Under President Bush in eight years, we added $4.9 trillion to the debt. Under President Obama, we've added $5.3 trillion to the debt in the 3.5 years he's been in office.
A few days before she hit the stage in front of a national audience at the Republican National Convention, U.S. Sen. Kelly Ayotte addressed a far smaller crowd in Merrimack, N.H.Despite the difference in venue, the New Hampshire Republican offered a similar message.During the town hall meeting, Ayotte, a Nashua native and freshman senator, took aim at President Obama and the growing debt under his administration. While she didnt specifically blame the president for the debt, she used the speech to blast Obama for increased spending and stifling business.Under President Bush in eight years, we added $4.9 trillion to the debt, Ayotte told the crowd Thursday, August 23, 2012, at Merrimack High School. Under President Obama, we've added $5.3 trillion ... in the 3 1/2 years he's been in office.The numbers have been used before. Lastweek, PolitiFact gave aMostly Trueratingto a similar claim by New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie that the debt has jumped $5 trillion during Obamas time in office.But, does that mean Ayottes numbers are on target? Lets take a look.The numbers arent hard to track.The U.S. Department of the Treasury tracks the national debt figures on its website,TreasuryDirect.gov.On the site, the treasury department divides the national debt into two main categories, debt held by the government and debt held by the public. But, in her statement, Ayotte is referring to the combined total, or total national debt, according to spokesman Jeff Grappone.According to the federal count, the total debt currently sits around $16 trillion. But, as of August, 23, when Ayotte made the statement, it was closer to $15.98 trillion. That figure is about $5.35 trillion higher than the $10.63 trillion debt Obama inherited when he came into office January 19, 2009.When Bush first came into office, the national debt was $5.73 trillion, and by the end of his eight years, it grew to $10.63 trillion -- an increase of exactly $4.9 trillion. So, Ayottes numbers look right on target.Still, as is so often the case, the numbers dont tell the whole story, according to analysts.At PolitiFact, we consider not just the factual accuracy of a statement, but also whether credit and blame is fairly attributed.Federal spending records show that both Democrats and Republican share the blame for the increased spending. Democrats controlled both houses of Congress during Obamas first two years, but Republicans have held the House of Representatives since January 2011.Further, as noted in the prior PolitiFact piece, much of the debt results from policies set under past presidents and lawmakers. So, the blame falls on both parties.Its true. They both contributed, said Ron Haskins, co-director of the Brookings Institutions Budgeting for National Priorities Project. I'm not too worked up about attributing 27 percent to this and 36 percent to that. But, the fact is that both presidents (Obama and George W. Bush) were irresponsible. Were seeing the impact of that now.Our ruling:Ayottes got her numbers right. According to the treasury departments count, the debt has grown $5.3 trillion since Obama took office in 2009, compared to $4.9 trillion in Bushs eight years.Still, analysts say these figures dont paint a full picture of the root causes of the debt.In her statement, Ayotte doesnt attribute direct credit or blame, but she did use the speech to blast Obama and his policies.We rate her claim Mostly True.
In recent years, internet users and fans of historical curiosities have marveled at a bizarre, even sinister-looking costume covered head to toe in spikes, which is most commonly described as being a "Siberian bear-hunting suit from the 1800s." Enthusiasts have repeatedly posted largely the same, distinctive black-and-white photograph of the outfit, to the popular online forum Reddit: in 2019; 2018; and 2014. The posts always refer to the object as a "Siberian bear-hunting suit" and largely date it to the 19th century, as shown in the example below: 2019 2018 2014   The remarkable photograph, and its description as a Siberian bear-hunting suit from the 19th century, enjoyed a boost online in 2012, after it was featured on the popular, and now defunct, website Retronaut: boost Retronaut   It has even inspired a song, entitled "Bear Hunting Armor," which was released by the Prague-based indie band Ending, in 2018. The music video, whose imagery clearly borrows heavily from the now-famous photograph, can be watched below. The band itself described the song as having been "Inspired by a Siberian bear hunting armor from the 1800s." music video  In reality, conclusive evidence is not available as to the precise origins of the costume  its purpose, creation date, or the geographical and cultural milieu from which it emerged  although it is a real historical artifact and the widely shared photograph of it is authentic. Moreover, good reasons exist to doubt the accuracy of the "Siberian bear-hunting" explanation that has become popular. As such, we are issuing a rating of "Unproven." If decisive evidence emerges, we will update this fact check accordingly. The picture in question appears to have been taken by Malcolm Kirk, a renowned New York-based photographer. In 2012, the Victorian Adventure Enthusiast blog wrote about the artifact, claiming to have confirmed with Kirk's representatives that he did indeed take the photograph. Malcolm Kirk wrote As of July 2021, the suit itself was housed at the Menil Collection in Houston, Texas  a museum that contains the private art and artifact collection of the French-American de Menil family. The museum's website features various photographs of the costume, which is on display as part of the "Witnesses to a Surrealist Vision" exhibit: museum various photographs   The Menil Collection describes the exhibit, which first opened in 1999, as follows: This unique installation presents a culturally heterogeneous collection of more than 150 objects from the Menils permanent collection or on long-term loan from members of the de Menil family. Ritual and everyday objects, primarily from the indigenous peoples of the Pacific Islands and the Americaswhich the Surrealists believed to be witnesses to the universality of their own visual and literary artistic practicesare exhibited with 19th-century European astrolabes, anamorphoscopes, and other devices that offer alternative ways to perceive and understand reality.  So we know the suit is real, who owns it, and where it has been on display for the past 20 years, and we know that the widely shared photograph of it is authentic, as well as the name of the photographer who captured it. However, the precise origins of the costume remain elusive.  