Was Pfizer COVID-19 Vaccine Development Funded by Trump Administration?
Snopes is still fighting an infodemic of rumors and misinformation surrounding the COVID-19 pandemic, and you can help. Find out what we've learned and how to inoculate yourself against COVID-19 misinformation. Read the latest fact checks about the vaccines. Submit any questionable rumors and advice you encounter. Become a Founding Member to help us hire more fact-checkers. And, please, follow the CDC or WHO for guidance on protecting your community from the disease.  fighting Find out Read Submit Become a Founding Member CDC WHO In the final months of 2020, scientists around the world raced to develop a vaccine for the novel coronavirus, which at that point had reached more than 50 million cases and resulted in the deaths of at least 1.2 million people. reached On Nov. 9, the biopharmaceutical company Pfizer announced in a news release  not a peer-reviewed journal that interim results testing the efficacy of vaccine candidate BNT162b2 showed a 90% success rate in protecting against COVID-19 infection, making it one of the first and most promising immunization potentials to date. news release And politicians were quick to weigh in. U.S. Vice President Mike Pence said in a tweet that the public-private partnership between U.S. President Donald Trump's administration and Pfizer led to the success of the vaccine:  While former U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Nikki Haley, whose policies closely align with Trump, furthered the notion that the vaccine was a part of the presidents Operation Warp Speed (OWS), an effort led by the Trump Administration to accelerate the testing of COVID-19 vaccines and therapeutics:  These claims are half-truths and misrepresent the role that OWS played in developing this particular vaccine candidate. Although the very preliminary findings of the vaccine look promising, a detailed look at the reported findings revealed that there is cause to be cautious about its availability and timeliness. A deal between OWS and Pfizer was announced in a July news release that outlined a bid by the U.S. government to receive 100 million doses (with the option to acquire up to 500 million more doses) of a vaccine  pending approval by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA)  for $1.95 billion. news release Today is a great day for science and humanity. The first set of results from our Phase 3 COVID-19 vaccine trial provides the initial evidence of our vaccines ability to prevent COVID-19, said Dr. Albert Bourla, Pfizer Chairman and CEO. We are reaching this critical milestone in our vaccine development program at a time when the world needs it most with infection rates setting new records, hospitals nearing over-capacity and economies struggling to reopen. With todays news, we are a significant step closer to providing people around the world with a much-needed breakthrough to help bring an end to this global health crisis." OWS is a joint effort by the Trump administration and the U.S. departments of Defense (DOD) and Health and Human Services (HHS) in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, launched on May 15 to accelerate the testing, supply, development, and distribution of safe and effective vaccines, therapeutics, and diagnostics by January 2021. Part of its mission is to also accelerate the vaccine approval process from the typical 73 months to just 13 months. Generally, receiving approval for a new drug or therapy is a long and tenuous process that can sometimes last years.  Department of Defense  Department of Defense   OWS offered $456 million to vaccine research and development projects by Johnson & Johnson for its Phase 1 clinical trials, as well as a total of $955 million to Moderna for late-stage clinical testing. However, the $1.95 billion allocated to Pfizer was for large-scale manufacturing and nationwide distribution. In short, the government intended to buy doses of a vaccine from Pfizer once an effective vaccine was made available, but it did not fund the research and development of Pfizer's vaccine. offered Johnson & Johnson Moderna Pfizer is proud to be one of various vaccine manufacturers participating in Operation Warp Speed as a supplier of a potential COVID-19 vaccine, Sharon Castillo, a Pfizer spokesperson, told Snopes in an email. While Pfizer did reach an advanced purchase agreement with the U.S. government, the company did not accept the Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority (BARDA) funding for the research and development process. All the investment for R&D and manufacturing has been made by Pfizer at risk. Technically, the work conducted by Pfizer and its partner, German drugmaker BioNTech, is an expansion of OWS and was operating under an agreement to meet the goal of OWS to deliver 300 million doses of a vaccine in 2021. As part of the agreement, the U.S. government would receive 100 million doses after the successful manufacturing of the vaccine and its approval by the FDA. However, that is not to say that the government had any hand in the research or development of the vaccine. Rather, it just agreed to buy the vaccines from the companies once they had gone through final approval. We made the early decision to begin clinical work and large-scale manufacturing at our own risk to ensure that product would be available immediately if our clinical trials prove successful and an Emergency Use Authorization is granted. We are honored to be a part of this effort to provide Americans access to protection from this deadly virus, said Dr. Albert Bourla, Pfizer chairman and CEO, at the time. Pfizer and BioNTech have similar agreements with the European Union. European Union The specific details about the Pfizer vaccine are not readily available. What we do know is that BNT162b2 is an mRNA-based vaccine that contained SARS-CoV-2 spike protein  the same protein that nearly all vaccination studies are targeting  that allows the virus to enter human cells and elicits an immune response from its host. The first doses administered to U.S. study participants, half of whom received the vaccine and the other half a placebo, were done so in May via intramuscular injection, which is similar to the flu shot. As part of a randomized placebo trial, two doses were each given three weeks apart with the vaccine not taking full effect until at least a week after the final dose. That means that a person couldnt expect protection until about a month after they were immunized. SARS-CoV-2 spike protein administered  A three-dimensional simulation of the coronavirus spike protein just before binding to the human cell receptor. University of Arkansas  University of Arkansas   An analysis of the interim results suggested that the vaccine is 90% effective in preventing the disease in study volunteers who did not have evidence of a prior COVID-19 infection  a rate that is similar to the measles vaccine administered in early childhood. No safety concerns were observed, but as the trial continues those findings could change. measles vaccine Thats because the results are based on limited data from an early clinical trial, and its unclear whether the vaccine prevents infection or just reduces symptoms. This is a very timely and encouraging development in the race to get an effective vaccine. It is difficult to fully evaluate the interim data without more information but it appears that the vaccine is able to protect against COVID-19 disease, said Lawrence Young, a professor of molecular oncology at Warwick Medical School. The big question is whether the vaccine can block virus infection and subsequent transmission. This additional data will be generated as further confirmed cases are identified and analyzed. said The promising results were met with both encouragement and skepticism by the broader scientific community, which by and large said that it remains cautiously optimistic. First and foremost, the results are interim and still await full trial results, meaning that these are non-peer-reviewed findings that were published midway through the clinical trial. Releasing the findings in the middle of a trial may further influence the integrity of the study, potentially biasing how future study participants respond or how their observations are reported. That could in turn make long-term follow-up with adequate randomization more challenging. There are other important limitations to the research that must be considered. Snopes read through the a 123-page study protocol document and found that while researchers describe the more than 43,000 participants as ethnically diverse," they do not specify other characteristics that may make an individuals infection more extreme, such as age or co-morbidities. And while it is written that study participants were between the ages of 18 and 85, their exact demographics were not known. Furthermore, individuals with a high risk of severe infection were excluded from the first phase of testing and the preliminary findings did not determine how long the vaccination lasts. protocol document  NurPhoto / Contributor  NurPhoto / Contributor Even after addressing the limitations, the results of an effective vaccine will not be felt immediately. With the best will in the world, this vaccine  or any other vaccine currently in trials  isnt going to change things for the majority of us this winter, said Elenor Riley, a professor of immunology and infectious disease at the University of Edinburgh. said So, we all need to accept that the current public health measures are going to remain in place at least until the end of the winter, possibly longer. But if this vaccine lives up to this early promise, and other vaccines work equally well, we may be able to look forward to a much better summer and autumn in 2021. If the vaccine is proven to be robustly effective at the wider community level, experts warn that there must still be public trust and buy-in  a challenge given some political leaders have been quick to dismiss the severity of the outbreak. Then there is the logistical challenge of manufacturing and distributing vaccines globally. First doses must be prioritized for health care workers and vulnerable populations. And a logistical challenge lies in manufacturing and rolling out a vaccine that needs to be stored and maintained at very low temperatures (-94 to -112 degrees Fahrenheit). As the world waits, experts warn that the promise of a vaccine cannot allow the findings to seed complacency and cause people to shy away from public health guidance. On the cusp of the vaccine candidate announcement, most nations in the world saw massive upticks in new coronavirus cases reported each day in October and November, according to data published by Johns Hopkins Coronavirus Resource Center. On Nov. 4, 5, and 6, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reported over 100,000 new coronavirus cases each day data reported Pfizer applied for an emergency use authorization (EUA) of the two-dose vaccine with the FDA on Nov. 20. At this point, researchers had collected two months of safety data required to use the drug in some cases. However, that does not constitute full approval of the drug. At the time of this writing, just 94 of the nearly 44,000 trial participants had contracted COVID-19 and the study is expected to continue until at least 164 people test positive. applied EUA Though the long-term safety and efficacy data remains to be seen, it is estimated that the manufacturers could produce globally up to 50 million vaccine doses in 2020 and up to 1.3 billion doses in 2021 to be distributed on an as-needed basis if a EUA is granted. The Pfizer study is estimated to be completed by Dec. 11, 2022. estimated Update [Nov. 20, 2020]: This article was updated to reflect Pfizers official filing of a EUA on Nov. 20.
