December 2018. Kirby, Jen and Andrew Prokop.  "Michael Cohen Pleads Guilty to 8 Federal Crimes."   Vox.  21 August 2018. Stewart, Emily and Dylan Matthews.  "The Michael Cohen-Stormy Daniels Subplot, Explained."   Vox.  27 February 2019. Chalfant, Morgan.  "Prosecutors Submit Redacted Cohen Raid Documents Under Seal, Teeing Up Public Release."   The Hill.  28 February 2019. Reuters.  "Trump Says He Did Not Know About $130,000 Payment to Stormy Daniels."   5 April 2018. Claim:  President Obama refused to participate in the ALS Association's "Ice Bucket Challenge."  Example:  [Collected via e-mail, August 2014] Tea Party.net posted on Facebook that President Obama refuse to take the ice bucket challenge from an 86 year old woman who did take the challenge.  Is that true and how did this 86 year old lady submit her challenge to the White House to begin with, etc.  Is is also true that the original challenge was either do the ice bucket or contribute 100 dollars to your favorite charity compared to the way it is going around now?   Origins:  In August 2014 the online world was hit with the "Ice Bucket Challenge," a playful competition that encouraged netizens to douse themselves with buckets of ice water, and challenge others to do the same,  Ice Bucket Challenge as a method of raising awareness and donations for the ALS Association (ALSA)  a national non-profit organization that provides services to persons with ALS (amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, also known as Lou Gehrigs Disease) and helps to fund research into the disease. As of mid-August 2014, ALSA was reporting it had surpassed $10 million in "Ice Bucket" donations. ALS Association reporting As described on ALSA's web page about the "Ice Bucket Challenge," that phenomenon seeks both to raise awareness of ALS (through people actively taking the challenge of dumping buckets of ice water on their heads and posting videos of their activity on the Internet) and to raise funds for ALS research (through donations provided by those who prefer making financial contributions rather than dousing themselves with ice-cold water): The challenge involves people getting doused with buckets of ice water on video, posting that video to social media, then nominating others to do the same, all in an effort to raise ALS awareness. Those who refuse to take the challenge are asked to make a donation to the ALS charity of their choice. One of those who accepted the "Ice Bucket Challenge" was 86-year-old Ethel Kennedy, the widow of Senator Robert F. Kennedy, who took part in a mass challenge event on 10 August 2014 involving numerous members of the Kennedy clan and others, then challenged President Obama to do the same, declaring "Welcome to Cape Cod, President Obama. I nominate you": challenge event  The White House responded by stating that President Obama's contribution would be financial rather than participatory: responded The President appreciates Mrs. Kennedy thinking of him for the challenge  though his contribution to this effort will be monetary. The President [will] be making a donation to an ALS charity this week. Did President Obama therefore "refuse" to take the "Ice Bucket Challenge"?  If one considers the whole essence of the challenge to be pouring ice water over one's head to raise awareness of ALS, then perhaps so. But, as described on the ALSA web site, the challenge also involves raising donations for ALS research from those who decline to participate in the "dousing yourself with ice water" portion and are instead asked "to make a donation to the ALS charity of their choice," and President Obama honored the spirit of the challenge by agreeing to the latter aspect. Last updated:  19 August 2014 The troubling history of a society ball for young debutantes has come under scrutiny through an unlikely figure  Kimmy Schmidt. No, not fictional Kimmy Schmidt, who was rescued from a cult in the popular Netflix show, but the actor who played her. Ellie Kemper, known for her roles in Bridesmaids, The Office, and Unbreakable Kimmy Schmidt, was at the center of an internet controversy when someone found old photographs of her winning a title at a debutante ball allegedly linked to a white supremacist group in her home city of St. Louis, Missouri. center According to the St. Louis Post-Dispatch, in 1999, Kemper won the title of Queen of Love and Beauty at the "Veiled Prophet Ball," an annual event for debutantes, that was organized by a society known as the Veiled Prophet Organization (VPO). The ball still takes place in December every year, except in 2020 on account of the pandemic. takes place We found the original clippings from the newspaper in 1999:     The VPO was reportedly co-founded in 1878 by a former Confederate officer and historically excluded Black and Jewish people. Originally intended as a celebration for the citys wealthy, the Veiled Prophet Ball and the events surrounding it were, according to one historian, meant to reinforce the elites values over working class activism in the city. The VPO only admitted Black members in 1979. co-founded Twitter users also honed in on an image depicting a Veiled Prophet from 1878, which shows a person wearing a white costume and a pointed hat. The image was eerily similar to the white robes and hood worn by the white supremacist organization the Ku