In her 2014 master's thesis, available in full here, Kristen Strange at Arizona State University wrote at length, and in considerable detail, about "Witnesses to a Surrealist Vision." here As part of her research, she examined records relating to the acquisition of the costume, which was also frequently referred to as "Wildman," as well as correspondence involving Dominique de Menil, a co-founder of the museum along with her husband, John; their daughter, Adelaide de Menil; and Edmund Carpenter, Adelaide's husband and an American anthropologist who initially curated the exhibit. Despite her extensive examination of those documents and records, Strange found no evidence to definitively pin down the exact origins of the suit, but did discover some interesting background information, and clues that the outfit might actually have originated in 18th or 19th century Germany or Switzerland, rather than 19th century Russia. She wrote: The Wildman, an essential object in the early planning stages of the exhibition, was referred to as the porcupine man in correspondence between Dominique de Menil and Edmund Carpenter. ... Carpenter was likely drawn to the uncanny appearance and narrative of the Wildman, and displayed this costume in his office for many years before its inclusion in Witnesses. There has been some uncertainty over this objects culture of origin and its originally intended purpose. While it is now thought to have originated in eighteenth- or nineteenth-century Germany or Switzerland, this costume presumably represents a folk figure seen in the Vogel Gryff Festival in Basel, but it has also been considered a bear hunting costume. ... Its provenance dates backwards from a December 6, 1974 auction at the Palais Galliera [in Paris], where it was purchased by Adelaide de Menil and Carpenter. The file provides further documentation and explains that this costume came with a handwritten note stating that it formerly belonged to the collection of Adamson (naturalists) who gave their name to surreal seashells. While the true origins of The Wildman remain uncertain, it appears that it was being described as a bear-hunting suit as early as 1998, and possibly before that. In November of that year, the renowned conservator Barbara Appelbaum wrote an email to her colleagues at the Global Conservation Forum, looking for advice on the use of Beva, a specialist adhesive popular among conservators.  specialist adhesive In her email, she described the artifact she was working on at that time in terms that strongly suggest it was The Wildman, especially since her email came just months before the "Witnesses to a Surrealist Vision" exhibit first opened at the Menil Collection. However, it should be noted that in her email, Appelbaum cast doubt on the "bear-hunting" description of the item: her email The object is being called a Siberian bear-hunting suit, but I suspect it is more likely to be for bear bating than hunting, since I can't imagine anyone could run around the woods in it. It consists of leather pants and jacket (and an iron helmet) studded all over with 1-inch iron nails about 3/4 in. apart. The nails are held in place by a second layer of leather lining the whole thing and quilted into place between the nails. In areas of wear and flexing, like around the ankles and the crotch, the inside layer of leather is worn through, so the nails are falling out. Claim:  Con artists are circulating letters demanding the completion of fake IRS forms that would arm them with all the information necessary to steal the identities and empty the bank accounts of those who fall for this ruse.  Status:  True. Example:  [Collected on the Internet, 2002] The IRS issued a warning of an identity theft scam that uses a phony form and an official looking letter from a bank. The letter states that the bank is updating its records in order to exempt the taxpayer from reporting interest income or having tax withheld at 31 percent on the interest paid on the taxpayer's account. The letter askes that customers submit the enclosed phony Form W-9095. This is a scam. There is no IRS Form W-9095. This is only an attempt to gain personal information from unsuspecting taxpayers.  The Internal Revenue Service is sounding the alarm about a fraudulent scheme that uses fictitious bank correspondence and IRS forms to try to trick taxpayers into disclosing personal and bank account information.  Con artists use the information to steal the taxpayer's identity and bank account deposits. Reports of the scam have surfaced from coast-to-coast. Dozens of victims have been identified. In the scam, a letter is sent out claiming to be from the taxpayer's bank. It states that the "bank" is updating its records in order to exempt the taxpayer from reporting interest or having tax withheld on interest paid on bank accounts or other financial dealings. Legally, banks must report interest to the IRS and taxpayers must include it as income. The scam "bank" correspondence encloses a phony IRS form for personal and financial data. The letter urges the recipient to fax the completed form to a specific number within seven days or lose the reporting and withholding exemption, resulting in withholding of 31 percent on the account's interest. The scheme promoters then use the faxed information to impersonate the taxpayer and gain access to the taxpayer's finances. One such phony form is labeled "W-9095, Application Form for Certificate Status/Ownership for Withholding Tax." It requests personal data frequently used to prove identity, such as a passport number and mother's maiden name. It also asks for sensitive financial data such as bank account numbers, passwords and PIN numbers. The fictitious W-9095 appears to be an attempt to mimic the genuine IRS Form W-9, "Request for Taxpayer Identification Number and Certification." The only personal information a genuine W-9 requests is the name, address and Social Security number or employer identification number of the taxpayer. Variations:  In December 2008, the Canada Revenue Agency (Canada's tax department, formerly Revenue Canada) issued a warning about a similar scheme being run on Canadian taxpayers.  warning Origins:  In April 2002, a new ruse designed to trick victims into giving out personal information that could lead to identity theft was unleashed on the unsuspecting throughout the USA. It arrived in the form of fake Internal Revenue Service forms which appeared to have been mailed by taxpayers'  banks. Here's how the scam worked: An account holder would receive a letter on bank stationery requesting information for the purpose of reporting earnings to the Internal Revenue Service. Attached to the letter would be a fake IRS form identified as W-9095. The phony document was based on a valid IRS form called a W-9 and thus would look passingly familiar to those accustomed to dealing with IRS forms. Those less familiar with tax forms would still be taken in by the ruse because the phony request for detailed information appeared genuine. The letter would say the recipient must return the completed by fax within seven days or the government would withhold 31% of the interest on his bank accounts. The happy prospect of keeping one-third of the taxpayer's earned interest out of the government's hands and the fear-inspiring impetus of having to act quickly (within seven days, remember) would imbue this combination of promise and threat with an untold power to persuade, one that would likely temporarily blind the victim to what was really going on. The real form (the W-9) doesn't ask for account numbers, but the bogus form (the W-9095) did. It also asked for marital status, place of birth, parents' names, bank account number, passport information, work history, and passwords;  in other words, just about everything a con artist would need to financially impersonate the victim.  