Claim:  Comedian Bill Cosby's remarks form the basis of a 'We Can't Blame White People' essay. CORRECTLY ATTRIBUTED Example:  [Collected via e-mail, October 2005] They're standing on the corner and they can't speak English. I can't even talk the way these people talk: Why you ain't, Where you is, What he drive, Where he stay, Where he work, Who you be... And I blamed the kid until I heard the mother talk. And then I heard the father talk. Everybody knows it's important to speak English except these knuckleheads. You can't be a doctor with that kind of crap coming out of your mouth.  In fact you will never get any kind of job making a decent living. People marched and were hit in the face with rocks to get an education, and now we've got these knuckleheads walking around. The lower economic people are not holding up their end in this deal. These people are not parenting. They are buying things for kids. $500 sneakers for what? And they won't spend $200 for Hooked on Phonics.  I am talking about these people who cry when their son is standing there in an orange suit. Where were you when he was 2?  Where were you when he was 12? Where were you when he was 18 and how come you didn't know that he had a pistol? And where is the father?  Or who is his father? People putting their clothes on backward: Isn't that a sign of something gone wrong? People with their hats on backward, pants down around the crack, isn't that a sign of something? Or are you waiting for Jesus to pull his pants up? Isn't it a sign of something when she has her dress all the way up and got all type of needles [piercing] going through her body? What part of Africa did this come from?  We are not Africans. Those people are not Africans; they don't know a thing about Africa. With names like Shaniqua, Taliqua and Mohammed and all of that crap, and all of them are in jail. Brown or black versus the Board of Education is no longer the white person's problem. We have got to take the neighborhood back. People used to be ashamed.  Today a woman has eight children with eight different 'husbands'  or men or whatever you call them now. We have millionaire football players who cannot read. We have million-dollar basketball players who can't write two paragraphs. We as black folks have to do a better job. Someone working at Wal-Mart with seven kids, you are hurting us. We have to start holding each other to a higher standard. We cannot blame the white people any longer. Origins:  On 17 May 2004, at an NAACP event commemorating the 50th anniversary of Brown vs. Board of Education, the landmark Supreme Court decision that struck down school segregation, entertainer Bill Cosby gave a speech on the theme of blacks in America taking responsibility for their own lives. In his exposition to that assembly, the man known to television viewing audiences as lovable, kindly, yet permanently bemused patriarch Dr. Huxtable spoke harshly about his  speech  perception of the ills affecting black American society. He cited elevated school dropout rates for inner-city black students and criticized low-income blacks for not using the opportunities the civil rights movement has won for them. Blacks, by their unplanned pregnancies, poor parenting, lack of education, non-standard English, counter-culture dress, and involvement in crime, fail the black community as well as themselves, he said. That May 2004 speech has been both praised and condemned, and excerpts from it have been cobbled together (often in forms that rearrange and present them out of context) and circulated on the Internet under titles such as "We Can't Blame White People" and "Bill Has Done It Again."  Bill Cosby has not repudiated his controversial pronouncements or attempted to distance himself from them. Instead, he has chosen to expand upon his theme on subsequent occasions and to make himself a spokesperson for black self-empowerment through education and better parenting. In the service of this cause, he has drawn upon his celebrity to make his voice heard; but, unlike many entertainers who take to the soapbox to decry their btes noires, he brings far more to the podium than merely a recognizable face and a fan base. This man who is best known to the world as a comedian holds a doctorate in education. He is also highly regarded in the African-American community, where he and his wife, Camille, are prized for their philanthropy. (The Cosbys were present at the NAACP event that sparked the e-mail quoted above in order to be honored for their open-handed generosity in donating money to black colleges.)  Dr. Cosby defended his comments almost as soon as he made them. The day after, he said in an interview: "It makes no sense to claim that these are things that belong quietly in the black community. We have to figure out how do you get parenting back into the home. This is a problem of epic proportion." Then, in a statement released shortly after the NAACP gala, he made clear his purpose: "I think that it is time for concerned African-Americans to march, galvanize and raise  the awareness about this epidemic, to transform our helplessness, frustration and righteous indignation into a sense of shared responsibility and action." In another interview, he said: "I feel that I can no longer remain silent. If I have to make a choice between keeping quiet so that conservative media does not speak negatively or ringing the bell to galvanize those who want change in the lower economic community, then I choose to be a bell ringer."  In July 2004, he again took to the public soapbox to expound upon his thesis. In a speech given at Rev. Jesse Jackson's Rainbow Coalition/PUSH Coalition conference in Chicago, he said:  "You've got to stop beating up your women because you can't find a job, because you didn't want to get an education and now you're (earning) minimum wage. You should have thought more of yourself when you were in high school, when you had an opportunity." In December 2004, he addressed a panel at Medgar Evers College in Brooklyn, telling them: "Stop waiting for a leader. Get Up! Tell your friends. And if they can't get up, we must see about them because they are true victims ... It's time to study four hours a day with your children. Teach them how much they'll be worth when they have A's instead of F's." Barbara "sag your pants, sag your chances, says Cos" Mikkelson Variations:  An August 2009 variant prefaced Dr. Cosby's remarks with the following claim regarding their origins: Bill Cosby's response on the Bailout in America This is actually word for word what he said to a gathering of students who asked about the bailout in America Great response. This man deserves a Nobel Prize. As noted above, this item dates from a talk Dr. Cosby gave in 2004, so his words had nothing to do with any economic bailouts provided to businesses in 2009. Last updated:  19 May 2014    Harris, Paul.  "The Paradox That Divides Black America."   The Observer.  9 October 2005.    Mitchell, Mary.  "Cosby Gave It to Us Straight  and It's a Valuable Lesson."   Chicago Sun-Times.  3 June 2004  (p. 14).    O'Connor, Austin.  "A Beloved Comic, Now Crusader."   Lowell Sun.  18 November 2004.    Suggs, Ernie.  "Cosby, Unbowed, Defends Remarks."   Cox News Service.  2 July 2004.    Associated Press.  "Cosby Continues to Challenge African-Americans."   15 December 2004. In March 2021, new employment figures showed that the U.S. economy added 379,000 jobs in February, the first full month of Joe Biden's presidency. The news was greeted with cautious optimism, with the Wall Street Journal reporting that the gains had "set up a stronger recovery" for the spring of 2021, and The Washington Post reporting that the figures had "surpassed analysts' estimates." Politico wrote that: Wall Street Journal Washington Post Politico U.S. employers added a robust 379,000 jobs last month, the most since October and a sign that the economy is strengthening as confirmed viral cases drop, consumers spend more and states and cities ease business restrictions.The February gain marked a sharp pickup from the 166,000 jobs that were added in January and a loss of 306,000 in December. Yet it represents just a fraction of the roughly 10 million jobs that were lost to the pandemic. On social media, other observers  in particular those more broadly opposed to Biden  sought to undercut the significance of the jobs figures, claiming that a large majority of the increased employment came in one sector, namely food and beverage services. On Twitter, the libertarian economics blog Zerohedge wrote: wrote Of the 379K jobs added, 286K were waiters and bartenders.   The stockbroker and financial commentator Peter Schiff tweeted: tweeted 75% of the 379k jobs "created" in Feb. were waiters and bartenders returning to work. Since many restaurants and bars that closed will never reopen there's a limit to how long this can last... The right-wing British blog Guido Fawkes tweeted: tweeted "US economic recovery sees 379,000 jobs added this week, 286,000 were waiters and bartenders. God bless America and cheers!" Those figures were accurately stated, although "waiters and bartenders" was a reductive description of the occupations in question. As a result, we're issuing a rating of "true." The standard measure of job growth is "total nonfarm payroll employment, seasonally adjusted," a metric that is collated and published by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), each month. On March 5, the BLS published figures for the preceding month, February 2021, writing that: "Total nonfarm payroll employment rose by 379,000 in February..." In effect, this means that there were 379,000 more jobs in the United States in February than there were in January. published The BLS provides in-depth breakdowns of job gains or losses, and unemployment, including details on the demographic and sectoral contours of each month's data. According to the same set of figures, the "leisure and hospitality" sector gained 355,000 of the 379,000 total new jobs in February (Summary Table B).  