Citibank
Urban Legends Reference Pages: Inboxer Rebellion (Citibank)  Claim:  Citibank is sending out checking account suspension notices and asking customers to verify their acceptance of new terms and conditions.  .Example:  [Collected on the Internet, 2003]Your Checking Account at CitibankWe are letting you know, that you, as a Citibank checking account holder, must become acquainted with our new Terms & Conditions and agree to it.Please, carefully read all the parts of our new Terms & Conditions and post your consent. Otherwise, we will have to suspend your Citibank checking account.This measure is to prevent misunderstanding between us and our valued customers.We are sorry for any inconvinience it may cause.Click here to access our Terms & Conditions page and not allow your Citibank checking account suspension.   .Example:  [Collected on the Internet, 2003]Your Checking Account at CitibankWe are letting you know, that you, as a Citibank checking account holder, must become acquainted with our new Terms & Conditions and agree to it.Please, carefully read all the parts of our new Terms & Conditions and post your consent. Otherwise, we will have to suspend your Citibank checking account.This measure is to prevent misunderstanding between us and our valued customers.We are sorry for any inconvinience it may cause.Click here to access our Terms & Conditions page and not allow your Citibank checking account suspension. Example:  [Collected on the Internet, 2003]Your Checking Account at CitibankWe are letting you know, that you, as a Citibank checking account holder, must become acquainted with our new Terms & Conditions and agree to it.Please, carefully read all the parts of our new Terms & Conditions and post your consent. Otherwise, we will have to suspend your Citibank checking account.This measure is to prevent misunderstanding between us and our valued customers.We are sorry for any inconvinience it may cause.Click here to access our Terms & Conditions page and not allow your Citibank checking account suspension.  Your Checking Account at Citibank We are letting you know, that you, as a Citibank checking account holder, must become acquainted with our new Terms & Conditions and agree to it. Please, carefully read all the parts of our new Terms & Conditions and post your consent. Otherwise, we will have to suspend your Citibank checking account. This measure is to prevent misunderstanding between us and our valued customers. We are sorry for any inconvinience it may cause. Click here to access our Terms & Conditions page and not allow your Citibank checking account suspension. Click here to access our Terms & Conditions page and not allow your Citibank checking account suspension.  Origins:  Yet   again a redirection scam has hit the Internet in the guise of messages appearing to come from a well-known financial entity; in this case the wolf is disguised in the clothing of Citibank. Just like scams perpetrated earlier this year using PayPal and various Internet service providers as camouflage, this one involves messages which appear to be coming from Citibank itself.  In this case the fraudulent message falsely announces that Citibank has changed the Terms & Conditions of its checking accounts and informs the recipient that he must follow a hyperlink to indicate his acceptance of these new conditions or his account will be suspended.  In a classic case of redirection scamming, however, the page the user is taken to after clicking the link does not reside on the real Citibank site; it's a phony page camouflaged to look like a real Citibank page and hosted on the web site of Nanhua Futures Trading Co. of Zhejiang, China.  (Since the redirection URL is an IP address rather than a domain name, the ruse isn't obvious.)  The faux Citibank page records the visitor's e-mail address and asks him to enter the first four digits of hisCitibank Banking Card number and his full name, then hides the ruse by bouncing him back to the real Citibank's terms and conditions page. PayPal Internet phony Nanhua page According to the warning Citibank has posted on their web site: warning Citibank is working with law enforcement to aggressively investigate a fraudulent email that has recently been sent as spam to numerous email addresses. Although the email appears to come from Citibank regarding "Your Checking Account at Citibank," it does not, and Citibank is in no way involved in the distribution of this email. The email tells recipients that their Citibank Checking Account will be suspended unless they accept new Terms and Conditions and directs them to a site that appears to be Citibank's. The fradulent site requests the customers' name and the first 4 digits of their ATM card number.  Citibank urges recipients of this email to delete it immediately. Citibank does not ask customers to provide sensitive information in this way. Customers who receive suspicious email purporting to be from Citibank are encouraged to report it to customer service at the number listed on their ATM card. Citibank's systems have not been compromised in any way. In August 2003 the scammers tried again, this time sending out phony "You've received money transfer" Citibank notices which require the user to enter personal information in order to "prove you are our customer":       Dear CustomerC2it.com service would like to inform you, that you received money      transfer from Andreas (andreas666@earthlink.net).      Amount is $217. In order to receive that amount from c2it.com you have to      register your ATM card to prove you are our customer.Your e-mail is not registred with us, you need to setup account with us      and verify your identity. Please fill this form to be enrolled to c2it.com      service.Once you register, the money will appear in your c2it's account balance      in your overview page. You can withraw the outstanding balance to your      credit or debt card's bank account. C2it.com service would like to inform you, that you received money      transfer from Andreas (andreas666@earthlink.net).      