Similar fake forms were labeled W-88BEN and W-8888. (Banks use a legitimate W-88BEN to confirm non-U.S. customers can remain exempt from tax reporting requirements, but the real W-88BEN does not ask for the depth of taxpayer information the fake one did.) There's no way of telling how many folks have fallen for this trick or what the provision of their private information cost them in cold hard currency, but it doesn't take great imagination to picture what use any halfway skilled swindler could put such information to. Armed with all the completed forms gave, it would be child's play to empty bank accounts and apply for charge cards and loans in the pigeon's name. This con contains the potential to be highly effective because little about it looks out of place or obviously wrong. Folks trust their banks (they leave their money there, after all), so letters from such bastions of trust asking recipients to complete yet another tax form won't be greeted with skepticism, especially when those letters also contain the news that doing so is eminently to the benefit of the account holders. Likewise, that an IRS form would ask for everything short of shoe size wouldn't strike many as in any way unusual. About the only part of the transaction that might cause an eyebrow or two to be lifted is the insistence that the completed forms be faxed to the IRS rather than returned by mail. Yet once again, in a world now accustomed to the notion that personal tax returns can be e-filed with taxpayers' signatures faxed in support of the electronically transferred returns, faxing doesn't seem terribly out of place. It always pays to be wary. Make the time to call your bank when asked for such information, even if it appears it's the IRS doing the asking. Better to waste five minutes on the phone convincing your bank that you're an idiot than keeping those five minutes to yourself and proving that you are. Those who have received questionable documents that purported to be from the IRS or who have completed such forms and faxed them off should call 1-800-829-0433, the IRS hotline. They should also contact the various credit bureaus to alert them that their identities might have been stolen and to be on the look out for newly acquired charge cards under their name. Barbara "credit carded" Mikkelson Additional information:        2002 Alerts   (Controller of the Currency Administrator of National Banks)   Last updated:  3 February 2010    Sources:   Caldwell, Bert.   "Fake IRS Forms Sent to Taxpayers."   The [Spokane] Spokesman-Review.  3 May 2002  (p. A12).     Hadley, Jane.   "New Mail Scam Aims to Steal Your Identity and Money."   The Seattle Post-Intelligencer.  2 May 2002  (p. A1).     Stefanova, Kristina.  "Scam's Scope National: Form Targets Bank Account Holders."   The Washington Times.  12 April 2002.     Svaldi, Aldo.   "Identity-Theft Scam Uses Fake IRS Form, Feds Say."   The Denver Post.  30 April 2002  (p. C1).     The Associated Press.  "Fake IRS Form Part of Identity Scam."   13 April 2002.     [Greensboro] News & Record.  "Fake IRS Form Seeks Personal Information."   14 April 2002  (p. B2).     Pittsburgh Post-Gazette.  "Your Money: Tax Fraud."   6 May 2002  (p. B3).     The Washington Post.  "After Getting Blasted By S . . . ."   5 May 2002  (p. H4). On Nov. 22, 2022, we received an email from a reader who spotted a survey scam on the Facebook page named "Groceries today" that promised a "$500 store credit" or "$500 Walmart credit" to users.  We were unable to find the origins of the picture of the Walmart employee and the carful of groceries, but it likely showed products provided in the past as part of a charity food drive. In other words, the person pictured in the post had nothing to do with the scam. Survey scams usually begin on social media with a big promise, then ask users who clicked on the posts to fill out a seemingly endless amount of online surveys with further promises of other prizes. This survey scam that promised a $500 store credit to Walmart asked for personal information and perhaps even financial data. We strongly recommend against believing in any offers that don't come from a company's official social media pages. As we've mentioned in the past, some survey scams often begin with a big promise of $750 delivered via PayPal or Cash App. Usually, the scammers who create the Facebook posts are hoping that users sign up for accounts on various websites that pop up during the survey scams, as they might land them small amounts of referral commission. At the same time, survey scams also have a chance of being quite dangerous,reported AARP.org: reported AARP.org Amid questions about the supposed subject, sham surveys solicit personal or financial information, such as a credit card number to pay a shipping fee for your prize  something a legit survey will not do. They might trick you into signing up for a"free trial" offerthat's actually a costly subscription for adietary supplementor other product. Clicking on the link might also launch malware that can scrape sensitive data from your device. Either way, the scammers get information they can use foridentity theftor sell on to other bad actors. Some major retailers, including Amazon and Walmart, do offer gift cards as prizes for customers who complete online surveys about their shopping experience, but those companies say they will never ask participants to provide sensitive data. We strongly advise all of our readers to never click any links in offers that seem too good to be true. Also, we recommend sharing this article with family members or friends who often shop at Walmart, as they might be more susceptible to falling for the scams. Note: Walmart does give away gift cards in an official and recurring promotion, but they don't use Facebook to do it. does give away gift cards in an official and recurring promotion "Beware of Survey Scams That Require Personal Information."AARP, 1 Sept. 2021, https://www.aarp.org/money/scams-fraud/info-2021/survey.html. "Groceries Today." Facebook, https://www.facebook.com/Groceries-today-107660332152080/. Liles, Jordan. "Was Walmart Giving Away $1,000 Gift Cards by Email?" Snopes, 7 Mar. 2022, https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/walmart-1000-gift-cards/. Claim:  The United States Postal Service is discontinuing the "Black Heritage" series of stamps and destroying the remaining stock. Status:  False. Example:  [Collected on the Internet, 2000] Subject: Discontinuing and DESTROYING Black Stamps I was in the post office this morning and requested the African American stamp. The postal worker informed me that they will DESTROY all remaining African American Heritage stamps at the end of the month instead of following their usual process of selling them until they are depleted. She also said that they were asking patrons to complain to the Post Master and gave me a complaint form. Needless to say, I've already completed the form. The post office is considering discontinuing Black Heritage Stamps because they aren't selling.  