Summary Table B Of those, 285,900 jobs were specifically in "food services and drinking places" (Table B-1). That's the source of the "286K" figure presented by Zerohedge. Those 285,900 jobs made up 75.4% of the total number of new jobs added in February, the percentage figure provided by Schiff in his tweet. Table B-1 However, the "food services and drinking places" subsector is made up of more than just "waiters and bartenders." The following is how that subsector is defined in the official North American Industry Classification System: defined Industries in the Food Services and Drinking Places subsector prepare meals, snacks, and beverages to customer order for immediate on-premises and off-premises consumption. There is a wide range of establishments in these industries. Some provide food and drink only; while others provide various combinations of seating space, waiter/waitress services and incidental amenities, such as limited entertainment. The industries in the subsector are grouped based on the type and level of services provided. The industry groups are full-service restaurants; limited-service eating places; special food services, such as food service contractors, caterers, and mobile food services; and drinking places. The BLS figures for February 2021 don't specify the proportion of those 285,900 jobs composed of specific occupations, but it's highly unlikely they were all "waiters and bartenders." In 2019, the most recent year for which figures are available, the following was the breakdown of occupations within the "food services and drinking places subsector": breakdown As can be seen from those figures, "waiters and waitresses" made up less than one-third of workers within that subsector. If the distribution of occupations was even broadly similar among the 285,900 new "food services and drinking places" jobs added in February, then it would appear highly unlikely that even a majority of those 285,900 new jobs were made up of "waiters and bartenders" alone. A radio host recently asked Gov. Rick Scott for an update on his trademark 7-7-7 plan -- creating 700,000 jobs in seven years in seven steps. (We're trackingthat promise on the Scott-O-Meter. )Scott said Floridas economy is getting better in a lot of ways.Were doing well. Were at a three-year low on our unemployment in this state... We generated around 100,000 net jobs so far, if you look at the federal numbers, he said in the April 18, 2012,interviewwith Orlando-based station WDBO. But if you look at the state numbers, about 230,000 people that were on unemployment when I took office are not on unemployment now.When you look around the state, tourism is up, the home markets up, home sales are up, home prices are up. So good things are happening, but we still have 900,000 people out of work, he said.What stuck out to us is his claim that 230,000 fewer people receive unemployment benefits than when he took office 15 months ago. That sounds like a drastic decrease, which Scott is taking credit for and in turn using as evidence that the states economy is improving.A spokeswoman with the states Department of Economic Opportunity, the agency that manages the unemployment compensation program, responded to our request about Scotts claim. Spokeswoman Nancy Blum said the number of people receiving unemployment compensation dropped from 561,736 on Jan. 31, 2011, to 345,052 on March 31, 2012. Thats a total decline of 216,684.Thats pretty close to about 230,000, which is the number Scott offered.Whether Scott is right to take credit for the decline -- and whether that is translating to a better Florida economy -- is more complicated.In 2011 and 2012, Scott and Florida lawmakers made a series of changes to the states unemployment compensation program that generally make it harder for people to receive benefits.Among them: Meanwhile, businesses got tax breaks. A 2012 bill reduces unemployment compensation taxes for businesses by at least $50 per employee, with savings of $276 million the first year.The Miami Workers Center asked the U.S. Department of Labors civil rights division to investigate Floridas unemployment compensation system over allegations that these changes act as barriers to people who deserve checks but cant get them for lack of computer access or reading skills. A Labor department spokesman told us the investigation is ongoing.The governors number in and of itself does not demonstrate any kind of economic recovery in Florida, said Valory Greenfield, staff attorney for Florida Legal Services, which represents the workers center. What it tells me based on our experience working with claimants is that fewer people who are potentially eligible are getting into the program.In fact, since August 2011 the department has denied 131,115 applicants for failing to comply with the new law, mostly for failing to fulfill the work search or the initial skills assessment.Those denials resulted in a $30.3 million savings. Economists said Scott's number, while accurate, isn't necessarily a great economic measure on its own. They also said it's too soon to tell if Florida's more stringent eligibility requirements play a big role in the declining number of recipients. Part of the drop-off could be attributed to people whose benefits have expired. Since December 2011, 30,600 people have exhausted all state and federal unemployment benefits, according to the department.So far I havent been able to see any hard data or evidence to quantify (either) effect, said Mekael Teshome, PNC Financial Services Group economist.Whats more relevant, Teshome said, is that jobless claims have been coming down since their peak in mid 2009, well before Scott took office. That somewhat undermines the idea that the drop is thanks to Scott. In fact, if you started counting in 2010 instead of 2011 when Scott took office, even fewer people -- 300,770 -- are receiving unemployment benefits. Some experts also pointed to the contracting size of the labor force, which helps to lower the unemployment rate but also indicates some people are no longer looking for work. About 15,000 people left the labor force from February, according to the statesMarch 2012 labor report. The 15,000-person drop in the labor force was part of the reason why the unemployment rate fall from 9.4 percent in February to 9 percent in March.Some of those are people whose benefits ran out and are now not looking for work, said Chris McCarty, director of the University of Floridas Bureau of Economic and Business Research. Some of those are retirees who have left the labor force permanently.Our rulingScotts claim that 230,000 fewer people are receiving unemployment benefits than when he entered office is pretty close to the actual drop (216,684). A couple of caveats here. The figure is not completely an indicator that the economy is improving, as Scott suggests, and is somewhat the result of a strict new state law. Also, the trend of jobless claims started falling in mid 2009, more than a year before Scott took office. That undercuts, to a point, the suggestion Scott should get the credit. Scotts statement is accurate but can use some additional information. Thats our definition of Mostly True. Urging the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas to choose a president who prioritizes jobs and rising wages for all communities, a Texas group said African Americans in the state have fared poorly on both fronts. The Texas Organizing Project,which saysit promotes social and economic equality for low- to moderate-income residents, joined labor unions in calling on the Fed, which has kept interest rates near zero since 2008 to spur business lending, not to raise interest rates and focus instead on full employment and higher wages, according to a March 4, 2015,news storyin theDallas Morning News. The project got our attention in a March 2015press releasewith this: Although the economy is adding jobs, the unemployment rate among blacks in Texas is 9.5% -- far more than double white unemployment -- and wages have fallen for black workers in Texas since 2000. We sought elaboration. Report offered as backup To our inquiry, a project spokesman, Daniel Barrera, pointed us by email to a March 2015 report by the Brooklyn-based Center for Popular Democracy, which says it promotes equity, opportunity and a dynamic democracy. The report,Wall Street, Main Street, and Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard: Why African Americans Must Not Be Left Out of the Federal Reserves Full-Employment Mandate,presents charts with the cited figures, which the Washington, D.C.