Amount is $217. In order to receive that amount from c2it.com you have to      register your ATM card to prove you are our customer. andreas666@earthlink.net Your e-mail is not registred with us, you need to setup account with us      and verify your identity. Please fill this form to be enrolled to c2it.com      service. Once you register, the money will appear in your c2it's account balance      in your overview page. You can withraw the outstanding balance to your      credit or debt card's bank account.  There's a world ofreasons to use c2it            service. Send money from your computer to over 100            countries for a low flat fee. Transfer money to a bank account overseas or            send a check to family back home. It's easy. It's secure.It's from            Citibank. c2it service is convenient. And it's secure --            because c2it is backed by Citibank. We've improved our foreign exchange rates, so            now is a great time to send money overseas.  Send money from your computer to over 100            countries for a low flat fee.  Transfer money to a bank account overseas or            send a check to family back home.    c2it service is convenient. And it's secure --            because c2it is backed by Citibank.  We've improved our foreign exchange rates, so            now is a great time to send money overseas.  Information About Yourself   Email Address PasswordCard Holder Full Name Card Number Card Expiration Month 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 / Year 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012CVV2 (3 or            4 Digit Code After Card # on Back of Card)ATM PIN (For            Bank Verification)     2003 Citibank, FSB. Member FDIC.   2003 Citibank, FSB. Member FDIC.   Once again, the information entered by gullible recipients is going not to Citibank, but to a site registered to "Hangzhou Silk Road Information Technologies Co., Ltd" in Beijing, China. Scams that trick the gullible into revealing private information by having them "confirm" details presumably already in the possession of the one doing the asking fall under the broad heading of "social engineering," a fancy term for getting people to part with key pieces of information simply by talking to them. The wary consumer's best defense to such maneuvers is a zipped lip (or, in the online world, an untapped keyboard). Protect yourself by volunteering nothing, even if you feel somewhat pressured by the one doing the inquiring. If someone on the telephone asks you to read off your checking account number for "verification," ask him instead to recite it to you from his records. If you get an e-mail announcing something dire has befallen one of your on-line accounts and requiring you to re-enter sensitive personal data to get things back on track, do not reply to it, and do not fill out any forms that accompany it or click through any hot links it provides. Instead, contact that service through its web site and ask them about the e-mail. The con artists are getting more sophisticated all the time, so do not be too quick to mistake the appearance of legitimacy or authority with legitimacy itself. Just because an e-mail looks like it comes from an entity you do business with doesn't mean it's genuine, and just because you're being directed to a web page that looks like that entity's home page doesn't mean you're not being sent somewhere else. Beware the wolf in sheep's clothing lest you end up his dinner. Additional information:      'Phishers' Use Citi Logo to Try to Steal Personal Info   (Associated Press)Last updated:  31 August 2003 By David MikkelsonDavid Mikkelson founded the site now known as snopes.com back in 1994.Article TagsASP ArticleRecommendations        'Phishers' Use Citi Logo to Try to Steal Personal Info   (Associated Press)Last updated:  31 August 2003 By David MikkelsonDavid Mikkelson founded the site now known as snopes.com back in 1994.Article TagsASP ArticleRecommendations  Last updated:  31 August 2003
Voting in the 2020 U.S. Election may be over, but the misinformation keeps on ticking. Never stop fact-checking. Follow our post-election coverage here. here In September 2020, social media users began circulating a text meme charting the decrease in abortion rates in the U.S. during previous presidential administrations, attributing the greater drop in those rates during Democratic administrations to a difference in approach (i.e., making it illegal vs. making it unnecessary):     As we noted in an earlier article on a similar topic, following the 1973 Roe v. Wade Supreme Court decision that protected a pregnant woman's liberty to choose to have an abortion without excessive government restriction, the abortion rate rose immediately afterward until it peaked in the 1980s, and it has fairly consistently declined since that peak through presidential administrations of both parties: article Following nationwide legalization of abortion in 1973, the total number, rate (number of abortions per 1,000 women aged 1544 years), and ratio (number of abortions per 1,000 live births) of reported abortions increased rapidly, reaching the highest levels in the 1980s before decreasing at a slow yet steady pace.     