Instead of taking the path of least resistance and accepting the love, flag, rose or teddy bear stamps that they offer you automatically, request African-American stamps each and every time you mail something.  If we don't buy them, nobody will. Perhaps you think it's not a major issue. However, it is a part of the ongoing effort to assert ourselves as a major economic force in this society. PASS THE MESSAGE ON AND LET'S KEEP BLACK STAMPS IN CIRCULATION. Origins:  Many of the messages we receive these days are expressions of the feeling that blacks are being overlooked and slighted by white Americans, particularly in the economic arena.  A common theme is    that major companies decline to advertise in media that reach primarily black audiences because theyfail to recognize both the social desires and income levels of black Americans.  (In other words, it's racism in another form: either the people running these companies are so prejudiced that they're willing to sacrifice revenues by not selling to blacks, or they don't realize that blacks are not one stereotypical bloc of uneducated, poor, blue-collar workers who couldn't possibly aspire to the finer things in life  or afford them even if they did.)  As well, other messages convey the sentiment that the roles of blacks in American history have been ignored or minimalized.  (See the controversy over the origins of the Statue of Liberty for one example.)  This current message touches on both these themes: postage stamps honoring the heritage and contributions of black Americans are being discontinued and destroyed for economic reasons: because people just don't buy them.   Statue of Liberty Whether the beliefs expressed in the previous paragraph are right or wrong (and that is not the issue here), this message about the end of the Black Heritage series of postage stamps is undeniably false. The United States Postal Service is neither discontinuing the Black Heritage series nor planning to destroy the remaining stock of Black Heritage stamps.  The series has been going strong for 31 years now, and the 2008 entry (the 31st stamp in this series) features civil rights leader Charles W. Chesnutt.  There is no end to the Black Heritage series in sight, no matter how well or poorly the stamps sell. As Executive Director of Stamp Services Azeezaly S. Jaffer was quoted as saying in an official official media statement: Charles W. Chesnutt official media statement Given the popularity and importance of the Black Heritage stamps, there are no plans to discontinue the series. It is unfortunate that such rumors have spread, and we hope that the Postal Services commitment to honoring the historical achievements and contributions of African Americans on stamps will dispel any further concerns This policy was confirmed yet again by the USPS in a March 2005 press release: press release To dispel recurring rumors that its long-standing Black Heritage stamp series will be discontinued, a senior postal official reiterated the Postal Service's continued commitment to honoring African Americans on stamps. "Nothing could be further from the truth. These rumors continue to resurface around this time of year," explained David Failor, Executive Director of Stamp Services, U.S. Postal Service, referring to the deluge of inquiries the Postal Service receives shortly after a Black Heritage stamp issuance.  He said, "As a main component of our annual stamp program, the Black Heritage series is alive and well, and here to stay. We're already looking forward to announcing next year's honoree this fall."  The myth started several years ago through an anonymous email that alerted recipients to buy Black Heritage stamps before Post Offices take them off sale due to lack of demand. Exhorting people to buy Black Heritage stamps as a way of honoring the memories of the individuals they depict (or Black Americans in general) is a worthy cause.  Coaxing people into buying them based on misinformation is not. Last updated:  30 November 2007 For years, internet users have shared a fake quote that was attributed to Anne Frank that said, "Look at how a single candle can both defy and define the darkness." Anne Frank Frank became a famous and important historical figure after her death in early 1945 for writing a series of works, most famously her diary, while she hid from Nazis during World War II. death a series of works  A statue of Anne Frank in Amsterdam, November 8, 1963. (Photo by Keystone/Getty Images)  A Google search showed results for the fake candle quote with Frank's name on various websites, including AZQuotes, Goodreads, QuoteFancy, and QuotePark. AZQuotes Goodreads QuoteFancy QuotePark We also found a seemingly endless wall of quote memes on Google Images:  Courtesy: Google Images  According to Google Books, the quote has been printed and attributed to Frank in numerous works, the first of which appeared to be published no earlier than 2013. This would be a red flag in the case of any purported decades-old quote. According to Google Books Facebook was littered with the fake quote, including several posts made in early January 2022, the same time when this fact check was first published. was littered with the fake quote several posts made in early January 2022 In 2018, "Harry Potter" author J. K. Rowling tweeted the fake Frank candle quote: tweeted  Courtesy: @jk_rowling/Twitter  The official Twitter account for the country of Israel once tweeted it: tweeted  Courtesy: @Israel/Twitter  In fact, the fake candle quote spread so much across the internet that even the U.S.-based Anne Frank Center for Mutual Respect once accidentally shared it by mistake: Anne Frank Center shared  Courtesy: @AnneFrankCenter/Twitter  This fact check does not serve to fault any of the institutions that are dedicated to educating the world about Frank's life and the history of the Holocaust. Rather, perhaps the debunking of fake quotes such as this one could potentially inspire readers to share more of the genuine passages from her writing. Holocaust Anne Frank Fonds is a foundation that was started by Anne's father, Otto Frank. Before his death in 1980, he designated it as his "universal heir and legal successor." Anne Frank Fonds A spokesperson for the foundation confirmed to us that the candle quote was fake and that there was no record of Frank ever having said the words, "Look at how a single candle can both defy and define the darkness." We also did not find any trace of the quote in Frank's works, nor did we find if it had been misattributed from a different author. The spokesperson said that fake quotes are "an ongoing battle" and that "new false quotes tend to pop up every so often."  