-based Economic Policy Institute based on federal wage and employment data. One chart says the 2014 Texas black unemployment rate, 9.5 percent, was more than twice the states white unemployment rate of 3.7 percent; the 2014 Hispanic jobless rate was 5.3 percent. Conditions may have been better in Texas than elsewhere over those years. Nationally, according to the report, black-white unemployment disparities were greatest in Wisconsin (the black jobless rate was 4.6 times the white rate), and Minnesota (the black rate was 3.7 times the white rate). Another chart in the report indicates median hourly wages of Texas whites and Hispanics increased 8 and 2.9 percent, respectively, from 2000 to 2014 while median hourly wages of black Texans decreased 0.8 percent. We wondered if blacks saw falling wages by this measure all through those years. They did not: To our inquiry, the Economic Policy Institute provided year-by-year data showing the hourly median for black Texans decreased in six years while going up in eight years. Through the period, the real median wage for Texas African Americans bottomed out at $13.61 in 2008. It crested at $15.18 in 2012. Nationally at the end of the 15-year period, median real wages of African-American workers were down even more than in Texas alone, according to the report. That is, the national median real hourly wage for African Americans in 2014 was $13.97, about 3 percent less than the comparable median of $14.41 in 2000. Also, according to the report, other states had bigger differences between the first and last years studied. Source:Report, Wall Street, Main Street, and Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard: Why African Americans Must Not Be Left Out of the Federal Reserves Full-Employment Mandate,  Center for Popular Democracy, April 6, 2015  Source:Report, Wall Street, Main Street, and Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard: Why African Americans Must Not Be Left Out of the Federal Reserves Full-Employment Mandate,  Center for Popular Democracy, April 6, 2015 And why? Missing from the report: Why the differences between black workers and others? When we called to ask about that, Ady Barkan, a center official, suggested multiple longstanding factors including racism and differences between blacks and whites in education levels and rates of incarceration. By email, Barkan also pointed out aJuly 2011 issue paperfrom the liberal Center for American Progress noting, among reasons, that in each of the latest U.S. recessions, blacks were most often the first employees fired and the last ones hired (once each recession was ending). We asked the Economic Policy Institute why black unemployment in Texas appeared to be runninghigher than white and Hispanic unemployment. Josh Bivens,director of research and policy, said by email this may be because of discrimination in the labor market and pre-labor market. And whats the pre-labor market? Bivens said residential segregation can lead to blacks going tolower-quality primary and secondary schools, potentially resulting in lower levels of educational achievement and less lucrative jobs. We also sought an explanation of the cited differences from Chris King, director of the Ray Marshall Center for the Study of Human Resources at the University of Texas. By email, King said labor economists would  explain higher unemployment among blacks/African Americans nationally by pointing out that African Americans tend to have lower levels of education and be employed in lower-paying occupations and industries than whites. King elaborated by pointing out Bureau of Labor Statistics data covering 2011 showing black men more likely to work in service, production, transportation and material moving jobs. Conversely, he wrote, black men were less likely to work in professional and managerial jobs than whites; the picture was similar, he said, for black women. (See his full reply here.) Another view Separately to our inquiry, analyst Chuck DeVore of the conservativeTexas Public Policy Foundation suggested real median hourly wage estimates used by the institute may deliver an incomplete picture of economic well being. People dont live on wages alone, DeVore said, adding that a more accurate indicator of wealth would be household income, folding in Social Security, inheritances and any other financial assistance.See more on this aspect here. Our ruling The Texas Organizing Project said: The unemployment rate among blacks in Texas is 9.5% -- far more than double white unemployment -- and wages have fallen for black workers in Texas since 2000. Texas African Americans may not have been as bad off as residents of other states, and this claim doesnt acknowledge wage fluctuations over the years. Regardless, evidence shows Texas blacks having a higher unemployment rate than fellow Texans and also being the lone group with lower wages in 2014 than in 2000. We rate the statement True. TRUE The statement is accurate and theres nothing significant missing. Click here formoreon the six PolitiFact ratings and how we select facts to check. In February 2019, a rumor circulated on social media that Jussi Smollett, the Empire actor accused of making false claims about being the victim of a hate crime, was the nephew of Democratic U.S. senator (and presidential candidate) Kamala Harris of California. false claims Conservative radio host Kevin McCullough was one Twitter user who promoted the notion that Harris was Smollett's aunt:McCullough deleted his tweet after it generated a considerable amount of ridicule.The claim that Kamala Harris is Jussie Smollett's aunt was offered by a number of social media users, but the documentation presented with it was flimsy at best. In fact, the most substantial piece of "evidence" presented to support this conspiracy theory was that Smollett's mother and the California senator share a surname:Sharing a last name does not constitute proof that these two women are siblings, however. In fact, the surname "Harris" is one of the most popular surnames in the United States, ranking in the top 30 of the 2010 U.S. Census.  We've examined the biographical information available for these two public figures and found that their family branches simply do not intersect.  Kamala Harris, who was born in Oakland, California, has a single sibling, a younger sister named Maya who was born in Illinois. In order for Kamala to be Jussie Smollett's aunt, Maya -- who is only 16 years older than Smollett -- would have to his mother.  However, Smollett's mother's first name is Janet, not Maya, and she is from New Orleans, not Illinois.  Neither did we find any familial relationship between Kamala Harris and the Smollett family through marriage that might provide a basis for referring to Kamala as Jussie's "aunt." Jussie Smollett was born in Santa Rosa, California, to Janet (Harris) Smollett and Joel Smollett Sr. (who migrated to the U.S. from Russia and Poland).  Jussie said the family moved to Queens when he was two years old, and afterwards, according to the New York Times, he grew up "bouncing with [his] parents and siblings between New York and Los Angeles, as the kids pursued careers in modeling, acting and music."Neither Kamala Harris' husband, Douglas Emhoff, nor Maya Harris' husband, Tony West, has any discernible connection to Jussie's parents.   Emhoff hails from New York, graduated USC law school, is a prominent entertainment and intellectual property lawyer in Los Angeles, and has two grown children from a previous relationship.  West hails from San Francisco, graduated Stanford  law school, serves as general counsel and Chief Legal Officer at Uber, and has one daughter with his wife Maya.  Conservative radio host Kevin McCullough was one Twitter user who promoted the notion that Harris was Smollett's aunt: Kevin McCullough promoted   McCullough deleted his tweet after it generated a considerable amount of ridicule. deleted The claim that Kamala Harris is Jussie Smollett's aunt was offered by a number of social media users, but the documentation presented with it was flimsy at best. In fact, the most substantial piece of "evidence" presented to support this conspiracy theory was that Smollett's mother and the California senator share a surname: evidence   Sharing a last name does not constitute proof that these two women are siblings, however. In fact, the surname "Harris" is one of the most popular surnames in the United States, ranking in the top 30 of the 2010 U.S. Census.  We've examined the biographical information available for these two public figures and found that their family branches simply do not intersect.   2010 U.S. Census biographical information Kamala Harris, who was born in Oakland, California, has a single sibling, a younger sister named Maya who was born in Illinois. In order for Kamala to be Jussie Smollett's aunt, Maya -- who is only 16 years older than Smollett -- would have to his mother.  However, Smollett's mother's first name is Janet, not Maya, and she is from New Orleans, not Illinois.   Neither did we find any familial relationship between Kamala Harris and the Smollett family through marriage that might provide a basis for referring to Kamala as Jussie's "aunt." Jussie Smollett was born in Santa Rosa, California, to Janet (Harris) Smollett and Joel Smollett Sr. (who migrated to the U.S. from Russia and Poland).  Jussie said the family moved to Queens when he was two years old, and afterwards, according to the New York Times, he grew up "bouncing with [his] parents and siblings between New York and Los Angeles, as the kids pursued careers in modeling, acting and music." Neither Kamala Harris' husband, Douglas Emhoff, nor Maya Harris' husband, Tony West, has any discernible connection to Jussie's parents.   Emhoff hails from New York, graduated USC law school, is a prominent entertainment and intellectual property lawyer in Los Angeles, and has two grown children from a previous relationship.  West hails from San Francisco, graduated Stanford  law school, serves as general counsel and Chief Legal Officer at Uber, and has one daughter with his wife Maya. Emhoff West Sullivan, Kevin.  "'I Am Who I Am': Kamala Harris, Daughter of Indian and Jamaican Immigrants, Defines Herself Simply as 'American.'"