Klux Klan (KKK). Many started calling Kemper the KKK princess alleging ties between the VPO and the KKK and highlighting the racist history behind the VPOs activities. image Ku Klux Klan  We learned that while the group does have a troubling history of racial discrimination within the organization, there is no clear evidence tying the group to the KKK. While Kemper did participate and win a title at the ball in 1999, there is also no evidence that she herself harbors racist beliefs. We reached out to representatives for Kemper for comment and will update this post if we get any more information. Below, we break down the history of the VPO, the ball, and the claims made about Kemper. It began in 1878, when a group of prominent businessmen formed an organization that instituted an annual ball and parade, which was presided over by a mysterious Veiled Prophet. This was usually one member of the organization in disguise, whose identity was not meant to be revealed. The parade ostensibly was meant to generate pride and interest in St. Louis as a prominent city. At the ball, daughters of Veiled Prophet members were presented and the Veiled Prophet would select one to reign as the Queen of Love and Beauty. formed The idea for this organization is commonly attributed to two brothers, Confederate Colonel Alonzo Slayback and his brother, Charles Slayback, a Confederate cavalryman. According to an essay in The Common Reader, a monthly publication by Washington University in St. Louis, the Veiled Prophet was drawn from a poem by Thomas Moore titled The Story of the Veiled Prophet of Khorassan, found in the book of poetry Lalla Rookh, published in 1817. The prophet in the poem is a wealthy man from the East, who is rewarded with opulent receptions wherever he goes. attributed The Common Reader Academics interpret the Veiled Prophet of the poem as a symbol of moral depravity, however, who rapes and corrupts the beautiful and virtuous high priestess Zelica, allegedly the inspiration for the Queen of Love and Beauty. interpret The Veiled Prophet in St. Louis, according to a book the organization published in 1928, is meant to be a beloved despot, evasive but real, who rules with an iron hand encased in velvet. The organizations interpretation of the Veiled Prophet showed him as a symbol of moral rectitude. published According to historian Thomas Spencers book The St. Louis Veiled Prophet Celebration: Power on Parade, 1877-1995, the parade was the business elites response to the workers strike of 1877, meant to awe the masses towards passivity with its symbolic show of power. The St. Louis Veiled Prophet Celebration: Power on Parade, 1877-1995, But it was civil rights protests from the 1960s to the 1980s that made people of the city perceive the parade and ball as wasteful and conspicuous consumption. Black activists with the Action Committee to Improve Opportunities for Negroes (ACTION) protested the events. An integrated group with Black leadership and white members who helped them get access to spaces normally off limits to minorities, the group carried out direct action protests, and sought economic justice through more jobs for minorities. By protesting the parade and ball, they were targeting big businessmen and corporations. perceive protested They also held parody balls which mocked the largely white Veiled Prophet events and crowned a Black Queen of Human Justice. In 1972, ACTION even managed to infiltrate a ball through three white women members who obtained tickets. According to The Common Reader: parody balls infiltrate The Common Reader As one woman shouted Down with the VP! another swung down from the balcony on a cable to the stage (the fall crushed three of her ribs). She told an official that she had fallen, and managed to sneak on stage, standing right next to the seated Veiled Prophet. She pulled the veil from his face, and then was quickly rushed offstage by the Bengal Lancers, the VPs protective guard. The VP, a Monsanto executive vice president, put his crown and veil back on, and the ball proceeded as usual. During this period of civil rights protests, the parade avoided Black neighborhoods on its route. ACTION's ultimate goal was to pressure business leaders to give jobs to more Black people. Members of ACTION also lay down in front of parade floats, chained themselves to floats and distributed leaflets, and reportedly picketed the balls with signs like VEILED PROFIT$ or VP=KKK. Percy Green, an activist behind ACTION said of the Veiled Prophet ball, parade, and the businessmen involved, "No wonder these people dont hire Blacks because they are socially involved in these all-white organizations [...]."  