Photographs of Anne Frank are on display at the Jewish Museum in Frankfurt am Main, western Germany, on October 21, 2020. (Photo by STR / AFP via Getty Images)  We previously debunked another fake Frank quote that read, "Dead people receive more flowers than the living ones because regret is stronger than gratitude." There's no evidence that she ever said these words. debunked Cinco de Mayo and St. Patrick's Day share many common elements from an American perspective: Although neither is a legal holiday in the United States, they are both nonetheless widely observed as celebrations of another nation's culture, both occasions are marked with parties featuring national music and cuisine (and involving a good deal of drinking), both events have become heavily commercialized, and most Americans have little idea what either holiday is actually about. St. Patrick's Day little idea either holiday Many Americans mistakenly believe that Cinco de Mayo ("May 5th") is the Mexican equivalent of the United States' Fourth of July holiday  a date marking the official casting off of colonial rule via the announcement of a new independent country. However, the Mexican version of Independence Day is celebrated on September 16, for it was on that date in 1810 that the commencement of the war for Mexican independence from Spanish rule was pronounced in the small town of Dolores by Miguel Hidalgo y Costilla -- an event now referred to as the "Grito de Dolores" ("Cry of Dolores") or "El Grito de la Independencia". Grito What Cinco de Mayo really commemorates is the Mexican victory against French forces led by Emperor Napoleon III in the Battle of Puebla, which took place on 5 May 1862. The French had invaded Mexico at Veracruz in 1861 (while the United States was preoccupied with its own Civil War) with the intent of establishing a dominance in Mexico that would favor French interests.  After beating President Benito Jurez and his government into retreat, the French army moved on from Veracruz toward Mexico City, where they encountered heavy resistance from Mexican forces just outside the city of Puebla. Despite possessing an overpowering superiority in weaponry and numbers (6,000 well-armed French troops battled 2,000 poorly-equipped Mexican troops), the French were forced to retreat after a full day of fighting. Although the French later overran Puebla, conquered Mexico City, and installed Emperor Maximilian I as ruler of Mexico, the Mexican victory at the Battle of Puebla was celebrated for its importance in symbolizing Mexican unity, pride, and determination in the face of overwhelming odds. (The event is roughly equivalent in national lore to the American celebration of the Battle of the Alamo: although the Texan defenders of the Alamo Mission near San Antonio de Bxar were decisively defeated by Mexican forces in 1836, the tenacity and courage of the 200 or so combatants who fought to their deaths against about 1,800 Mexican troops served as inspiration for the Texan defeat of the Mexican Army at the Battle of San Jacinto a few months later.) The other common misconception about Cinco de Mayo among Americans is that if the holiday is so well known here in the U.S., it must be a really big deal in Mexico itself. But Cinco de Mayo is not a national holiday in Mexico: It is celebrated in Mexico, but it's only an official holiday in the Mexican states of Puebla and Veracruz, and the biggest Cinco de Mayo celebrations typically occur not in Mexico but in U.S. cities with large Hispanic populations such as Los Angeles. And just as St. Patrick's Day has long been observed throughout America in areas without significant Irish populations, Cinco de Mayo is now also commonly celebrated in towns across the U.S. that are predominantly non-Hispanic. Many social media users have expressed disbelief and dismay at a graphic indicating that the United States had been deemed "one of the ten worst countries in the world to be a woman," rounding out a list headed by India, Afghanistan, Syria, Somalia, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Democratic Republic of Congo, Yemen, and Nigeria:  The basis of the graphic was a 2018 survey compiled by the Thomson Reuters Foundation, the "charitable arm of Thomson Reuters, that covers humanitarian news, women's rights, trafficking, property rights, climate change and resilience." survey This item is therefore superficially "true" in the sense that it reflects the results of a genuine poll, but of course the significance of any particular survey or poll depends upon its methodology. In this case, Thomson Reuters polled 548 experts on women's issues by phone and in person between March 26 and May 4, 2018. The respondents were evenly spread across Europe, Africa, the Americas, South East Asia, South Asia, and the Pacific, and included "aid professionals, academics, healthcare staff, non-government organisation workers, policy-makers, development specialists and social commentators." According to Thomson Reuters, "the survey asked respondents which five of the 193 United Nations member states they thought were most dangerous for women and which country was worst in terms of healthcare, economic resources, cultural or traditional practices, sexual violence and harassment, non-sexual violence and human trafficking." Still, Americans (and others) were left puzzled by how the United States could rank so highly in such a survey, given that many of the phenomena that contributed to the other countries' being declared dangerous and unhealthy places for women  female infanticide, forced marriages, sex slavery, domestic servitude, death by stoning, civil war, restricted access to health care  have little to no prevalence in the U.S. The explanation offered by Thomson Reuters was that the influence of the #MeToo movement and the Time's Up campaign, which were running concurrently with the poll, influenced the results sufficiently to push the U.S. into the top 10: Time's Up Experts said the surprise addition of the United States in the top 10 most dangerous countries for women came down to the #MeToo and Time's Up campaigns against sexual harassment and violence that have dominated headlines for months. "People want to think income means you're protected from misogyny, and sadly that's not the case," said Cindy Southworth, executive vice president of the Washington-based National Network to End Domestic Violence. "We are going to look back and see this as a very powerful tipping point ... We're blowing the lid off and saying '#Metoo and Time's Up'." Reuters.  "Factbox: Which Are the World's 10 Most Dangerous Countries for Women?"
  25 June 2018. Goldsmith, Belinda and Meka Beresford.  "India Most Dangerous Country for Women with Sexual Violence Rife."