  The Washington Post.  2 February 2019. Ryzik, Melena.  "The Smollett Family Business: Acting and Activism."
  The New York Times.  9 March May 2016. Driscoll, Sharon.  "Tony and Maya: Partners in Public Service."
  Stanford Lawyer.  17 May 2010. Fearnow, Benjamin.  "Conservative Radio Host Peddles Conspiracy Theory That Kamala Harris Is Jussie Smollet's Aunt, Later Deletes Tweet."
  Newsweek.  24 February 2019. In May 2017, a Reddit user posted a graphic that purported to list all of President Trump's accomplishments during his first four months in office. It was then widely shared on social media: Reddit TRUMP ACCOMPLISHMENTS ..Retweet the hell out of this to annoy @ABC @CBS @cnn @cnbc @MSNBC @nbc @nytimes @washingtonpost #dishonestmedia. pic.twitter.com/ITArBQgcmJ @ABC @CBS @cnn @cnbc @MSNBC @nbc @nytimes @washingtonpost #dishonestmedia pic.twitter.com/ITArBQgcmJ  Small Biz for Trump (@SmallBiz4Trump) May 15, 2017 May 15, 2017  Creating homebrew visual aids touting the accomplishments (or failures) of top politicians is a popular online pastime, not least because it's a cheap and easy way to propagandize, and because there are no pesky standards of fairness and accuracy to meet. As we've noted with regard to previous specimens (for example, a late-2016 meme touting the alleged economic achievements of President Obama), the graphic format lends itself to the display of cherry-picked facts to make a simplistic case with no semblance of context or nuance. achievements In this case, the claim is that, despite all the carping in the mainstream press about "chaos" and "ineptitude" in the Oval Office, President Trump has actually accomplished quite a lot during his first four months as chief executive, and thus you will not find mention of major campaign promises Trump has had difficulty keeping so far, such as instituting a Muslim immigration ban and building a wall on the Mexican border. Also, since it's very much a partisan case being made, there will be disagreement over what constitutes an "accomplishment." Some feats, such as reducing unemployment, are uncontroversial, while others, such as dismantling entire government agencies, aren't likely to be regarded as accomplishments by those who find the functions of those agencies critical. Here are the claims: 4.4 percent - lowest since May 2007 As reported in the Washington Post, government data released on 5 May 2017 indicated that the national unemployment rate hit a new low in April: reported The U.S. job market rebounded strongly last month and the unemployment rate fell to the lowest level seen in a decade, government data released Friday morning showed, calming fears that had bubbled up in the past month about the state of the economy. Employers added 211,000 jobs in April as the unemployment rate ticked down to 4.4 percent, the lowest level since May 2007.  It bears pointing out that the jobless rate had already been on a steady decline since 2010. Further, unemployment hit a previous nine-year low of 4.6 percent in December 2016 when President Obama was still in office. It climbed back up to 4.8 percent in January, dipped to 4.7 percent in February, and to 4.5 percent in March 2017. unemployment To what degree short-term improvements in the economy since January can be attributed to a new chief executive whose economic policies remain nascent is perennially up for debate, though according to The New York Times' senior economic correspondent Neil Irwin, a "Trump effect" that is buoying corporate hiring policies after the election cannot be ruled out: according So does Mr. Trump deserve any credit for solid economic results? If you think the economy is driven by concrete, specific policies around taxes, spending, monetary policy and regulation, the answer is no. If you think that what really matters is the mood in the executive suite, then just maybe. SoftBank $50B Exxon $20B Hyundai $3.1B Apple $1B Chrysler $1B GM $1B Bayer AG $1BToyota $600M LG $250M This is a mostly-accurate, partial list of corporations who have announced investments in American facilities and/or jobs since the election of Donald Trump. With the exception of Bayer AG (which announced $8 billion in new investments, not $1 billion as claimed), the dollar amounts match those cited in press reports between January and April 2017 (sources: Softbank, Exxon Mobil Corp., Hyundai-Kia, Apple, Fiat Chrysler, General Motors, Bayer AG, Toyota, LG Electronics). Softbank Exxon Mobil Corp. Hyundai-Kia Apple Fiat Chrysler General Motors Bayer AG Toyota LG Electronics It's not necessarily accurate to characterize all of these commitments as "accomplishments" of President Trump, however. As CBS Moneywatch's Irina Ivanova reported in January 2017: reported Few of the jobs companies are promising to create in the U.S. can be attributed to a sudden renewed commitment to USA Inc. inspired by Trumps America First policies. Indeed, the businesses Trump has been quick to praise have been careful not to characterize their recent hiring announcements as new. And as usual with corporate investments of this scale, such plans are typically months  or even years  in the making, suggesting they long predate the presidential election. For example, Fiat Chrysler said their promise of a $1 billion investment in Michigan and Ohio plants, projected to create 2,000 jobs, was the "second phase" of an industrialization plan announced in 2016. GM's $1 billion investment was "several years in the making," according to sources cited by CBS. promise The largest of all the announced commitments, SoftBank's pledge of $50 billion, was also in the works long before Trump won the election: Another widely publicized corporate initiative that Trump trumpeted  a promise by SoftBank to create 50,000 high-tech jobs in the U.S.  was the result of a tech fund the company announced on Oct. 14  three weeks before the election. Given the massive tech industry in the U.S., economists say much of the planned $50 billion investment would have found its way to the states regardless of who occupied the White House. You dont just decide overnight to invest $3 billion, said Nathan Jensen, a professor at the University of Texas who studies interactions between government and corporations. Bayer AG's commitment to an $8 billion investment and the creation of 3,000 U.S. jobs was announced by the Trump transition team after the president-elect met in January 2017 with the CEOs of Bayer AG and Monsanto, who are planning a merger. Transition spokesman Sean Spicer credited Trump's negotiating skills for the pledge, but some analysts were skeptical that the companies had actually promised anything that wasn't already on the table when plans for the merger were first revealed in September 2016: commitment analysts Bayer and Monsanto said in a joint statement after Spicer's remarks that the "combined company expects to spend approximately $16 billion in R&D in agriculture over the next six years with at least half of this investment made in the United States." That amounts to about $2.7 billion a year, which roughly equates to what the combined companies already spend in that area globally, [Wall Street analyst Jeremy] Redenius said. As for the U.S. breakdown, he estimates it's likely close to half already; Monsanto spends $1.5 billion a year, the majority of which is in the U.S., he said, and Bayer already invests in R&D here as well. "Not an increase, but not substantially cutting," he said of the global figure. The merger, which awaits U.S. regulatory approval, is not likely to be completed until 2018, CNBC reported. reported $182B in April 2017 It is true that the U.S. Treasury reported a $182 billion budget surplus in April 2017, the largest April surplus since 2001 (and the second-largest in history), according to MarketWatch. It's unclear exactly how that surplus is attributable to President Trump, however. April is typically a surplus month because of tax receipts. In addition, citing a Congressional Budget Office (CBO) review as its source, Associated Press reported that the April 2017 surplus was "inflated" because of a tax deadline change allowing corporations to pay federal taxes in April that in previous years were paid in March.  