Although it is true that the abortion rate has experienced greater declines during Democratic administrations than Republican ones, we can't draw any definitive conclusion that, as the meme tries to suggest, this difference is primarily due to varying approaches by the two main political parties. The simple idea presented by the meme has a number of flaws, chief among them that political factors that might influence the abortion rate (e.g., policies, legislation, judicial appointments and rulings) do not neatly conform to presidential terms of office -- what takes place during one administration generally continues to have an effect throughout subsequent administrations. As well, events occurring at state and local levels (not necessarily directly tied to federal actions) can have a substantial impact on the availability and prevalence of abortions. More important, though, is that we cannot definitively determine to what extent political factors influence the abortion rate. As the Guttmacher Institute (a pro-abortion-rights research organization) observed, recent declines in the abortion rate appear to have been driven not primarily by abortion restrictions but by a broader decline in pregnancies: observed Abortion restrictions target either individuals ability to access the procedure (such as by imposing coercive waiting periods and counseling requirements) or providers ability to offer it (such as through unnecessary and intentionally burdensome regulations). Any one of these restrictions could result in some people being forced to continue pregnancies they were seeking to end; this could, in theory, lower the abortion rate. With the available evidence, it is impossible to pinpoint exactly which factors drove recent declines, and to what degree. However, previous Guttmacher analyses have documented that abortion restrictions, while incredibly harmful at an individual level, were not the main driver of national declines in the abortion rate ... Rather, the decline in abortions appears to be part of a broader decline in pregnancies, as evidenced by fewer births over the same period. What's driving that decline in pregnancies, then? We don't know that for sure, either, but likely a combination of social, cultural, economic, medical, and political factors: combination Experts say the decline isnt due to a single cause, but rather a combination of several factors, including changing economics, delays in childbirth by women pursuing jobs and education, the greater availability of contraception, and a decline in teen pregnancies. The trend seen in the United States is also seen in much of the developed world, including Western Europe, said Dr. John Rowe, a professor at Columbia Universitys Mailman School of Public Health. One important factor driving this is the changing roles of women in society, Rowe said. In general women are getting married later in life, he explained. They are leaving the home and launching their families later. [Dr. Helen Kim, an associate professor at Northwestern Universitys Feinberg School of Medicine] said the concept of the ideal family size may be changing. There are shifts where having smaller families is a trend, she added. I cant speak on this as a sociologist, but this is what Ive seen among my peers and colleagues. One of the biggest factors is the decline in teen pregnancies, Rowe said. Thats good news ... And that makes a huge difference to their lives. The Guttmacher Institute posited a similar mix of factors to explain the decline in the abortion rate: Because both abortions and births [have] declined, it is clear that there were fewer pregnancies overall in the United States ... The big question is why. One possible contributing factor is contraceptive access and use. Since 2011, contraception has become more accessible, as most private health insurance plans are now required by the Affordable Care Act (ACA) to cover contraceptives without out-of-pocket costs. In addition, thanks to expansions in Medicaid and private insurance coverage under the ACA, the proportion of women aged 1544 nationwide who were uninsured dropped more than 40% between 2013 and 2017. There is evidence that use of long-acting reversible contraceptive methods -- specifically IUDs and implants -- increased through at least 2014, especially among women in their early 20s, a population that accounts for a significant proportion of all abortions Another possible contributing factor might be a decline in sexual activity. Findings from one national survey suggest a long-term increase in the number of people in the United States -- mostly younger men -- reporting not having sex in the past year. Yet another possibility is that infertility is increasing in the United States, thereby reducing the chances of getting pregnant and subsequently seeking to obtain an abortion. More generally, there are a host of other potential factors that could be driving declines in pregnancy rates, from individuals evolving desires about whether and when to become parents to peoples changing economic and social circumstances. Finally, it is possible that ... there could have been an increase in self-managed abortions happening outside of medical facilities, which the census would be unable to capture. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) also offered a combination of potential explanations for lower abortion rates: combination Multiple factors influence the incidence of abortion including the availability of abortion providers; state regulations, such as mandatory waiting periods, parental involvement laws, and legal restrictions on abortion providers; increasing acceptance of nonmarital childbearing; shifts in the racial/ethnic composition of the U.S. population; and changes in the economy and the resulting impact on fertility preferences and access to health care services, including contraception. As we stated four years ago, "causation between the presidency and abortion rates [is] difficult to demonstrate in any case, because it is hard to draw a straight line between federal government policy (let alone presidential policy) and abortion procurement." That observation remains true today. Carroll, Linda and Shamard Charles, M.D.  "Americans Aren't Making Enough Babies to Replace Ourselves."