  Thomson Reuters Foundation.  26 June 2018. In the summer of 2020, amid a new wave of nationwide protests over racial injustice and police brutality, readers inquired about the accuracy of online articles and social media posts that claimed a convicted terrorist sat on the board of directors of a left-leaning organization that provides fundraising and administration services for the Black Lives Matter movement. On July 8, 2020, Twitter user @asdomke posted a widely-shared tweet that read:  "This is convicted terrorist Susan Rosenberg, she sits on the Board of Directors for the fundraising arm of Black Lives Matter. She was convicted for the 1983 bombing of the United States Capitol Building, the U.S. Naval War College and the New York Patrolmen's Benevolent Assoc."   In June, the website of right-leaning talk radio host Wayne Dupree posted an article with the headline "Report: Leader of Group Handling 'BLM Fundraising' is a Convicted Terrorist Who Carried Out Bombings in NYC and DC." Similar articles were published by the Daily Caller (an article that was republished by the Western Journal) and on the website of former Fox News pundit Bill O'Reilly.  article Daily Caller Western Journal Bill O'Reilly On July 9, 2020, Tucker Carlson ran a segment about Rosenberg's past and her connection to Thousand Currents and the Black Lives Matter movement on his Fox News show.  segment Those posts and articles were largely based on a June 24, 2020, report published by the right-leaning Capital Research Center, which carried the headline "A Terrorist's Ties to a Leading Black Lives Matter Group." The report went on to state that: report Some conservatives have begun speculating the unrest in American cities -- even as late as Monday night in Washington, DC as protestors unsuccessfully worked to tear down a statue of Andrew Jackson and set up an autonomous zone across the street from the White House -- may in part be an attempt to affect the upcoming presidential election, with the chaos and violence intended to make it as difficult as possible for Donald Trump to win a second term. Lending credence to this idea is the fact that at least one board member of the group fiscally sponsoring the most organized part of the Black Lives Matter movement, who have been involved in most of the activity surrounding the current unrest -- tried the same thing almost 40 years ago during Ronald Reagans reelection campaign. And it landed her in federal prison for 16 years. If there were any question whether Black Lives Matter has ideological ties to the Communist terrorists of the 1960s, the story of Susan Rosenberg should put that issue to bed... Rosenberg, who started out as a member of the 1960s revolutionary group Weather Underground, graduated into even more violent, and arguably successful, forms of terrorism in the 1970s and 1980s -- including bombings at an FBI field office in Staten Island, the Navy Yard Officers Club in Washington, DC, and even the U.S. Capitol building, where she damaged a representation of the greatest of the Democrat defenders of slavery, John C. Calhoun. She currently serves as human and prisoner rights advocate and a vice chair of the board of directors of Thousand Currents. Thousand Currents is undoubtedly very closely linked to the Black Lives Matter Global Network Foundation, a Delaware-registered entity that is one of the leading formal embodiments of the broader Black Lives Matter movement. The Thousand Currents website outlines the relationship between the two entities: outlines "In 2016, BLM Global Network approached Thousand Currents to create a fiscal sponsorship agreement. Thousand Currents, a 501(c)(3) tax-exempt nonprofit organization, provides the legal and administrative framework to enable BLM to fulfill its mission. Fiscal sponsorship is a common structure utilized by nonprofit organizations. Oftentimes, nonprofit initiatives seek fiscal sponsorship to be able to have the fiscal sponsor handle administrative operations while the organization focuses on its programs and builds up its own organizational infrastructure. In this capacity, we provide administrative and back office support, including finance, accounting, grants management, insurance, human resources, legal and compliance." Descriptions of Thousand Currents as an organization which "handles fundraising" for Black Lives Matter were therefore accurate. As recently as June 24, the date on which the Capital Research Center published their report, the Thousand Currents website listed Susan Rosenberg as vice chair of the organization's board of directors, describing her as a "human and prison rights advocate and writer." The entire "board of directors" page has since been removed from the site. describing According to tax documents obtained by Snopes, Rosenberg sat on the board of directors during the 2015 and 2016 financial years, and was elevated to the position of vice chair in 2017. We asked Thousand Currents for the dates of Rosenberg's tenure on the board, and as its vice chair, and invited the organization to comment on the ongoing controversy, and will update this story if we receive a response. 2015 2016 2017 Rosenberg's prominent position within Thousand Currents is clear, as are that organization's close links to the Black Lives Matter Global Network (and thereby the broader Black Lives Matter movement). However, the question of whether she should be described as a "terrorist" or "convicted terrorist" is much more complicated. Originally from New York City, Rosenberg was an active member of several revolutionary left-wing groups and movements during the 1960s, 1970s and 1980s. In November 1984, she was arrested in Cherry Hill, New Jersey after police said she and an associate, Timothy Blunk, were found transferring 740 pounds of explosives, an Uzi submachine gun, an M-14 rifle, a rifle with a telescopic sight, a sawed-off shotgun, three 9-millimeter handguns and boxes of ammunition from a car into a storage locker. said Rosenberg was tried and convicted on the following charges: "Conspiracy to possess unregistered firearms, receive firearms and explosives shipped in interstate commerce while a fugitive, and unlawfully use false identification documents ...; possession of unregistered destructive devices, possession of unregistered firearm (two counts) ...; carrying explosives during commission of a felony ... ; possession with intent to unlawfully use false identification documents...; false representation of Social Security number, possession of counterfeit Social Security cards." charges In May 1985, New Jersey U.S. District Court Judge Frederick Bernard Lacey gave Rosenberg and Blunk the maximum available sentence of 58 years each in prison. On Jan. 20, 2001, his last day in office, President Bill Clinton commuted Rosenberg's sentence, and she was released from prison. sentence commuted According to several contemporaneous news reports, Rosenberg had previously been charged with multiple offenses as part of a major 1982 conspiracy case against several prominent left-wing revolutionaries. Along with the others, Rosenberg was charged with conspiracy and racketeering offenses in connection with the following incidents: incidents The most high-profile incident was the October 1981 Brink's robbery in Nyack, New York. Several members of the Weather Underground and Black Liberation Army groups were accused of having orchestrated and carried out the violent robbery of a Brink's armored vehicle at the Nanuet Mall, stealing total of $1.6 million. In the course of a police chase and shootout, two police officers and a Brink's guard were