MarketWatch review inflated It remains to be seen what effect Tump's policies will have on the budget deficit for 2017 as a whole (the fiscal year ends on 30 September). The CBO projects a 4.6 percent drop in the deficit from what it was in 2016, but that is based on laws and policies already in effect when Trump took office. DOW at 20,896 The stock market can be fickle. As of April 29, the Dow Jones Industrial Average was at 20,940.51, 6.12 percent higher than when Trump took office  positive movement, unquestionably. That number had risen to 20,981.94 by 16 May, then plummeted 372 points the next day as the market was shaken by news that Trump had shared classified information with Russian diplomats in the White House and attempted to divert FBI Director James Comey from an investigation of Trump's alleged ties to Russia before he fired him. 20,940.51 20,981.94 news Currently at 125.6 It's true that the Consumer Confidence Index, a metric assessing how ordinary consumers feel about the strength of the economy, hit 125.6 in March 2017, its highest point since 2000. It is also true that it fell five points to 120.3 the following month. Even so, it showed that consumers (as of April) had more confidence in the economy under Trump than under Obama, during whose administration the index never exceeded 113.7 (although it did manage to rise to that point after bottoming out in 2009 at 25). fell Passed 32 bills through Congress As of 17 May 2017, President Trump had signed 34 bills passed by Congress, a comparatively high number in such a short period of time (since Franklin Delano Roosevelt, who signed 76 pieces of legislation in his first 100 days, only Harry Truman, at 55, signed more). signed number That's not to say that all of the legislation signed by Trump between January and May 2017 was necessarily noteworthy, however. One bill changed the name of a Veterans Affairs outpatient clinic in Pago Pago, American Samoa; another renamed a VA health center in Pennsylvania; another approves the location of a memorial honoring Desert Storm and Desert Shield veterans; three appointed citizen regents to the board of the Smithsonian Institution. changed renamed Nor should it be assumed that Trump's signing of a given bill meant he or his administration was actively involved in its passage. Thirteen such bills nullifying federal regulations enacted during the Obama administration (such as H.J. Res. 69, reversing a U.S. Fish and Wildlife rule pertaining to Alaska's National Wildlife Refuges and S.J. Res. 34, reversing FCC Internet privacy rules) were rushed through Congress and quickly signed because they made use of the Congressional Review Act of 1996, which imposes a 60-day limit on the time allowed to overrule previously passed laws. Appointed constitutionalist Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch This is true. Gorsuch was confirmed by the U.S. Senate on 7 April 2017. true After 8 years of inaction This is true. Trump fulfilled a campaign promise by signing an executive order withdrawing the U.S. from the Trans-Pacific Partnership international trade agreement on 23 January 2017, one day after announcing he would renegotiate it. Despite President Obama's fervent support for the deal, many groups, including labor unions, were critical of the TPP, and CNN reported that its chances of approval by Congress were already "bleak."  signing 40 percent fewer illegal border crossings and deportation of violent and repeat offenders The number of illegal border crossings from Mexico into the U.S. in February 2017 were indeed down 40 percent from the previous month, according to statistics provided by the Department of Homeland Security, and that downward trend, which had actually started the previous November, continued in March and April 2017. This U.S. Customs and Border Protection chart shows how striking the change was compared to the previous five years: statistics   CNN Water contamination crisis started in April 2014 It's true that in March 2017, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) awarded a $100 million grant to the state of Michigan to upgrade the drinking water infrastructure in Flint, which experienced a lead pollution crisis potentially affecting as many as 100,000 people beginning in 2014. There has been some dispute, however, over whether this ought to be labeled a "Trump accomplishment" or an "Obama accomplishment."  awarded crisis As we noted in a previous article, funding for the grant came from a bill signed by President Obama in 2016, though the monies weren't officially awarded until after he left office, hence some prefer to credit it to Trump. article Strengthening relationships  China  Japan  Russia  UK Tough on North Korea Tough on Syria Freed Humanitarian Workers from Egypt Although President Trump pledged to "strengthen" overseas relationships going into office and he had already met with several important foreign leaders by mid-May 2017, it is too soon to tell to what degree his promise will bear fruit. China: The president-elect got off to a rocky start with China in December by accepting a congratulatory call from the leader of Taiwan, which China views as a province,not an independent nation, and with which the U.S. does not have diplomatic relations. China lodged a formal complaint. In April, Trump met with Chinese President Xi Jinping, with whom he said he made "tremendous progress" but no breakthroughs. A trade deal negotiated by the Trump administration with China in May was rated "pretty good" by The Wall Street Journal. call met rated Japan: Japanese Prime Minister Abe, who has met twice with Trump, issued a joint statement with him reaffirming the "unshakable alliance" between the U.S. and Japan. That is despite Trump having called Japan a "currency manipulator" during the presidential campaign and pulling out of the TPP, which Abe supported. Whether the "very, very good chemistry" Trump says he has with Abe will improve the relationship between the two countries over the long haul remains to be seen. Russia: U.S.-Russia relations have been strained for many years, a situation not improved by Russia's attempts to meddle in the U.S. presidential election, nor by the fact that Trump associates are under investigation for possible collusion in that effort. A U.S. missile strike by Trump against Syria, with whose government Russia is closely allied, were strongly condemned by Russian leaders, who warned there could be "extremely serious" consequences. U.K.: British Prime Minister Theresa May was the first foreign leader to visit the Trump White House, and their cordial meeting was portrayed by both countries as a renewal of the "special relationship" between the U.S and the U.K. According to the BBC, Obama was seen by many Britons as more interested in the European Union as a whole than in the U.K. itself, while Trump, who was in favor of Brexit, is perceived as the opposite. BBC Tough on Korea? President Trump has employed what the Washington Post calls "hard-line rhetoric" against North Korea, including threats of force, in hopes of squelching that county's increasing militarism, a strategy some experts dismiss as "macho posturing" that could escalate into a Cuban Missile Crisis-like confrontation.  calls experts Tough on Syria? In April 2017, Trump ordered U.S. missile strikes against an air base in Syria in response to an alleged chemical weapons attack on civilians by the Syrian government, which has been known to brutalize its own people during the ongoing civil war there. Trump's gesture came up short, however, in that the Syrian Air Force was able to launch a new attack against rebel forces from that same base just hours later. attack Humanitarian workers in Egypt: In April 2017 President Trump negotiated the release of U.S.. citizen Aya Hijazi, her Egyptian husband, and four other humanitarian workers from a prison in Cairo, Egypt, where they had been locked up since 2014, without evidence or trial, on charges of child abuse and trafficking.  negotiated Trimming the fat at many overblown government agencies and promoting small business growth by reigning in the EPA Although it is true that President Trump signed an executive order on 13 March 2017 directing the heads of executive branch departments to eliminate all "unnecessary" agencies and reorganize those that remain to improve their "efficiency, effectiveness, and accountability," the order gave said department heads six months from the date of signing to come up with suggestions for this process, so not much fat has been trimmed thus far despite the groundwork being laid. signed Regarding efforts to "reign in" the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), a CNN report confirms that's been among Trump's top priorities from the start: priorities President Donald Trump made a campaign trail promise to eliminate the Environmental Protection Agency  a department once looked to as an important national force tackling climate change  and during his first 100 days in office has held true to his word, taking swift strides towards dismantling the agency and rolling back regulations. Alongside EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt, a former Oklahoma attorney general who once worked tangentially with the fossil fuel industry to oppose Obama-era regulations, the Trump administration has so far issued a flurry of EPA-focused executive orders, proposed employee buyouts, handed down a social media gag order and is proposing significant cuts to the EPA budget. The National Federation of Independent Business (NFIB), a small business advocacy group, has hailed Trump's commitment to cutting "burdensome regulations," while environmental protection groups see it as a threat to public health and the future of the planet. hailed threat  Finished Dakota Access Pipeline & reversed Obama's "Land Grab" EO, freeing US to use our own natural resources The controversial Dakota Access Pipeline project, halted under President Obama, was revived by President Trump and will begin commercial operations on 1 June 2017. Trump also issued an executive order directing a review of lands designated as national monuments: halted revived directing Specifically, the review will consider all national monument designations of federal public lands since 1996 that are 100,000 acres or larger. Mr Trump singled out former President Barack Obamas egregious use of federal power in using the Antiquities Act to unilaterally place swaths of American land and water under federal control, adding, its time we ended this abusive practice. Antiquities Act As with many of the other items discussed above, whether or not one regards this as an "accomplishment" (as opposed, say, to a travesty) will depend almost entirely on one's political views going in. Baker, Peter and Davenport, Coral.  "Trump Revives Keystone Pipeline Rejected by Obama."
 The New York Times.  24 January 2017. Bradner, Eric.  "Trump's TPP Withdrawal: 5 Things to Know."