  NBC News.  13 January 2019. Nash, Elizabeth and Joerg Dreweke.  "The U.S. Abortion Rate Continues to Drop: Once Again, State Abortion Restrictions Are Not the Main Driver."
  Guttmacher Institute.  18 September 2019. Kasprak, Alex.  "Abortion Rates Fall During Democratic Administrations and Rise During Republican Ones."
  Snopes.com.  11 November 2016. On 10 August 2016, the unreliable web site Disclose.tv published an article reporting that former National Security Agency (NSA) employee and whistleblower Edward Snowden was "pronounced dead by his girlfriend" in Russia: article Days after Edward Snowdens rumored death was debunked by journalist Glenn Greenwald and a Russian lawyer, a report emerged that his mistress and girlfriend have confirmed the leakers demise. HE WAS KILLED SATURDAY BY A DRUNKEN KNIFE WIELDING BURYAT Quoting MKRU News of Russia, a conservative site called Get Off the BS said Monday afternoon that Snowdens mistress said he was killed Saturday by a drunken knife wielding Buryat man in the Republic of Buryatia. The article from which the claim was aggregated was presented in the style of fiction rather than reporting and was interspersed with salacious fabrications: article Late Monday afternoon, the mistress of the infamous Edward Snowden announced the death of Snowden, who was allegedly killed this past Saturday by a drunken knife wielding Buryat man in the Republic of Buryatia. MKRU News (Russia) reported this past Saturday that a drunken man who for some reason took exception to a man, presumably Snowden, saving his wife from drowning, attacked a woman by slicing her neck and stabbed her male companion in the thigh, who later died from severe blood loss in a local hospital ... The injured were taken to a nearby hospital, where one of them died as a result of the extensive blood loss. The unidentified man was allegedly 27 years old. (Snowden who was born on June 21, 1983, would be 33 now) That outlet connected the purported death of Snowden to a cryptic, since-deleted tweet issued by the exiled contractor on 5 August 2016: tweet  While it was true the disappearing tweet was interpreted by many as an ominous signal, an insurance key, or a dead man's switch, journalist Glenn Greenwald (who works closely with Snowden to publish leaked material) quickly confirmed that Snowden is alive and well: insurance key dead man's switch @HannahhhBeth @Snowden He's fine @HannahhhBeth @Snowden  Glenn Greenwald (@ggreenwald) August 6, 2016 August 6, 2016  Disclose.tv and Get Off the BS are sites known for publishing outlandish fabrications and fake news in order to attract readers. On 15 August 2016 Snowden reappeared on Twitter, putting concerns for his safety to rest: Disclose.tv fabrications fake news The world's first confirmed, publicly-ID'd victim of NSA's #PRISM: a pro-democracy activist. https://t.co/C7GPiojhHT pic.twitter.com/GDvTDhyBHg #PRISM https://t.co/C7GPiojhHT pic.twitter.com/GDvTDhyBHg  Edward Snowden (@Snowden) August 15, 2016 August 15, 2016 Voting in the 2020 U.S. Election may be over, but the misinformation keeps on ticking. Never stop fact-checking. Follow our post-election coverage here. here On Oct. 20, 2020, U.S. President Donald