killed. The money was recovered. Specifically, Rosenberg was accused of having driven one of the getaway cars. killed accused After Rosenberg's arrest in New Jersey in 1984, and her subsequent conviction and imprisonment on the weapons and explosives possession charges, prosecutors dropped the conspiracy and racketeering charges against her, and she was never tried or convicted in relation to the 1981 Brink's robbery, the 1979 Shakur prison escape, or other armed robberies. The prosecutor who oversaw the decision not to proceed with that case, in the 1980s, was Rudolph Giuliani, then U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York. After Rosenberg's release in 2001, Giuliani, by then Mayor of New York City, told the New York Times the charges were dropped because her existing 58-year prison sentence made a further prosecution unnecessary. told In 1988, Rosenberg was charged with aiding and abetting a series of bombings which took place between 1983 and 1985, at the Capitol building, Fort McNair, the Washington Navy Yard Computer Center and the Washington Navy Yard Officers' Club, all in Washington, D.C. Bombs were also planted, but did not detonate, at several sites in New York: the FBI's office in Staten Island, the Israeli Aircraft Industries building, the South African consulate and the New York Patrolmen's Benevolent Association. However, prosecutors dropped those charges in 1990 as part of a plea deal involving other suspects in the bombings. As a result, Rosenberg was never tried or convicted on any charges relating to the 1983-1985 bombing campaign. The claim, made in @asdomke's tweet, that Rosenberg was "convicted of" several 1983 bombings, was therefore false. The claim in the headline of an article on Wayne Dupree's website that Rosenberg "carried out" the bombings stands in contrast to the fact that she was never tried or convicted in relation to those incidents. dropped During her 16-year incarceration, Rosenberg renounced the use of political violence, though her political beliefs appear not to have changed significantly. In a radio interview shortly after her release in January 2001, she said she "rejects" the "potential for violence in my past actions," saying her view of violence as a strategic tool had undergone an "enormous change," but that she retained "a political view that is certainly progressive and radical in a certain sense." interview In her 2011 memoir, she recounted what she said during an unsuccessful 1997 parole application: recounted "I outlined my criminal acts and what I felt about them then and now. I talked about the political ethos of the 1960s and how it had led me and my associates into thinking our activities were acceptable. I detailed how sorry I felt now, how I accepted responsibility for my past actions, and how I would never commit any crimes again. I tried to put my life within the context of the historical period when many Americans thought they could change the world and end war and racism and poverty. I tried to distinguish between my core values and my embrace of the use of political violence. I stated that I now rejected the use of violence. I meant all that I said." There is no single, universally-accepted definition of terrorism, so any use of that label requires a degree of explanation or justification. One basis upon which one might reasonably describe a person as a terrorist is if they have been convicted of terrorist offenses. That is not true of Rosenberg, who was convicted only of weapons and explosives possession and fraudulent document possession, after her arrest in New Jersey 1984. She pleaded not guilty to charges relating to the 1980s bombing campaign, and those charges against her were dropped, and she has denied any involvement in the 1979 Shakur prison break and 1981 Brink's robbery, with those charges also having been dropped. not guilty denied The United States Code defines "domestic terrorism" (as distinct from "international terrorism") as follows: defines "... Activities that (A) involve acts dangerous to human life that are a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or of any State; (B) appear to be intended (i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population; (ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or (iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping; and (C) occur primarily within the territorial jurisdiction of the United States ..." However, that definition was only added in 1992, years after Rosenberg was convicted of weapons and explosives possession and charged for her alleged role in the 1983-1985 bombing campaign, and her alleged role in a series of armed robberies by left-wing revolutionaries. added In any event, despite the existence of a definition of domestic terrorism in federal law, a discrete criminal offense of domestic terrorism does not exist, and did not exist in the 1980s. As a result, even if Rosenberg's activities perfectly met the definition of domestic terrorism currently set out in federal law, and even if that definition existed in the 1980s, she could not have been charged with, tried for and convicted of domestic terrorism as such does not exist In the 1988 indictment relating to the 1983-1985 bombing campaign, prosecutors accused Rosenberg and others of trying "to influence, change and protest policies and practices of the United States Government concerning various international and domestic matters through the use of violent and illegal means." That language is remarkably similar to that found in the present U.S. Code definition of domestic terrorism as seeking to "influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or (iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping ..." accused Examining the 1980s bombings retrospectively, one might very well be justified as describing them as a campaign of domestic terrorism, even if prosecutors were not in a position to hang that label on them at the time. However, the charges against Rosenberg were dropped anyway, and she was never convicted in relation to the bombing campaign. In her memoir, Rosenberg wrote of her 1984 arrest in New Jersey that "there was no immediate, specific plan to use the explosives" with which she and Blunk were caught. However, it's clear they were transporting and transferring them for a purpose that was at the very least broadly associated with the group's wider mission of opposing various U.S. government policies and carrying out a socialist uprising. "We were stockpiling arms for the distant revolution that we all had convinced ourselves would come soon," she added. wrote Earlier in her book, Rosenberg indicated that she was comfortable, at least at one point in time, with bombing government buildings: "We thought that by taking armed actions against government property (including bombing unoccupied government buildings), we would show that despite the power of the state, it was possible to oppose it." indicated One could reasonably argue that Rosenberg's actions in the explosives possession case served her and her comrades' overarching mission of militant opposition to U.S. government policy and broader power structures and were in keeping with the group's (if not Rosenberg's) proven record of using bomb attacks to influence the wider American public and advance their cause. As such, a supportable (though not definitive) case exists for claiming that the crimes of which Rosenberg was convicted in 1985 were indeed acts of domestic terrorism. Crane, Missy. "Report: Leader of Group Handling 'BLM Fundraising' is a Convicted Terrorist Who Carried Out Bombings in NYC and DC."
