Did President Trump Kiss Bob Dole on the Forehead?
A photograph purportedly showing President Trump kissing former U.S. Senator Bob Dole on the forehead was circulated on social media in the days following the funeral of former president George H.W. Bush in December 2018: social media   The internet's interest in this image, and Bob Dole in general, spiked in December 2018 after the 95-year-old politician rose from his wheelchair in order to salute Bush's casket. (Dole was gravely wounded by an artillery shell during World War II that left him with permanent disabilities.) wheelchair wounded Although this photograph is genuine, some viewers may have been left with the inaccurate impression that it was taken during Bush's funeral. The picture of Trump's kissing Dole on the forehead was actually taken in January 2018 during a ceremony held in the Capitol Rotunda, upon which occasion the former senator was bestowed with a Congressional Gold Medal. The original is available via UPI, who display it with the following caption: UPI During a ceremony in the Capitol Rotunda, Dole was presented Congress' highest civilian honor by President Trump, Vice President Pence and Senate and House leaders. President Trump kisses World War II veteran and former Senate majority leader Bob Dole as he received the Congressional Gold Medal, the highest civilian honor, "in recognition of his service to the nation as a soldier, legislator, and statesman.  Przybyla, Heidi.  "Former Senator Bob Dole Receives Congressional Gold Medal in Capitol Ceremony
  USA Today.  17 January 2018.  Cole, Devan.  "Bob Dole Helped Out of His Wheelchair to Salute George H.W. Bush."
  CNN.  4 December 2018.  Uria, Daniel.  "'True American Hero' Bob Dole Receives Congressional Gold Medal."
  UPI.  18 January 2018.
Editor's note: As of April 20, 2023, Twitter had droppedall "state-affiliated" and "government-funded" labels on the accounts of government officials and media outlets, including the CBC. dropped On April 17, 2023, several social media posts surfaced claiming that Twitter, under Elon Musk's leadership, had labeled the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC) as "69% Government-funded Media." The claim was true. several social media posts  As of this writing on April 18, CBC's Twitter profile indeed included the label "69% Government-funded Media" above its bio reading, "The official CBC Twitter. Bringing you the best of Canada." CBC's Twitter profile Initially, the figure was reportedly 70%, according to a screenshot shared by Musk. It was unclear when, exactly, the social media platform decreased the number by 1% in what some observers took to be an allusion to a sex joke.Sharing a screenshot depicting the "69%" figure, Musktweetedin the early hours of April 18: "Canadian Broadcasting Corp said they're 'less than 70% government-funded', so we corrected the label." screenshot shared by Musk allusion to a sex joke tweeted The "government-funded media" label wasattachedafter the leader of the Conservative Party of Canada, Pierre Poilievre, posted a message on social mediaasking for it. "I believe that Twitter should apply the Government-funded Media label to the CBC's various news-related accounts, including @CBC, @CBCNew and @CBCAlerts," wrote Poilievre, who is challenging Justin Trudeau as prime minister, in theletter. CBC's new "government-funded" designation also followed Twitter'smove to label Public Broadcasting Service (PBS) and National Public Media (NPR) "government-funded media," and those media outlets' subsequent decision to go silent on the platform. As far as we can determine, no other accounts labeled as government-funded media had a percentage attached to the label. posted a message letter For the purposes of this fact check, we are not attempting to confirm, nor deny, whether the label was appropriate or accurate considering CBC's budget composition. Rather, we are focusing whether such a designation was actually made. That was true. The CBC receives some funding through Canadian Parliament appropriations. (According toCBC's annual financial report,the media outlet received $1.24 billion (in Canadian dollars) in public funding through parliamentary appropriations in 2021-2022. That accounts to roughly 66% of that year's revenue.)However,the "69%" figure was not seemingly based on the factual makeup of CBC's budget. Rather, it appeared to be an instance of Musk thumbing his nose at the CBC (and possibly making a joke about a sex position, which would not have been out of character for Musk). CBC's annual financial report would not have been out of character When we asked Twitter's communications team how, or why, it picked the number to supposedly depict the proportion of CBC's budget that is government funding, we got a poop emoji autoreply. (Musk instituted that autoreply to all questions from journalists on March 19.) autoreply We asked CBC spokesperson Leon Mar  about Twitter's recent labeling of the media outlet's Twitter profile, and the spokesperson said, "With regard to the latest from Elon Musk,this is not a serious response. Journalistic independence is not a game." this The CBC official said the real issue was that "Twitter's definition of 'Government-funded Media' means [that account is] open to editorial interference by government," or that it takes editorial direction from government officials. The spokesperson shared a statement from CBC Editor-in-Chief Brodie Fenlon'sin which the top editor said, "[The] government has no  zero involvement in our editorial content or journalism." Twitter's definition statement Considering the government money that helps fund CBC's operations, Michael Geist, who is a Canada Research Chair in internet and e-commerce law at the University of Ottawa, said "publicly-funded media" would be a more accurate designation on the media outlet's Twitter profile, rather than "government-funded media." The former group, according to Geist'sinterpretation of Twitter's policies, "includes media organizations with public financing and does not reference government involvement in editorial content." according to Geist'sinterpretation On April 20, Twitter removed all "government-funded" and "state-affiliated" profile labels, including those on CBC accounts. removed Goswami, Rohan. "Twitter Drops Labels for President Joe Biden, State-Affiliated and Government-Funded Media."CNBC, 21 Apr. 2023, https://www.cnbc.com/2023/04/21/twitter-drops-government-related-account-labels.html.