Trump's son Eric Trump posted an image to social media that supposedly showed musicians Ice Cube and Curtis "50 Cent" Jackson wearing "Trump 2020" hats: posted   This is not a genuine photograph of 50 Cent and Ice Cube wearing "Trump 2020" hats. This is a doctored image that was created from a photograph of Ice Cube and 50 Cent at a BIG3 basketball game in Las Vegas, Nevada, in 2017. In the original image, Ice Cube is wearing a hat with the BIG3 logo on it and 50 Cent is wearing a hat with a New York Yankees logo.  Ice Cube shared the original photograph to his Twitter page in July 2020 along with a birthday message for his friend 50 Cent:  Getty Images has archived a few other photographs taken at this event. The image at the top of this article, for example, carries the caption: caption LAS VEGAS, NV - AUGUST 26: BIG3 founder and recording artist Ice Cube and Curtis "50 Cent" Jackson attend the BIG3 three on three basketball league championship game on August 26, 2017 in Las Vegas, Nevada. (Photo by Sean M. Haffey/BIG3/Getty Images) Ice Cube confirmed that the image was fake in a message posted to Twitter and Trump has since deleted his tweet. Twitter Although this image is fake, both of these musicians have truly aligned themselves, at least in part, with the Trump administration. While Ice Cube has not endorsed Trump for 2020, he did work with the president's administration to create a "Contract With Black America." Ice Cube said that he would "advise anyone on the planet who has the power to help Black Americans close the enormous wealth gap." work with said 50 Cent's support for Trump was more explicit. On Oct. 19, 50 Cent took to Instagram and shared a message endorsing Trump along with a screenshot from CNBC's "Power Lunch" concerning a report that Biden's tax plan would raise the tax rate to as much as 62% on Americans who make more than $400,000 a year: Instagram WHAT THE FUCK! (VOTE For TRUMP) IM OUT. FUCK NEW YORK The KNICKS never win anyway. I dont care Trump doesnt like Black people 62% are you out of ya fucking mind."   This screenshot comes from a segment of "Power Lunch" that aired on Oct. 19. During this segment, CNBC's Robert Frank explained how people earning more than $400,000 a year could pay income taxes at rate of more than 62%. Here's a video of Frank on another CNBC show, "Squawk Box," talking about Biden's tax plan: aired explained  Interestingly, Ice Cube and 50 Cent appear to be aligning themselves with Trump for polar opposite reasons. Ice Cube, for instance, said that he was willing to work with either presidential campaign in order to improve the lives of Black Americans and to "close the enormous wealth gap." 50 Cent, on the other hand, said he didn't care that "Trump doesnt like Black" and that he was endorsing the incumbent because his opponent's tax plan would increase taxes on wealthy Americans. Asmelash, Leah.  "From N.W.A. to MAGA: Ice Cube Takes Some Heat For Working With the Trump Administration."
  CNN.  16 October 2020. Reilly, Nick.  "50 Cent Endorses Donald Trump for President Even Though He 'Doesnt Like Black People."
  NME.  20 October 2020. CNBC.  "Bidens Tax Plan Could Lead to Combined Rate of 62% For High Earners."