avoided pressure lay down said Indeed, the organization remained primarily white until 1979 when it admitted its first Black members, who were three doctors. Older members reportedly insisted that the doctors were admitted because they had earned their place among the elite. insisted We reached out to the modern-day VPO. A spokesperson described the ball as "a venue to introduce young ladies, generally in their sophomore year of college, to the St. Louis community and instill the value of community service. During the preceding summer, the debutants and their families contribute more than 3,500 hours of volunteer time to countless service projects coordinated through the Veiled Prophet Community Service Initiative to participate in the Ball." Rumors of a connection with the KKK grew from the first available image of a Veiled Prophet from an 1878 issue of the Missouri Republican, which shows a figure dressed in white robes with a pointed cap. image   The image does not actually indicate the VPO was connected to the KKK. The KKK did not use this uniform until the early 1900s, when the 1915 film The Birth of a Nation depicted the white robes and hoods. Around 1921, the KKK was mass-producing similar white robes and hoods, decades after this particular image. did not Since that first image, the Veiled Prophets outfits have varied, as seen in these photographs of the celebrations over decades. The outfits include elaborate robes that are more reminiscent of the Popes regalia. This does not, however, discount the role of the VPO in perpetuating exclusionary practices over the course of its history. photographs A spokesperson for the VPO denied any connection to racist organizations. The source did not initially respond to our queries about their exclusionary policy that admitted Black members into the organization as late as 1979. In a statement, the group said: The VP organization is dedicated to civic progress, economic contributions and charitable causes in St. Louis. Our organization believes in and promotes inclusion, diversity and equality for this region. We absolutely reject racism and have never partnered or associated with any organization that harbors these beliefs. The VPO told us, "Membership in the organization is open to men of all backgrounds and experiences. The organization is committed to diversity and actively seeks members with an interest in community service and a commitment to making St. Louis a better place to live for all." It is inaccurate to refer to Kemper as a KKK princess given that the VPO itself has no known ties to the KKK, even though its role in systems that uphold racism cannot be discounted. The ball and parade have continued in a range of forms since then. The organization today is commonly referred to as the Veiled Prophet Organization (VPO). According to a statement the group sent us and its website, VPO carries out volunteer work and donates to numerous causes: website We are proud of our commitment to support civic St. Louis for 143 years, including: Annually hosting dozens of community service projects and donating tens of thousands of dollars and service hours to support a variety of charity partners to create a stronger, more equitable and prosperous St. Louis, including: Beyond Housing, Mission: St. Louis, Missouri Veterans Endeavor, North Side Community School, Promise Community Homes, Brightside St. Louis, Forest Park Forever, and many others. Making many significant infrastructure and cultural gifts to the City, including lighting of the Eads Bridge, the Mississippi River Overlook and the mile-long Riverfront Promenade, and partnering in providing the Grand Staircase beneath the Arch as part of the National Park System and to the irrigation system as part of Forest Park Forever. Hosting two major free events in St. Louis, including Americas Birthday Parade and Fair St. Louis. Both events reflect the diversity of the St. Louis community and include a wide variety of partners  such as PrideFest and the Annie Malone Parade. Kemper came from a wealthy and influential banking family, and she has talked about her upbringing, saying she had a had a very privileged, nice, warm childhood. Her relationship to the organization, which still appears to be influential in St. Louis cultural and social landscape, can be attributed to her social standing and family history. While she may have certainly benefited from her background and privilege, it does not indicate that she is actively a part of upholding racist systems and beliefs. came from On June 7, 2021, Kemper addressed the controversy in a statement on her Instagram account:   She added:  I unequivocally deplore, denounce, and reject white supremacy. At the same time, I acknowledge that because of my race and my privilege, I am the beneficiary of a system that has dispensed unequal justice and unequal rewards. There is a very natural temptation when you become the subject of internet criticism, to tell yourself that your detractors are getting it all wrong. But at some point last week, I realized that a lot of the forces behind the criticism are forces that I've spent my life supporting and agreeing with. I believe strongly in the values of kindness, integrity and inclusiveness. I try to live my life in accordance with these values. If my experience is an indication that organizations and institutions with pasts that fall short of these beliefs should be held to account, then I have to see this experience in a positive light. Soon after Kemper made her statement, VPO sent us an additional statement, addressing their history of racism and exclusion: Upon reflection, the Veiled Prophet Organization acknowledges our past and recognizes the criticism levied our way. We sincerely apologize for the actions and images from our history. Additionally, our lack of cultural awareness was and is wrong. We are committed to change, allowing our actions to match the organization we are today. The VP Organization of today categorically rejects