Government and Media Account Labels on Twitter. https://help.twitter.com/en/rules-and-policies/government-media-labels. Accessed 18 Apr. 2023. Https://Cbc.Radio-Canada.ca/En/Impact-and-Accountability/Finances/Annual-Reports/Ar-2021-2022/Highlights/Financial-Highlights. https://cbc.radio-canada.ca/en/impact-and-accountability/finances/annual-reports/ar-2021-2022/highlights/financial-highlights. Accessed 18 Apr. 2023. Https://Cbc.Radio-Canada.ca/En/Media-Centre/Cbc-Radio-Canada-Is-Not-Governement-Funded-Media. https://cbc.radio-canada.ca/en/media-centre/cbc-radio-canada-is-not-governement-funded-media. Accessed 18 Apr. 2023. Https://Cbc.Radio-Canada.ca/En/Media-Centre/Statement-Regarding-Twitter-Labelling-Cbc-Radio-Canada-as-Government-Funded-Media. https://cbc.radio-canada.ca/en/media-centre/statement-regarding-twitter-labelling-cbc-radio-canada-as-government-funded-media. Accessed 18 Apr. 2023. News , Brodie Fenlon . CBC. "Why We Have Paused Our CBC News Twitter Accounts | CBC News." CBC, 18 Apr. 2023, https://www.cbc.ca/news/editorsblog/cbc-twitter-news-1.6813747. 'Twitter Labels CBC Account as "Government-Funded Media"'.Thestar.Com, 16 Apr. 2023, https://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2023/04/16/twitter-labels-cbc-account-as-government-funded-media.html. Update [April 21, 2023]: Noted that Twitter removed all "government-funded" and "state-affiliated" labels throughout the platform as of April 20. Legend:  Two men traveling together check into a country inn run by a relatively young widow.  One of the men ends up spending the night with the widow, and to avoid any future entanglements he deceptively gives the widow his partner's name before departing the next morning.  The man never tells his partner about the incident, and a year later the partner receives an unexpected letter from a lawyer, informing him that the widow has died and left him the inn and a sizeable chunk of money in her will, in remembrance of the wonderful night of pleasure he gave her. Example:  [N Dhuibhne, 1983] Two men, John and Mick, went to Kilkenny for the day.  Evening came and as they were enjoying themselves they decided they would put off the journey back to Dublin till the following day.  They proposed to stay the night in the pleasant hotel they were in, which belonged to an attractive widow whom they were getting to know.  They spent an enjoyable evening in the bar and made their way to their separate rooms.  However, when all was quiet, Mick made his way to the widow's room and would have been seen, if there were anyone to see him, returning to his room in the early morning.  When they were leaving the widow called Mick aside.  "Now I know," says she, "that you have put your names in the register, but I just want to be sure who's who," taking out a notebook and pen.  Mick, a quick thinker, gave John's name and address. Mick had forgotten all about Kilkenny until, nine months later, he had a telephone call from John, who seemed to be highly excited. "Hello! Hello! Is that Mick? Listen, do you remember that outing we had to Kilkenny?  Hello! To Kilkenny, yes. Well, I don't know what to make of it. I've had a letter from a Kilkenny solicitor.  Do you remember that nice widow whose hotel we stayed in? Well, the solicitor says she has died and left me the hotel and a lot of money as well.  I don't understand it." Origins:  As folklorist Jan Brunvand points out in The Choking Doberman, "fantasies of unlimited sex and of sexual favors granted with no strings attached" are often accompanied by twists of fate or poetic justice in modern legends.  In this tale, the two elements blend neatly: a man needlessly lies about his identity to a woman he sleeps with in order to avoid possible future entanglements; as a result, his friend, not he, reaps the unexpected rewards. As for how old this legend is, its plot had been used so often by aspiring writers that it merited inclusion in a 1946 round-up of abused storylines:  [Young, 1946] An attractive young fellow goes to Atlantic City, for a holiday. He meets a charming girl from Baltimore, and has an affair with her. He does not give her his right name  instead, he gives her the name and address of one of his friends in New York City. When he leaves, the girl is in love with him, but to him the girl is just another girl. And he never, of course, hears from her. The girl returns to Baltimore. A short time later, she dies  and leaves a large estate to the villain's friend. It also appeared the previous year in a humor collection: [Cert, 1945] Two friends motored home from a fishing trip in Maine. On a lonely country road they encountered engine trouble. Who answered their knock at the nearest farmhouse? Right! The farmer's beautiful daughter. She gave them dinner and let them stay overnight. Six months later one of the friends received an ominous-looking legal document. A frown disappeared as he read it, and then he phoned his fishing companion. "I say, Tom," he said. "Did you by any chance spend a little time with that beautiful farm girl the night our car broke down?" "Why, yes," answered Tom sheepishly. "And did you, in a moment of Machiavellian cunning, give her my name and address?" "Now, don't get sore about that," broke in Tom. "Where's your sense of humor?" "Oh, I'm not a bit sore," his friend assured him. "I just thought you'd like to know I heard from her lawyer. She died last week and left me the farm and $12,000 in cash." Last updated:  9 July 2007    Sources:  Brunvand, Jan Harold.  