  15 October 2020. Frank, Robert.  "Biden Tax Plan Gives $620 Tax Cut to Middle Class, New Study Says."
  CNBC.  15 October 2020. As California dealt with the deadliest wildfire in the state's history in November 2018, a number of social media users encountered an image that supposedly showed a "fawn and bobcat cub found under a desk in office build after California forest fire rolled through": showed   Although this photograph was often presented as if it were taken during the deadly Camp Fire in November 2018, it was actually several years old by that time. Furthermore, the claim that the fawn and bobcat were "found" under a desk during a fire isn't exactly accurate. This photograph was taken in May 2009 at a facility run by the non-profit Animal Rescue Team during the Jesusita wildfire near Santa Barbara, California. Julia Di Sieno, the co-founder and Director of Animal Rescue Team, said that the bobcat and the fawn were rescued at different times and locations. In other words, they were not "found" huddled together under a desk during the fire. Discovery.com reported that while animals of different species are typically kept in separate areas, rescue workers were swamped in the aftermath of the fire and didn't have many options for housing these animals: reported Di Sieno helped rescue the bobcat kitten in the photo a week before, near Arnold Schwarzeneggers Ranch, where it was dehydrated and near death. Di Sieno nurtured it back to health. They rescued the fawn during last week's wildfire. Although wild animals, especially of separate species, are never placed together due to regulations, in this emergency situation, they had no choice. During the mayhem of the fire, they were forced to put animals anywhere they could, since they had run out of crates large enough for the fawn. The kitten ran to the fawn, and it was instant bonding. Most wildlife knows instinctively to flee fires - to fly away, burrow, or run - but some dont make it out in time. Rescue workers walk near the fire line with nets, searching for any injured animals or young separated from their parents. Burn victims go to the local care hospital, says Di Sieno. We rescued bunnies, squirrels, two fawns. Weve rescued I dont know how many geese, chickens ducks, cats, birds, turkeys, and a baby owl and a baby raptor. Discovery.com.  "Jesusita Wildfire Animal Rescue."
  18 May 2009. Reports about big bonuses for Wall Street executives have struck a nerve with people who wonder how the executives can justify large payments when their firms are in shaky condition or are seeking federal help. It's drawn the ire of President Obama, who called it the height of irresponsibility. It's shameful. On Feb. 4, 2009, he said top executives at firms receiving federal aid will have their compensation capped at $500,000 and that bonuses would have to come as stock that they can't receive until the government is reimbursed. The New York State Comptroller reported in late January that Wall Street firms in 2008 handed out $18.4 billion in cash bonuses to employees who live in New York City, the sixth-largest amount on record. Critics have said the employees don't deserve the rewards because the firms lost more than $35 billion in 2008 and the federal government is spending hundreds of billions of dollars bailing out many of them. Fred Smith, chief executive of FedEx and supporter of George W. Bush, John McCain and other Republicans, tried to cool down the heated discussion with a bit of perspective on ABC'sThis Weekon Feb. 1, 2009. Host George Stephanopoulos noted that Smith actually took a pay cut in December. You announced a 20 percent pay cut because of the performance of FedEx over the last year, because of the tough economic times. And I wonder ... what do you think of the bonus structure now on Wall Street? Smith replied that compensation on Wall Street is built on bonuses much more so than in the industrial sector. As I understand it, the average bonus in that $18 billion is about $100,000 a year. The bonuses on Wall Street are down about 44 percent. Smith was not far off when it came to the average cash bonus. It was $112,000 in 2008, according to New York State Comptroller Thomas DiNapoli's Jan. 28, 2009, report. And indeed bonuses were down 44 percent in a sense: The total amount given out in bonuses, $18.4 billion, was a decline of 44 percent from the $32.9 billion handed out in 2007. But due to job losses on Wall Street, there were fewer employees to split the pie in 2008. So the average bonus was down a slightly more modest 37 percent from the previous year's average. Also, it might have been worth pointing out that while bonuses were well below the 2007 level, that average of $112,000 was still the fifth-highest since the comptroller's office started keeping records in 1985. And the total haul of $18.4 billion was the sixth highest on record. Both were around the same as 2004, a vastly better year for the securities industry and its investors. And although it's true that bonuses generally make up a substantial portion of the compensation on Wall Street, $112,000 is still more than twice the average salary in the United States. But Smith is free to use statistics selectively  and the statistics he chose were off by just $12,000 and a few percentage points. We find his statement Mostly True. An eye-catching billboard in the state of Minnesota caused some controversy in the early days of January 2018. Purportedly sponsored by "Republicans for Honesty in Government," the billboard showed a photograph of President Donald Trump accompanied by the words "Big Mistake." billboard We received several inquiries from readers about the authenticity of the billboard, and whether it was actually produced by Republicans.  