racism, in any form. Todays VP is committed to diversity and equity in our membership, community service initiatives and support for the region. Our hope is that moving forward, the community sees us for who we are today and together we can move this region forward for everyone. We are, and always will be committed to the success of the region and making St Louis a better place to live for all. The organization itself has no known connection to the KKK but did uphold exclusionary and racist policies within its ranks. It was also a target of protests by the civil rights movement. Kemper participated and won a title in the annual ball, decades after it admitted its first Black members. While the ball and organization play a role in a long history of racism in the United States, which implicates many institutions, there is no evidence tying this group to the KKK, nor any evidence that Kemper is actively racist herself. As such, we rate this claim a Mixture. June 2, 2021: Updated with ACTION's Percy Green quote.  June 3, 2021: Updated with VPO's additional comments. June 8, 2021: Updated with Ellie Kemper's statement, and a follow up statement from the VPO. Claim: The Southern Poverty Law Center has declared the Fox News Channel a hate group.  Example:  [Collected via Twitter, June 2015] So. Southern Poverty Law Center declares Fox News a hate group. Origins: On 10 June 2015, the web siteFree Wood Postpublished an articledeclaring that the Fox News Channel had been declared a hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), a legal advocacy organization known for its representation of victims of hate groups.  The SPLC is also known for maintaining a list of hate groups, which they define as groups that "have beliefs or practices that attack or malign an entire class of people, typically for their immutable characteristics." article The Free Wood Post article reported: In what should come as a surprise to no one, considering their coverage of unarmed black people being brutalized by the police, the Southern Poverty Law Center has added Fox News to their list of hate groups, as they meet the criteria. From calling any black person who stands up in protest against the policethugs to thinking black people will shank officers, to glossing over a white biker gang that actually killed nine people, to thinking gay people are persecuting Christians with their audacity to think, they too can, should be able to file for taxes under married. While many social media users (particularly on Twitter) took the headline at face value, Free Wood Postis a satirical web site that prominently features a "Satire Disclaimer" on their pages: Satire Disclaimer Free Wood Post 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 FreeWoodPost.com are fiction, and presumably fake news. Any resemblance to the truth is purely coincidental, except for all references to politicians and/or celebrities, in which case they are based on real people, but still based almost entirely in fiction. FreeWoodPost.com is intended for a mature, sophisticated, and discerning audience. The article was not dissimilar to a previous satirical piece published by theFree Wood Post in March 2012, claiming that the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) had reclassified the Fox News Channel "from a valid news source to that of satire." reclassified Last updated:  10 June 2015 On Sept. 19, 2016, theWisconsin Democratic Partycalled onDonald Trumpto release his tax returns, issuinga statementthat quoted U.S. Sen.Tammy Baldwin, D-Wis., as saying: The time is way past due for Donald Trump to release his tax returns, as every other major party nominee has done for the past 40 years. So, lets see if thats what every Democratic and Republican presidential nominee since 1976 has done. Wayback machine Baldwin has taken aim at Trump before, since he became the GOP nominee. In August 2016, werated Half Trueher claim that Trump has a long history of exporting jobs overseas. Trump-brand products such as his clothing have been made overseas, but those jobs were always abroad, not U.S. jobs that were moved. To back her current claim, Baldwins campaign cited editorials from theNew York Timesand theWashington Post, both of which said Trump would be the first major party candidate since 1976 -- 40 years ago -- not to release his tax returns. Also cited was an editorial from theBoston Globe, which said its been more than 40 years. But there is an exception. We checked anarchive of presidential tax returnsmaintained by the Tax Analysts, a publisher specializing in tax policy. It shows that going back to 1976, all but one major-party nominee released at least one return. Only Republican Gerald Ford, who lost to Democrat Jimmy Carter in 1976, did not release returns (he released summary tax data), the archive shows. FactCheck.org also found Ford to bethe one exception. Joe Thorndike, the Tax History Project director at Tax Analysts, told us that Fords summaries were clearly not the same as tax returns. For instance, they didnt provide detailed information on things such as sources of income and charitable contributions. Moreover, its impossible to know what might be in a return unless you see the return. It's also worth noting that while some nominees have released numerous years of returns  1996 GOP nominee Bob Dole provided30 