The Choking Doberman.  New York: W. W. Norton, 1984.   ISBN 0-393-30321-7   (p. 133). The Choking Doberman   Brunvand, Jan Harold.  The Mexican Pet.  New York: W. W. Norton, 1986.   ISBN 0-393-30542-2   (pp. 127-128). The Mexican Pet   Brunvand, Jan Harold.  Too Good To Be .  New York: W. W. Norton, 1999.   ISBN 0-393-04734-2  (p. 88). Too Good To Be    Cerf, Bennett.  Laughing Stock.  New York: Grosset & Dunlap, 1945  (pp.179-80).   N Dhuibhne, ils.  "Dublin Modern Legends: Intermediate Type List and Examples."  Baloideas: The Journal of the Folklore of Ireland Society. Vol. 5; 1983  (pp. 55-70).   O'Brien, Edna.  "Hers."  The New York Times.  26 September 1985  (p. C2).   Young, James.  101 Plots Used and Abused.  Boston: The Writer, Inc., 1946  (p. 20)    Reader's Digest.   "Laughter: The Best Medicine"  August 1989  (p. 70).   Also told in:  Fiery, Ann.  The Complete and Totally  Book of Urban Legends.   Philadelphia: Running Press Books, 2001.  ISBN 0-7624-107404  (pp. 98-102). The Complete and Totally  Book of Urban Legends   The Big Book of Urban Legends.  New York: Paradox Press, 1994.  ISBN 1-56389-165-4  (p. 122). The Big Book of Urban Legends The Troubled Assets Relief Program, or TARP, was envisioned as a giant pot of money the federal government could use to buy toxic assets, the mortgage-backed investments that triggered the nation's financial crisis. The idea was to buy the bad assets so banks would be in better shape to do more lending. That was the original vision of Henry Paulson, the Bush administration's treasury secretary and one of the architects of the plan. He won quick approval from Congress in early October 2008. But Paulson changed his strategy. Instead of using the early TARP money to buy the toxic assets, he decided to use it to invest in banks. That, Paulson said, would get them to resume lending. Since then, critics have questioned whether the TARP money has been wisely spent. They have criticized TARP investments in banks that did not appear to be in serious trouble, and said it was unwise to spend $25 billion on the auto industry. In his column on March 24, 2009, conservative writer George Will took aim at a variety of recent acts by Congress and the Obama administration. He described members of Congress as braying yahoos and said the Obama administration had invited private sector investors to become business partners with the capricious and increasingly anticonstitutional government. This latest plan to unfreeze the financial system came almost half a year after Congress shoveled $700 billion into the Troubled Assets Relief Program, $325 billion of which has been spent without purchasing any toxic assets. We had a vague recollection that TARP spending had been broadened at some point, but we wondered if Will was correct that such a large amount had been spent without buying the assets that were the original focus of the program. (Indeed, the program was named after them, creating a metaphorical acronym that suggested it was a temporary protection from storms.) A quick history: In early October, with fears that the economy was on the brink of collapse, Congress approved the $700 billion Paulson wanted, and President George W. Bush signed the measure into law. As we noted above, the early vision was to buy toxic assets. But just 10 days later, Paulson and the Bush administration changed the game plan. Instead of buying toxic assets, they said they would buy stock in American banks to put them on sound footing so they could resume lending. Today we are taking decisive actions to protect the U.S. economy, Paulson said on Oct. 14. We regret having to take these actions. Today's actions are not what we ever wanted to do  but today's actions are what we must do to restore confidence to our financial system. Criticism grew. Some said Paulson had gotten too much leeway to spend the money. Congress began harrumphing and holding hearings, and oversight groups known as SIGTARP (the Special Inspector General for the Troubled Asset Relief Program) and COP (the Congressional Oversight Panel) began to scrutinize the spending. (A quick aside: The financial crisis has spawned some of coolest acronyms this side of the Pentagon, making it possible for Treasury officials to utter sentences like, COP and SIGTARP have examined the TARP but haven't yet focused on the P-PIP.) The $325 billion cited by Will comes from the March 11 testimony by Neel Kashkari, the interim assistant secretary for financial stability who directs the TARP, before the Domestic Policy Subcommittee of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee. Asked about the status of the program and