 CNN.  23 January 2017. Bunge, Jacob and Alessi, Christopher.  "Bayer, After Trump Meeting, Pledges to Add Thousands of U.S. Jobs."
 The Wall Street Journal.  18 January 2017. Carroll, Lauren.  "Trump Has Signed More Bills in 100 Days than Any President Since Truman, Spicer Says."
 Politifact.com.  27 April 2017. Crutsinger, Martin.  "Federal Government Records $182.4 Billion Budget Surplus."
 Associated Press.  10 May 2017. DeCambre, Mark.  "How Trump's Stock Market Ranks During His First 100 Days in Office."
 MarketWatch.  30 April 2017. Green, Miranda.  "Trump's EPA: Cuts, Infighting and No Talk of Climate Change."
 CNN.  4 May 2017. Greene, Leonard.  "Stock Market Suffers Biggest Blow Since President Trump Took Office."
 New York Daily News.  17 May 2017. Ivanova, Irina.  "Trump Isn't the Reason Corporate America Is Investing in the U.S."
 CBS News.  18 January 2017. Kopan, Tal.  "Does Border Drop Mean Trump's Tough Talk Is Working?"
 CNN.  9 March 2017. Kulish, Nicholas and Santos, Fernanda.  "Illegal Border Crossings Appear to Drop Under Trump.
 The New York Times.  8 March 2017. Liptak, Adam and Flegenheimer, Matt.  "Neil Gorsuch Confirmed by Senate as Supreme Court Justice."
 The New York Times.  7 April 2017. McKelvey, Tara.  "Special Relationship Gets a New Lease on Life."
 BBC.  27 January 2017. Robb, Greg.  "U.S. April Budget Surplus Rises to $182 Billion."
 MarketWatch.  10 May 2017. Rucker, Philip and DeYoung, Karen.  "Freed Egyptian American Prisoner Returns Home Following Trump Intervention."
 The Washington Post.  20 April 2017. Ryan, Missy, Denyer, Simon and Rauhala, Emily.  "On North Korea, Trump Administration Talks Tough but Hopes to Avoid War."
 The Washington Post.  19 April 2017. Ryan, Tim.  "Trump Directs Department Heads to Trim Agency Fat."
 Courthouse News.  14 March 2017. Savransky, Rebecca.  "Tillerson: U.S.-Russia Relationship 'At an All-Time Low Point' Since End of Cold War."
 The Hill.  14 May 2017. Thomas, Lauren.  "Consumer Confidence Lags in April as Americans Are Less Optimistic About Economy."
 CNBC.  25 April 2017. Watson, Kathryn.  "Trump Executive Order Calls for Review of 'Egregious' Federal Land Grab."
 CBS News.  26 April 2017. Boston Herald.  "Editorial: Getting Tough in Syria."
 20 May 2017. CBO.gov.  "Monthly Budget Review for April 2017."
 5 May 2017. Democracy Now.  "Trump's Proposed EPA Cuts Threaten Health & Lives of Tens of Millions of Americans."
 3 March 2017. NFIB.com.  "In Targeting the Waters of the United States Rule, President Trump Looks to Dismantle Another Burdensome Regulation."
 3 March 2017. PRNewsWire.com.  "The Conference Board Consumer Confidence Index Declined in April."
 25 April 2017. TradingEconomics.com.  "United States Unemployment Rate."
 5 May 2017. U.S. Customs and Border Protection.  "Southwest Border Migration."
 1 May 2017. The Wall Street Journal.  "Japan's Abe Talks Trump."
 22 May 2017. The Wall Street Journal.  "Trump's Pretty Good China Deal."
 14 May 2017. On 3 May 2016, web site the Washington Free Beacon published an article provocativelytitled "Clinton Campaign Made Payments to Hard Drive and Document Destruction Company" (and subtitled "Payments could have purchased destruction of 14 hard drives"). The article reported that the Hillary Clinton campaign made payments totaling $187 to a document destruction company (American Document Destruction, Inc.) in February and March of 2016. The article implied (without directly stating) that the Clinton campaign might have spent the funds on destroying disk drives involved in the controversy surrounding Clinton's use of private, home-based servers and accounts for official business she conducted while serving as U.S. secretary of state: controversy The Hillary Clinton campaign made multiple payments to a company that specializes in hard drive and document destruction, campaign finance records show. The payments, which were recorded in February and March of 2016, went to the Nevada-based American Document Destruction, Inc., which claims expertise in destroying hard drives or anything else that a hard drive can come from. Our hard drive destruction procedures take place either at your site or at our secure facility in Sparks, NV, the companys website states. This decision is yours to decide based on cost and convenience to you. In either situation, the hard drive will be destroyed by a shredding. Nowhere did the Washington Free Beacon article offer any evidence that the services provided by American Document Destruction, Inc. to the Clinton campaign involved the destruction of hard drives or data from the private server she used while serving as secretary as state. In fact, the article didn't even offer any evidence that the provided services involved the destruction of hard drives at all (rather than paper documents). It simply noted that the Clinton campaign paid American Document Destruction, Inc. an amount of money that would have covered the costs of destroying 14 hard drives or shredding 37.4 cubic feet of paper (or, presumably, some combination of the two). A follow-up article from another news outletreported that Clinton's campaign also paid $50 to Shredco, a company that provides safe disposal of paper documents. outlet It's extremely unlikely either of these companies were involved in destroying material related to Clinton's use of a private e-mail server, for a number of reasons. First of all, the expenditures were openly reported to the Federal Election Commission, an unlikely move for a campaign furtively involved in destroying evidence relating to a federal investigation:     Second, anyone seeking to destroy sensitive information related to a high-level federal investigation probably wouldn't trust the task to businesses who charged only a few hundred dollars for the service, rather than to much more expensive (and presumably more private and secure) outfits. Moreover, even though Bernie Sanders' campaign wasn't embroiled in an e-mail controversy, his campaign paid nearly three times as much as Clinton's did for similar services: paid    Former Republican presidential candidate Ted Cruz also contracted for shredding services in the same timeframe: timeframe    Paying for data destruction services is hardly suspect for an organization that processes thousands of donations each month, as the Hillary Clinton campaign does. Personal information from donors (such as credit card numbers) would, if printed or stored on hard drives, need to be securely destroyed to protect those donors. And given Bernie Sanders' repeated insistence that the average donation made to his campaign is $27, it seems reasonablethat his organization would also be contracting for similar services and paying for a higher volume of shreddable transactions than the Clinton campaign.  Bier, Jeryl.  "Hillary Clinton Campaign Paid Second Document Destruction Company."
The Weekly Standard.  5 May 2016. Schmidt, Michael S.  "Hillary Clinton Used Personal Email Account at State Dept., Possibly Breaking Rules."
The New York Times.  2 March 2015. Schoffstall, Joe.  "Clinton Campaign Made Payments to Hard Drive Aand Document Destruction Company."
The Washington Free Beacon.  3 May 2016. Federal Election Commission.  "Selected Presidential Reports for the 2016 March Monthly."