years worth others have not. In 1980, Republican Ronald Reagan released onlyone returnand in 2012, Republican Mitt Romneyreleased two. In the 2016 race,Hillary Clinton, the Democratic nominee, has released returns from 2000 through 2015. As for Trump, he has said he hasnt released his taxes because he is being audited. When he claimed he released the most extensive financial review of anybody in the history of politics. You don't learn much in a tax return, PolitiFact Nationalsrating was False. Trump did release an extensive (and legally required) document detailing his personal financial holdings. But experts say tax returns would offer valuable details on his effective tax rate, the types of taxes he paid and how much he gave to charity, as well as a more detailed picture of his assets. Our rating Baldwin says that except for Trump, every other major party nominee for the past 40 years has released their tax returns. Shes almost right. During that period, the only major-party presidential nominee who didnt release returns was Ford, the Republican nominee in 1976. It's also worth noting that many nominees have released numerous years of returns, but some have released only one or two. We rate Baldwins statement Mostly True. https://www.sharethefacts.co/share/3b799eb7-8454-41ff-a343-3c13c44e9c78 During the tour to promote his presidential memoir,Decision Points, George W. Bush defended his fiscal record in an interview with Matt Lauer on NBC'sToday Show. In the interview, Bush said that the ratio of the deficit to gross domestic product during his time in office was lower than Ronald Reagan's by half. Lower than my dad's. And only [worse than] Bill Clinton among modern presidents. ... My debt to GDP was the lowest or one of the lowest of modern presidents. My taxes to GDP was the lowest and my spending to GDP was too. We thought it would be worthwhile to see if Bush was correct. So we turned to a historical table from the Office of Management and Budget that shows tax receipts, spending and the deficit as a percentage of GDP -- essentially, as a percentage of the nation's economy as a whole.The challenge is figuring exactly how to compare recent presidents.Let's start with the deficit. The most obvious way to do it is to add up all of the annual percentages for a president and divide by the number of years served, to produce an average.Calculating it this way -- and beginning our list of modern presidents with President Dwight Eisenhower -- we came up with the following order: Eisenhower (deficits averaged 0.53 percent of GDP), Clinton (0.76 percent of GDP), Richard Nixon (0.93 percent), Lyndon Johnson (1.1 percent),George W. Bush (2.0 percent), Jimmy Carter (2.4 percent), George H.W. Bush (3.98 percent), Reagan (4.23 percent). (We excluded John F. Kennedy and Gerald Ford because of their short tenures. )You can do the same with spending and tax receipts.For spending as a percent of GDP, the ranking from low to high is Eisenhower (18.1 percent of GDP), Johnson (18.7 percent), Nixon (19.2 percent),George W. Bush (19.6 percent), Clinton (19.8), Carter (20.8), George H.W. Bush (21.9), and Reagan (22.4).For tax receipts as a percentage of GDP, the ranking from low to high is Eisenhower (17.5 percent of GDP), Johnson andGeorge W. Bush (tied at 17.6 percent), George H.W. Bush (17.9 percent), Reagan (18.2 percent), Nixon (18.3 percent), Carter (18.4 percent) and Clinton (19 percent).Whether Bush is correct depends heavily on which presidents you consider modern. If you only go back to Reagan -- the earliest president that Bush himself cited by name in the interview -- then Bush is basically correct. Only Clinton did better when measured by deficit as a percentage of GDP, while no president dating back to Reagan scored better on spending or tax receipts as a percentage of GDP.By contrast, if you go back to Eisenhower -- the first fully post-World War II president -- Bush is in the middle of the pack on the deficit and on spending, and he's near the top on tax receipts.But there's another way to look at the deficit -- to compare a president's first deficit as a percentage of GDP to their last. This shows what direction the deficit went during their tenures.And on this one, George W. Bush does the worst of any president dating back to Eisenhower.The younger Bush went from a 1.3 percent surplus to a 3.2 percent deficit, a decline of 4.5 percentage points. The best was Clinton, who moved the deficit from a 3.9 percent deficit to a 2.4 percent surplus -- a positive change of 6.3 percentage points. The other presidents all had changes up or down that were roughly two percentage points or smaller.This suggests that Bush's fiscal record wasn't so sterling if you use a different measure than the one he did. But to analyze the accuracy of his statement, we'll stick closely to the words he used. George W. Bush is correct that he outperformed his father, Reagan and (mostly) Clinton. So if you consider those the modern presidents, he's essentially right. If you broaden the modern presidents to include those serving in the entire post-World War II period, Bush is about average. While we wouldn't have chosen to define the modern presidents to include just the four that Bush mentioned by name, we'll give him some deference in framing the question. So we rate his statement Mostly True.