how much more would be needed, Kashkari said, We've deployed about 325 billion cash dollars out the door. And at that point, none of the money had been spent on buying toxic assets, according to the Government Accountability Office, a nonpartisan congressional research group, and the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, an independent group tracking spending on TARP and other stimulus programs on its siteStimulus Watch. We should note that since that testimony, Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner has unveiled his proposal for buying the toxic assets, which would be partly paid for by a portion of the TARP money. But that wasn't the case when Will's column was published, so we find his claim to be True. Most of the April Fool's pranks that appear on the Internet on or around April 1 have petered out by a day or two later; some of the more subtle satirical articles may continue to circulate for a few days longer before some readers recognize them as humor rather than genuine news stories.  For whatever reason, though, a "mummified fairy" prank of 2007 was still going strong well after April 1 had come and gone, even though its creator had long since admitted to the hoax and the fictional tale had been exposed by major news outlets: Do fairies live at the bottom of your garden? Maybe not anymore but a recent discovery would suggest that they probably did. What appear to be the mummified remains of a fairy have been discovered in the Derbyshire countryside. The 8 inch remains complete with wings, skin, teeth and flowing red hair have been examined by archaeologists and forensic experts who can confirm that the body is genuine. X-rays of the fairy reveal an anatomically identical skeleton to that of a child. The bones, however, are hollow like those of a bird making them particularly light. The puzzling presence of a navel even suggests that the beings reproduce the same as humans despite the absence of reproductive organs.  The mummified fairy supposedly found in Derbyshire by a dog walker at Firestone Hill near Duffield was the work of former Derbyshire resident Dan Baines, a prop maker.  Baines posted an article (titled "Do Fairies Live at the Bottom of Your Garden?") presenting an elaborate backstory about the creature's discovery, along with several close-up photographs of the small, detailed fairy figure he created, on a web site a few days before April Fool's Day 2007.  The hoax was quite the hit for a few days as netizens debated its details and origins, and then on April 1 Baines 'fessed up by appending the following message to his fairy article: article Thank you for the interest you have shown in my story.    Even if you believe in fairies, as I personally do, there will always have been an element of doubt in your mind that would suggest the remains are a hoax. However, the magic created by the possibility of the fairy being real is something you will remember for the rest of your life.    Alas the fairy is fake but my interest and belief has allowed me to create a work of art that is convincing and magical. I was also interested to see if fairy folklore is still a valid belief in modern society and I am pleased to say that yes it is! I have had more response from believers than I ever thought possible.   As well as an artist I am also a magician and you have been my fantastic audience. That spark of magic ignited your imagination and made your day more memorable and exciting.    I believe fairies to be Earth spirits rather than physical beings so my performance was slightly flawed. The question stills begs to answered though, are they made of flesh and blood like you and I?    I hope you have not been offended by the events of the past few days but if you are I sincerely apologise. It took 50 years for the Cottingley fairies to be revealed as a hoax; at least youve only had to endure a few days of mystery. The prank was even prominent enough to merit coverage by the BBC: Photographs of a mummified fairy supposedly found in Derbyshire have been revealed as an April Fool's prank.  Former Derbyshire resident Dan Baines, 31, who designs illusions for magicians, made the fairy as a prank.  The site got 20,000 hits in one day from fairy believers. "Although I've said it's a hoax, people still believe that it's real," said Mr Baines. "They believe this is just a cover-up so let the illusion continue."  He added that it had taken him four hours a day to answer all of his emails.  "I've had all sorts of comments including people who say they've seen exactly the same things and one person who told me to return the remains to the grave site as soon as possible or face the consequences," he said.  The fairy is about eight inches long with details such as a navel, ears and hair added for authenticity.  Mr Baines added that he had now become addicted to April Fool's jokes and told people to "watch this space" for future pranks. Dan Baines later put his fairy figure up for auction on eBay, where it fetched a high bid of 280.00.  eBay BBC News.  "Fairy Fool Sparks Huge Response."