March 2016. In late August 2020, readers inquired about a meme circulating on Facebook that claimed falsely that U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi had rigged legislation to help her husband benefit financially from selling off property belonging to the U.S. Postal Service.   The meme's text reads: This is Paul Pelosi (aka, Nancys Husband). He owns Financial Leasing Services LLC, a San Francisco based Real Estate and Venture Capitalist Firm. His net worth is 120 million. Why is this important? His wife sits on the House Appropriations committee. This committee appropriates funds to the United States Postal Service ( and others). Why is this important? Easy. She passed a bill to sell off 9 billion dollars ( yes 9 BILLION WITH a [smile emoji] worth of FEDERALLY OWNED POST OFFICE PROPERTY AND AWARDED THE THE CONTRACT TO, none other, Financial Leasing Services LLC. Her husbands firm. Why is this important? The commissions rate was set at 9%. That is almost a 1 BILLION dollar contract. If thats not enough, lets look at the new stimulus package. Nancy wants 25 billion in the stimulus package for the postal service where only 1.25 billion goes to making sure voting ballots are legit. The other 23.5 billion is going to upgrading the facilities so they are more attractive to potential buyers for her husbands firm. Corrupt to the core. It's true that Speaker Pelosi's husband Paul Pelosi owns and operates Financial Leasing Services, a San Francisco-based investment company. Financial disclosures in 2018, the most recent available, show Speaker Pelosi's estimated net worth to be $114 million. owns estimated But Speaker Pelosi doesn't sit on the House Appropriations Committee. Her spokesman Drew Hammill told us by email she hasn't been on the committee since 2002. Furthermore, we found no evidence that a bill to sell off $9 billion-worth of federally-owned U.S. Postal Service property exists. doesn't sit It's true that the U.S. House of Representatives passed a bill that would, if signed into law, provide $25 billion to shore up the Postal Service and rectify delays in mail delivery service, but it doesn't allocate $1.25 billion toward "making sure voting ballots are legit." The funding was originally on the table during negotiations over a coronavirus stimulus package, but those negotiations broke down. Whether the stand-alone Postal Service funding bill will be signed into law by U.S. President Donald Trump seems unlikely. bill originally unlikely The meme seems to be a rehash of a similar one that dates back to 2013  except in that case the subject of the claim was Richard Blum, the husband of U.S. Sen. Diane Feinstein, D-Calif., who like Pelosi hails from San Francisco. similar one Mikkelson, David.  "Did Dianne Feinstein Get Her Husbands Company a USPS Contract?"   Snopes. 23 April 2013. Rayome, Alison DeNisco.  "What the New USPS Bill Means for the Next Stimulus Package."   CNET.  24 August 2020. Pramuk, Jacob.  "House Passes Bill to Put $25 Billion Into USPS and Reverse Changes Amid Uproar."   CNBC.  22 August 2020. Henney, Megan.  "How Much Money is Nancy Pelosi Worth?"   Yahoo! News.  17 July 2020. Wildermuth, John.  "Pelosi's Husband Prefers a Low Profile."   San Francisco Chronicle.  1 January 2007. In May and June 2019, a misleading but widely seen meme about immigrants and Medicare benefits continued to circulate on Facebook:   Although the trope that undocumented immigrants are cashing in on U.S. government-funded public benefits for free is a common one, it's generally misleading. common one generally misleading Contrary to what the meme asserts, undocumented persons do not qualify to receive Medicare. Additionally, because many undocumented persons acquire fake Social Security numbers so that they can work, they pay billions of dollars into the system but never reap those benefits, said Steven Wallace, professor of public health at the University of California, Los Angeles, and associate director of UCLA's Center for Health Policy Research."In reality, undocumented immigrants paying into these programs actually are helping to subsidize them," Wallace told us by phone. "So its the other way around -- its not that they're draining the system. They're actually subsidizing it."The impacts of immigration on the economy and public benefits are political flashpoints in a larger national debate. For example, in September 2017 the Trump administration was criticized for rejecting a study by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services that concluded refugees have an overall positive effect on government revenue.A 2017 study conducted by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine reported that immigration "has an overall positive impact on the long-run economic growth in the U.S. In the short term and on the local and state government levels, new immigrants do have a negative revenue impact largely due to costs associated with educating children, health care and law enforcement. But in the long term, they are a net positive on revenue due to higher incomes of their descendants who are among the strongest fiscal and economic contributors in the U.S.PBS News Hour reported that "In general, more people working means more taxes  and thats true overall with undocumented immigrants as well. Undocumented immigrants pay an estimated $11.6 billion a year in taxes, according to the Institute on Taxation & Economic Policy. Immigrants are also less likely to take public benefits than the native-born population for two reasons."Those two reasons, according to PBS, are that undocumented persons aren't eligible to receive federal public benefits, and many of the ones who are authorized to be here aren't eligible because they earn too much money.  Contrary to what the meme asserts, undocumented persons do not qualify to receive Medicare. Additionally, because many undocumented persons acquire fake Social Security numbers so that they can work, they pay billions of dollars into the system but never reap those benefits, said Steven Wallace, professor of public health at the University of California, Los Angeles, and associate director of UCLA's Center for Health Policy Research. undocumented persons "In reality, undocumented immigrants paying into these programs actually are helping to subsidize them," Wallace told us by phone. "So its the other way around -- its not that they're draining the system. They're actually subsidizing it." The impacts of immigration on the economy and public benefits are political flashpoints in a larger national debate. For example, in September 2017 the Trump administration was criticized for rejecting a study by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services that concluded refugees have an overall positive effect on government revenue. rejecting A 2017 study conducted by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine reported that immigration "has an overall positive impact on the long-run economic growth in the U.S. In the short term and on the local and state government levels, new immigrants do have a negative revenue impact largely due to costs associated with educating children, health care and law enforcement. But in the long term, they are a net positive on revenue due to higher incomes of their descendants who are among the strongest fiscal and economic contributors in the U.S. 2017 study PBS News Hour reported that "In general, more people working means more taxes  and thats true overall with undocumented immigrants as well. Undocumented immigrants pay an estimated $11.6 billion a year in taxes, according to the Institute on Taxation & Economic Policy. Immigrants are also less likely to take public benefits than the native-born population for two reasons." Those two reasons, according to PBS, are that undocumented persons aren't eligible to receive federal public benefits, and many of the ones who are authorized to be here aren't eligible because they earn too much money. Frazee, Gretchen.  "4 Myths About How Immigrants Affect the U.S. Economy."
  PBS News Hour.  2 November 2018. Hirschfeld Davis, Julie, and Somini Sengupta. "Trump Administration Rejects Study Showing Positive Impact of Refugees."
  The New York Times.  18 September 2017. Congressional Budget Office.  "The Impact of Unauthorized Immigrants on the Budgets of State and Local Governments."
  December 2007. The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, Medicine.  "The Economic and Fiscal Consequences of Immigration."
  2017. FACT CHECK:  Does a photograph depict a pressure canner accident?   Claim:  A photograph depicts a pressure canner accident.   PROBABLY  Example:  [Collected via Reddit, August 2015] Why I'm not allowed to cook dinner anymore Origins: On 24 August 2015, a user (who has since deleted the post from their history) published a thread  titled "Why I'm not allowed to cook dinner anymore" with the photograph shown above to Reddit's r/funny subreddit. r/funny The image garnered thousands of comments and "upvotes" for the submitter, but that user was very likely not the source of the image. One day earlier, Imgur user NineteenSeventyFour had published the same image in a separate post on that site with the title "Whoopsie." In both cases no backstory for what was depicted in the photograph was provided. Whoopsie As is not uncommon for popular image posts of this sort, the photograph filtered over to Facebook. The account UNILAD published the same picture to their timeline (crediting the Reddit user who posted it as the source), and the the page Adinas Acres page also posted it along with the following text: UNILAD posted Canning season is upon us. If you use a pressure canner be sure the weights/release is working correctly. Despite clear interest in the events of the photograph (and multiple reposts of the picture), the actual scenario depicted by the photograph remains unknown. We were unable to find any online versions of it before it was shared to Imgur in August 2015 with no description, and the user who posed it there has a site tagline that reads "It's not a Repost, it's Nostalgia!", suggesting that they curate and share interesting images not personally taken by them. Imgur While it's possible the photograph indeed depicts a pressure canning or cooking scenario gone awry, no actual information was ever included alongside its iterations to definitively describe the image. We don't know when the photo was taken, by whom, or even in which country the purported kitchen catastrophe occurred. Moreover, canning enthusiasts commenting on the image noted that while debris from equipment was scattered throughout the scene in the photograph, the splattered food one would expect to see if a pressure cooker malfunctioned was curiously absent. It's unlikely that either the person who originally posted the photograph on Imgur or the Reddit reposter snapped the picture themselves. As such, any information gleaned from such online postings are speculative, and the humorous one-line descriptions that have accompanied it were likely invented to encourage sharing of an amusing picture.       Last updated: 28 August 2015 Originally published:  28 August 2015