 WayneDupree.com. 28 June 2020. Kerr, Andrew. "A Convicted Terrorist Sits on Board of Charity Handling Black Lives Matter Fundraising."
 The Daily Caller. 27 June 2020. O'Reilly, Bill. "Does Karl Marx Matter?"
 BillOReilly.com. 5 July 2020. Walter, Scott. "A Terrorist's Ties to a Leading Black Lives Matter Group."
 Capital Research Center. 24 June 2020. Raab, Selwyn. "Radical Fugitive in Brink's Robbery Arrested."
 The New York Times. 1 December 1984. The Associated Press/The Philadelphia Daily News. "2 Revolutionaries Get 58 Years Each in N.J."
 20 May 1985. Barbanel, Josh. "4 Indicted by U.S. in Escape of Joanne Chesimard in '79."
 The New York Times. 19 November 1982. Barbanel, Josh. "3 Killed in Armored Car Holdup."
 The New York Times. 21 October 1981. Gross, Jane. "Brink's Suspect Held Without Bail After She Refuses to Enter a Plea."
 The New York Times. 14 May 1985. Lipton, Eric. "Officials Criticize Clinton's Pardon of an Ex-Terrorist."
 The New York Times. 22 January 2001. The Associated Press/The New York Times. "3 Radicals Agree to Please Guilty in Bombing Case."
 6 September 1990. Rosenberg, Susan. "An American Radical..."
 Citadel Press. 2011. Legal Information Institute, Cornell Law School. "United States Code, Title 18, Part I, Chapter 113B, Section 2331 -- Definitions."
 Accessed 14 July 2020. McCord, Mary B. "It's Time for Congress to Make Domestic Terrorism a Federal Crime."
 Lawfare. 5 December 2018. Shenon, Philip. "U.S. Charges 7 in the Bombing at U.S. Capitol."
 The New York Times. 12 May 1988. In July 2016, a image picturing Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau was circulated with text stating that he had freed everyone imprisoned for marijuana offences and expunged their records, and that he was able to enact such a sweeping reform because Canada (unlike the U.S.) has no "prison for profit" facilities:  However, the claim originated not with a news report of any such reform act, but with an article published by the Global Sun on 3 July 2016: A press conference was held last night by The Liberal Party of Canada, on behalf of newly-elected Canadian prime minister, Justin Trudeau about future marijuana laws and regulations. 30 minutes into the conference, Trudeau announced the big news that all members of the parliament have agreed to  and that is pardoning all Canadian prisoners who have been convicted of a minor or major offence of marijuana. The Global Sun is a satirical publication that does not publish factual stories: The Global Sun is a satire website, articles/post on the website are all made-up stories and should not be taken seriously. Although Prime Minister Trudeau has not freed all those convicted of marijuana-related offences from prison, real news suggests Canada may be moving toward legalizing the drug in 2017: legalizing Canada's Liberal Party government will introduce a law next spring to legalize recreational marijuana, Health Minister Jane Philpott disclosed last week at the United Nations. She did not detail who would be allowed to grow or distribute cannabis products. Canada has a lot of options here, said RAND Drug Policy Research Center co-director Beau Kilmer. You have to pay attention to what's going to happen with the regulation and the taxes. That could really shape what happens in terms of people coming in from other countries. You have to decide whether you want to allow that. In October 2015, links began circulating on Facebook promising users a free carton of Marlboro cigarettes as a celebration of the brand's 100th anniversary:   The embedded links involved a variety of URLs (like the one above), some of which included entirely unrelated scam-bait terms like "iTunes" and "Apple." Users who clicked through to claim their purported free carton of Marlboros were routed to a page reading "Marlboro is Giving FREE Carton of Cigarettes to celebrate 100th Anniversary (150 Cartons Remaining)," which cloned the style of Facebook-based content (but was hosted on a non-Facebook URL):   As noted, URLs visible in the posts didn't point to any credible domains (or any sites linked to Altria, the brand's parent company). Marlboro didn't appear to even maintain any social media accounts, and the brand's official web site was locked to registered users only. So while no official refutations were issued, it seemed safe to assume cigarette brands largely refrained from participating on Facebook (or creating promotions that could land them afoul of strict tobacco advertising laws). By now, most social media users are familiar with survey scams; Kohl's, Costco, Home Depot, Lowe's, Kroger, Best Buy, Macy's, Olive Garden, Publix, Target, and Walmart are among retailers used as bait by scammers (seeking personal information and valuable page likes from Facebook users).  Kohl's Costco Home Depot Lowe's Kroger Best Buy Macy's Olive Garden Publix Target Walmart scammers A July 2014 article from the Better Business Bureau illustrated how folks might spot and avoid bad actors utilizing the reputations of brands on social media: article Don't believe what you see. It's easy to steal the colors, logos and header of an established organization. Scammers can also make links look like they lead to legitimate websites and emails appear to come from a different sender. Legitimate businesses do not ask for credit card numbers or banking information on customer surveys. If they do ask for personal information, like an address or email, be sure there's a link to their privacy policy. When in doubt, do a quick web search. If the survey is a scam, you may find alerts or complaints from other consumers. The organization's real website may have further information. Watch out for a reward that's too good to be true. If the survey is real, you may be entered in a drawing to win a gift card or receive a small discount off your next purchase. Few businesses can afford to give away $50 gift cards for completing a few questions. While Marlboro occasionally sends coupons to registered customers, tobacco advertising and promotion is heavily restricted (including a prohibition on free samples) and is highly unlikely to ever occur on social media in the manner posited above. restricted [05/05/20] CORRECTION: A previous version of this article incorrectly identified the date of Marlboro's 50th anniversary. That reference has been removed.