  1 April 2007. The Sun Online.  "Mummy Fetches Fairy Good Price."
  11 April 2007. Claim:  Illustrations show a proposed Grand Canyon skywalk. Status:  True. Example:  [Collected via e-mail, 2005]  Grand Canyon SkywalkScheduled to open January 1, 2006Hualapai Indian Reservation   * Juts out about 70 feet into the canyon, 4000 ft above the Colorado River  *Will accommodate 120 people comfortably (How comfortable would YOU be?)  * Built with more than a million pounds of steel beams and includes dampeners that minimize the structure's vibration  * Designed to hold 72 million pounds, withstand an 8.0 magnitude earthquake 50 miles away, and withstand winds in excess of 100 mph  * Has a glass bottom and sides...four inches thick   Origins:   Strange as it may seem, theabove-displayed illustrations are indeed renderings of a proposed skywalk extending over the south rim of the Grand Canyon, to be built on the  Hualapai Indian Reservationadjacent to Arizona's Grand Canyon National Park. Hualapai Indian Reservation The $30 million all-glass Skywalk will hover 3,800 feet above the Colorado River over a rim of the Grand Canyon, allowing tourists to stroll on an 80-yard walk around a semicircular platform jutting beyond the canyon rim, surrounded by Plexiglas that will provide a spectacular view of the canyon floor directly below.  (The statement that the structure is designed to hold "72 million pounds" appears to be a copywriter's misparsing of a 72-ton figure.)  The Skywalk (initially projected to open in early 2006, before construction delays pushed back the completion date) will be part of a new Grand Canyon West resort on the Hualapai reservation at the western edge of the park, about 120 miles from Las Vegas.   As the Arizona Republic noted, the Skywalk is part of an effort by the Hualapai tribe to create a multi-faceted tourist resort and revenue stream not dependent upon casino gaming: Levi Esquerra, program director for Northern Arizona University's Center for American Indian Economic Development, said the Hualapais are one of the few tribes to have a bustling economy without casino gaming as a linchpin. "They've been able to exploit their natural beauty and become a tourist destination," Esquerra said. "What we've normally seen in the past between the tribes and national Park Service is like the Blackfeet in Montana appealing to get free access to Glacier National Park. But the Hualapais have a new and aggressive attitude to develop markets on their own land." The Hualapai's Grand Canyon Resort Corp. already has completed the first phase of an adjoining Indian village, where Navajo, Hopi, Hualapai and Havasupai craftsmen constructed traditional dwellings surrounding an amphitheater that hosts daily Native American dances. The first phase of a nearby Old West village also has been completed, and plans are on the drawing board to construct a tram from the canyon rim to the floor. Ditto for an anticipated high-end resort and a campground, which will house about 50 cabins and be able to accommodate 200 campsites and 200 recreation vehicles. The parts for the Skywalk project were fabricated in other locations and brought to the Grand Canyon site as it was readied for their installation, a process depicted in the photographs shown below:                      The transparent pathway was installed in place in March 2007, and Apollo 11 astronaut Buzz Aldrin offically inaugurated the Skywalk on 20 March 2007 by taking a stroll on it in front of a crowd of about 1,000 tourists, dignitaries and tribal members:    Grand Canyon West has announced 28 March 2007 as the official public opening date:  Grand Canyon West, a destination owned and operated by the Hualapai Tribe at the Grand Canyon's western rim, announces March 28, 2007 as the official public opening date of The Skywalk. The Skywalk will be the first-ever cantilever shaped glass walkway to suspend more than 4,000 feet above the canyons floor and extend 70 feet from the canyon's rim.  Access to The Skywalk will run from dawn to dusk and will cost $25 per person in addition to the cost of a Grand Canyon West entrance package. One hundred and twenty people will be allowed on the bridge at a time. Admittance is first come, first serve for walk up visitors; however, reservations can be made. Guests will enter and exit the walkway via temporary buildings while the adjacent visitors center is being completed. Grand Canyon West plans to issue numbered shoe covers  in in order to avoid scratches and slipping - to each visitor that enters the open-air walkway. Prior to the public opening in March, Grand Canyon West will host a "First Walk" event for media and VIPs. The name of the first public figure to step on The Skywalk will be announced closer to the opening.  The historical rollout of The Skywalk structure, with the glass in place, is scheduled for February 27 to March 2. The initial part of the rollout process involves jacking the structure up off of the supports and then subjecting the structure to several days of thorough tests that replicate the conditions of final placement. After the final testing is complete, the multi-million pound steel enforced structure will be rolled out across the canyon's edge, which takes multiple days. Immediately after the structure is in position, it will be seated and attached to the foundation. Details for a media event during the rollout will be revealed closer to the event. Additional information:      Destination Grand Canyon West   Last updated:  20 March 2007     Sources:   Braun, David.  "Photo in the News: Grand Canyon to Get Glass Bridge."   National Geographic News.  26 August 2005.    Clarke, Jay.  "Tribe Plans Walkway Over Grand Canyon."   The [San Jose] Mercury News.  4 December 2005.    Gaynor, Tim.  "Astronaut's Small Step Opens Grand Canyon Skywalk."   Reuters.  20 March 2007.    Mannweiler, David.  "Don't Look Down and You'll Be Fine."   The Indianapolis Star.  20 November 2005.    Shaffer, Mark.  "Hualapai Tribe Finds Economy Flows Better with River Plan Than Casino."   The Arizona Republic.  13 October 2005. In the days following the pro-Trump riot at the U.S. Capitol on Jan 6. 2021, several lawmakers started calling for U.S. President Donald Trump to be impeached for a second time, this time, according to one draft of the impeachment articles, for "incitement of insurrection." one draft of the impeachment articles As the momentum for impeachment built, some social media users argued that it wasn't worth impeaching Trump again as he would be leaving office in a few days regardless.  But according to a viral message from Twitter user @BenCostiloe, the potential consequences of impeachment extended further than removal from office. This message, which was shared more than 150,000 times, claimed that impeaching Trump would also strip him of several post-presidency benefits, such as a lifetime pension, security detail, and the ability to run for office in the future: viral message   This message is generally accurate. However, it should be noted that a president is only stripped of these benefits if they are impeached and removed from office. As of this writing, Trump, who was impeached by the U.S. House of Representatives in December 2019, will still receive presidential benefits as he was not convicted by the Senate and removed from office. U.S. President Bill Clinton, for example, still receives the benefits bestowed on former presidents even though he, too, was impeached.  impeached The benefits a president receives after leaving office are outlined in the Former Presidents Act of 1958. That law states that former presidents shall receive a lifetime pension (of approximately $200,000 annually), travel-related expenses up to $1 million each fiscal year, and protection from the Secret Service. It also notes that these benefits shall not be awarded to presidents whose service was terminated by removal "pursuant to section 4 of article II of the Constitution of the United States of America." Former Presidents Act approximately $200,000 annually) Article II of Section 4 of the Constitution, reads: "The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors." reads Mother Jones reported: reported The 1958 Former Presidents Act assures that no president leaves office without being set for lifeit guarantees a pension, access to health insurance, office space and staff. There is, however, one exception: These perks are only granted to presidents who arent removed from office in an impeachment trial. There is some debate as to whether an impeached, convicted, and removed president would also lose protection from the Secret Service. The Former Presidents Protection Act of 2012 authorizes "the Secret Service to protect former Presidents and their spouses for their lifetimes." This act does not state any exceptions for an impeached and removed president. As this is ahistorical territory, it's unclear how the term "former president" would be interpreted in this instance. We reached out to various historians for comment and will update this article accordingly. Former Presidents Protection Act The final item listed in the viral tweet  "loses his ability to run in 2024"  is a possibility, but not a foregone conclusion in the case of an impeachment conviction in the Senate. The U.S. Constitution states that a president "shall be removed from office if impeached and convicted. However, it is up to the Senate's judgment as to whether a removed president should be barred from holding future office.  Here's an excerpt from the U.S. Senate website (emphasis ours): website In impeachment proceedings, the House of Representatives charges an official of the federal government by approving, by majority vote, articles of impeachment. A committee of representatives, called managers, acts as prosecutors before the Senate. The Senate sits as a High Court of Impeachment in which senators consider evidence, hear witnesses, and vote to acquit or convict the impeached official. In the case of presidential impeachment trials, the chief justice of the United States presides. The Constitution requires a two-thirds vote of the Senate to convict, and the penalty for an impeached official upon conviction is removal from office. In some cases, the Senate has also disqualified such officials from holding public offices in the future. There is no appeal. Since 1789, about half of Senate impeachment trials have resulted in conviction and removal from office. In short, if Trump is impeached and removed from office, he would lose many of the benefits awarded to former presidents.    Updated [13 January 2021]: Article update to note that there is some debate as to whether an impeached, convicted, and removed president would also lose secret service protection. Claim:  Actor Michael J. Fox chose the middle name 'Jello' for himself when he was a child.  Example: [Collected via e-mail, May 2015] I have read several times since the 90s that Michael J. Fox's middle name was left up to him to choose, and that when he was six years old, he chose "Jello."   Origins:  What is actor Michael J. Fox's middle name? Is it Justin? Jackson? How about Jazzhands? The answer to the question of exactly what that initial stands for has proved elusive to many of his fans, allowing for the rise of a strange rumor: Michael Fox's parents  allowed him to choose his own middle name, so when he was six years old he opted honor his favorite dessert and become Michael Jello Fox. The exact origins of this rumor are unclear (it's probably an escapee from one of the plethora of fake "Did you know?" factoid lists that have long circulated online), but the unusual claim has been posted to multiple Internet forums over the years.  Although the details of the story change depending upon the source, the basic premise of the rumor was provided during a 2008 "off-topic" discussion on the Rotten Tomatoes film site about middle names: change discussion But here's the absolute best nickname in the world: Jello! When Michael J. Fox was a kid, he was given the chance to pick his own middle name, so he picked the name of his favorite dessert at the time! Michael JELLO Fox. I kid you not! Curiously, expressions of this rumor have also made their way into some online sales listings for the Back to the Future DVD: listings Notes:Theatrical release: May 25, 1990. Estimated budget: $22 million. BACK TO THE FUTURE grossed more than $80 million at the domestic box office and more than $240 million worldwide. Michael J. Fox's middle name is Jello. His parents let him pick his own middle name at the age of two. (This note is also wrong in stating that Back to the Future had its theatrical release in 1990. The second sequel, Back to the Future III, Okay, so what is Michael J. Fox's real middle name?  The correct answer is ... wait for it ... "Andrew." Huh?  How is that possible? According to a brief biography from the Michael J. Fox Foundation, the actor was born Michael Andrew Fox in 1961 to parents William and Phyllis Fox in Edmonton, Alberta. The actor explained in his autobiography Lucky Man: A Memoir that it wasn't until he had to register for the Screen Actors Guild (SAG) that he decided to use a different middle initial for his professional name, due to industry requirements for unique stage identifiers: biography The Screen Actors Guild prohibits any two members from working under the same stage name, and they already had a "Michael Fox" on the books. My middle name is Andrew, but "Andrew Fox" or "Andy Fox" didn't cut it for me.  "Michael A. Fox" was even worse, the word fox having recently come into use as a synonym for attractive. (Presumptuous?) It also sounded uncomfortably Canadian  Michael Eh? Fox  but maybe I was just being oversensitive. And then I remembered one of my favorite character actors, Michael J. Pollard, the guileless accomplice in Bonnie and Clyde. I stuck in the J, which sometimes I tell people stands for either Jenuine or Jenuis, and resubmitted my forms.  So it was Michael J. Fox on the call sheet I picked up at wrap each night that summer. In terms of birth names, Michael J. Fox's middle name is therefore Andrew.  In terms of stage names, his middle name is  like that of President Harry S. Truman  simply an initial that stands for nothing in particular. Truman Last updated:  5 May 2015 In late March 2020, amid the COVID-19 coronavirus disease pandemic, scams abounded on the internet. One such scam reported that consumers could get a $100 coupon during the pandemic for use at Starbucks cafes by simply clicking on a link. Here is a screenshot of a Twitter post promoting the bogus offer:     Although the links shared with the posts no longer appear to work, we are rating this offer a "Scam" because no evidence exists that the coupon was real. The web address for the "coupon," for example, was not from an official Starbucks website. We asked Starbucks to confirm the offer was a scam but didn't receive a response in time for publication. However, the "offer" being made echoes similar coupon scams that promise "free" or discounted goods from well-known brands if users click on a site  collecting people's private information in the process  but then don't deliver on the promise. As we have reported in the past on such scams: reported These types of viral coupon scams often involve websites and social media pages set up to mimic those of legitimate companies. Users who respond to those fake offers are required to share a website link or social media post in order to spread the scam more widely and lure in additional victims. Then those users are presented with a survey that extracts personal information such as email addresses, telephone numbers, dates of birth, and even sometimes credit card numbers. Finally, those who want to claim their free gift cards or coupons eventually learn they must first sign up to purchase a number of costly goods, services, or subscriptions. The Better Business Bureau offers consumers several general tips to avoid getting scammed: general tips 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 As the COVID-19 coronavirus disease pandemic of March 2020 threatened to shut down businesses across America for an extended period of time, the U.S. government faced the difficult task of deciding which industries should be provided economic assistance to keep them afloat for the duration. Public sentiment in some quarters was strongly against government bailouts for businesses such as airlines and cruise companies, on the grounds that over the last several years many of the major operators had spent billions of dollars in profits buying up their own stock rather than paying down their debts. In USA Today, John M. Griffin and James M. Griffin wrote: strongly against Start with the airlines. Rather than using their profits from the past five years to pay off debts and save for a rainy day, the big four  American, United, Delta and Southwest  instead grew their combined liabilities to $166 billion, all while spending $39 billion on share repurchases. That number, which is only from the big four, is almost 80% of what theyre asking for now from U.S. taxpayers. Similarly, the three largest Cruise companies -- Carnival, Norwegian, and Royal Caribbean -- have liabilities of $47.5 billion and engaged in share repurchases of $8 billion. Had these companies paid down liabilities instead of using stock repurchases to bid up their stock prices, they would have been far better prepared to weather this emergency. Of course, higher share prices made their stock options more valuable. This allowed top airlines executives to pay themselves $666 million in compensation over the five-year period. The top cruise executives managed to haul in $448 million. Now, taxpayers are unwillingly being called upon to bail out their profligate behavior. A widely circulated meme on social media offered another reason why cruise lines were supposedly unworthy of government bailouts -- because although they might be headquartered in the U.S., their ships were foreign-flagged in order to put them out of reach of U.S. law:  That nearly every major cruise line registers their ships somewhere outside the U.S. is hardly a disputable point. As a 2011 news report noted, only a single major cruise ship at the time was U.S.-flagged: news report [O]nly one major cruise ship -- NCL America's Pride of America -- is registered in the United States, according to data from CyberCruises.com. Most of the big boats fly Bahamian flags, but other popular registries include Panama, Bermuda, Italy, Malta and the Netherlands. In fact, according to Cruise Lines International Association, 90% of commercial vessels calling on U.S. ports fly foreign flags. The three cruise lines called out by name in the meme -- Disney, Celebrity, and Carnival -- do indeed engage in this practice. It's not difficult to verify that Disney cruise ships are registered in the Bahamas, Celebrity ships in Malta, and Carnival ships in Panama. Of course, the cruise industry and their critics offer differing reasons for why cruise ships are flagged in countries other than the U.S., with the former asserting that: Bahamas Malta Panama reasons CLIA [Cruise Lines International Association] maintains there are reasons for such policies: "There are many factors that determine where a cruise ship -- or for that matter, any maritime vessel -- is flagged. Those determinations are made by individual cruise lines and other ship operators based on varying factors including the capabilities of the flag to deliver the services needed; representation and reputation of the flag in the international shipping community; the performance of the flag state, which dictates how a ship is prioritized by port states; the pool of seafarers able to meet the needs of the flag; and the flag's fees/charges and taxes," the association said by e-mail. This can be viewed as a robust free-market debate. Some maintain burdensome U.S. regulations have forced cruise operators to plant their flags elsewhere, while others say these corporations are seeking to attract American dollars while skirting American safety and consumer protection laws. On the other hand, an academic paper by Caitlin E. Burke of the University of Florida about "Legal Issues Relevant to Cruise Ships" made no bones of observing that reflagging of ships had long been used as a means of avoiding U.S. federal taxes, labor and safety laws, environmental laws, lawsuits, criminal investigations, and other regulations: paper Aside from the majority revenue generated by U.S. passengers, cruise lines are independent of the U.S. economy. Even though nearly 75 percent of passengers are U.S. citizens, cruise line corporations and their ships are not traditionally American-owned or registered ... (Tomlinson, 2007) Cruise line companies are not concerned about increasing minimum wage, rising insurance premiums, or higher corporate taxes. Cruise lines escape federal taxes and labor laws by registering their corporations and vessels in foreign countries [such as] Panama, Liberia, and the Bahamas. In fact, employees of cruise lines are often mistreated due to lackadaisical labor laws. Worst of all, employees will find little to no recourse pursuing litigation. Likewise, a U.S. citizen passenger faces the same predicament. A vessels country of registration is commonly referred to as the "flag of convenience" (FOC). Flagging a ship under a foreign flag for the convenience of the cruise line is nothing new, nor is it rare. The majority of cruise ships today are registered to Panama, Liberia, or the Bahamas. It is important to pay close attention as many vessels within the same fleet are often registered to different countries. Carnival Corporation, for example, has flagged their cruise vessel Celebration under Panama and Destiny under the Bahamas. Cruise lines often avoid drawing attention to the FOC of by using the term "headquartered in Miami, Florida." It is important to understand that while the majority of these cruise lines have their headquarters in Miami, they are not registered in the U.S. Thus, U.S. laws do not apply and passengers are at the mercy of maritime law. That the practice of ship-reflagging is common and regular is undeniable. Whether cruise lines headquartered in the U.S. but operating ships registered in foreign countries "deserve" government bailouts in a time of pandemic is a subjective issue with no definitive answer, but certainly some critics have argued that they do not: critics Even in a crisis, companies with prudent balance sheets will survive and in time, thrive. Despite what politicians might tell you, the airplanes and ships of imprudent companies are physical property that will not suddenly disappear. They will fly or sail again under the same or different name, but hopefully with cheaper prices, better service and different executives. Like a college student sleeping off a hangover, a crisis is a time to sober up by removing debt from the system. Its not time for another drink. McGee, Bill.  "What Every Cruiser Should Know Before They Book."
  USA Today.  26 April 2011. McGee, Bill.  "Why Are Cruise Ships Registered in Foreign Countries?"
  USA Today.  11 December 2012. van Doorn, Philip.  "Airlines and Boeing Want a Bailout  But Look How Much Theyve Spent on Stock Buybacks."
  MarketWatch.  22 March 2020. Griffin, John M. and James M. Griffin.  "Coronavirus Bailout for Airlines and Cruise lines Is Socialism for the Undeserving Rich."
  USA Today.  20 March 2020. Burke, Caitlin E.  "A Qualitative Study of Victimization and Legal Issues Relevant to Cruise Ships."
  Accessed 23 March 2020. On 27 November 2016, the web site The American Tribune published an article reporting that Green Party candidate Jill Stein had been arrested for "embezzling" money donated to her to fund a recount of 2016 general election votes: article In yet another crazy turn of events this election season, Green Party's Jill Stein was arrested following a speech in Los Angeles this Saturday. Investigators received a tip from an anonymous source that Stein had hosted a "marijuana dinner party for ... some of the richest liberals in Los Angeles." When asked for comment, representatives for Jill Stein refused to respond. A spokesperson for the LAPD only said that they are "taking the case very seriously, and will update the public with any major announcements." President-Elect Donald Trump was quick to call out "two-face Stein" for her "rude scheme" to "gyp the whiny liberals!" As of now, the guest list for the dinner party, which purportedly cost Stein $75,000, has not been released. It is unclear whether Stein obtained the marijuana legally or not -- chances are some legal shortcuts were taken to supply a large amount of cannabis for an event where medical licenses were not verified. If found guilty, Stein faces fines of up to $5 Million (ironically, the amount raised for the recount), and a sentence of up to 2 years in prison. An "About" page linked in The American Tribune's footer disclaimed: page The American Tribune provides a satirical view of current events. Our articles should be taken with a grain of salt. Our articles are a parody of the terrible news coverage in 2016 and beyond. A reverse image search led to a page (which has since been disabled) on the official Green Party web site, bearing the caption: page Photos from arrest [of Jill Stein] at the Conestoga Bank next to Fannie Mae August 1, 2012. The clothing worn by Jill Stein and the image's August 2012 date matched a separate photograph documenting her arrest while protesting banking practices in Philadelphia: documenting