The billboard is real, as is another similar one found elsewhere in Minnesota. However, the group behind it"Republicans for Honesty in Government"is run by a Democratic donor and businessman in the state, suggesting there is more to the campaign than meets the eye. On 2 January 2018, the left-wing Facebook page Occupy Democrats posted a photo of the billboard, along with a message emphasizing the apparent party affiliation of its sponsors: photo REPUBLICANS erected this billboard in Minnesota...speaks volumes about the current state of our Liar-in-Chief's presidency, doesn't it?   That post was shared almost 25,000 times within three days.  The photo appears to have originally been posted to Facebook in October 2017 by Rosemary Rocco, who said the billboard was located along U.S. Route 52, in the state's second congressional district, which includes parts of Minneapolis-St. Paul and Wabasha County. She wrote: posted Seen on MN Highway 52 south-CD2! Proof there are Republicans who care about our country. Note the disclaimer on the billboard. This is what country first looks like. Earlier in October, a Reddit user posted another photograph of a billboard bearing a photograph of Trump along with the word "Clueless." It was also purported to have been erected by the same group.  photograph According to records held by the Minnesota Secretary State, Republicans for Honesty in Government was first registered as a non-profit corporation in Minnesota in 2006, as reported by the regional news web site Bluestem Prairie. Its registered agent is Robert Johnson, founder and director of the Minnesota real estate investment firm AEI Capital.  records Bluestem Prairie AEI Capital Republicans for Honesty in Government shares its address with that of AEI Capital. The group was dissolved in 2009, but was reinstated in March 2017.  However, despite being the man behind a non-profit organization that labels itself Republican, Johnson is a prolific donor to Democratic candidates and the Minnesota branch of the Democratic-Farmer-Labor party (DFL). Federal Election Commission records show that a "Robert P. Johnson," "Robert Johnson" or "Bob Johnson" at "AEI Fund Management" or related company names in Minnesota has donated a total of $43,830.50 in federal campaign funding since 2004. All of it went to DFL and Democratic candidates or political action committees. records Johnson told the Minnesota news web site GoMN that he had leaned towards the Republican party in the past, but switched allegiances after what the web site described as a shift to the right within the GOP.  GoMN "My political position was staked out decades ago and has not changed," he told GoMN. "What has changed is the positions of the parties and their platforms." Federal Election Commission records show that in 1980, Johnson did donate $500 to the Minnesota Independent-Republican Finance Committee, his only non-Democratic federal election donation. records However, Johnson registered "Republicans for Honesty in Government" in 2006, two years after he began donating exclusively to Democratic and DFL candidates, including $7,000 to former Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry, and more than $10,000 to the Minnesota DFL party.  $7,000 We asked Johnson questions about his involvement with Republicans for Honesty in Government, his party affiliation, his political donations, and the purpose of the billboards. We did not receive a response. He told GoMN that the billboards were intended to provoke Minnesotans to think more carefully about their electoral choices"to maybe rub their chin metaphorically a little bit and wonder, what kind of decisions are we making?" Sorenson, Sally Jo. "Is Billboard on Highway 52 for Real?; Or, Who Are Those 'Republicans for Honesty in Government'".
 Bluestem Prairie. 2 January 2018. McLaughlin, Shaymus. "Who is the Group Behind the Donald Trump 'BIG MISTAKE' Billboard?"
 GoMN. 3 January 2018. In February 2013, the American Muslim Political Action Committee (AMPAC) announced they would be staging an event called the "Million Muslim March," which they hoped would gather one million people in Washington, D.C., on 11 September 2013, the twelfth anniversary of the 9/11 terrorist attacks, to press the U.S. government into revealing "the truth" about those attacks: AMPAC The American Muslim Political Action Committee is hosting what it hopes will be a gathering of one million people in Washington, D.C., on the 12th anniversary of 9/11 to urge the government to reveal "the truth" about the attacks."We want to hold President Obama accountable for his empty promises of creating a transparent government," march organizer Isa Hodge said. "What exactly have we spent all our money, lost lives and taken lives for? The entire record of the 9/11 Commission has never been released." Protesters will also denounce "FBI traps," "illegal tapping and surveilling of Muslim Americans" and "media propaganda making the word terrorist synonymous with Muslim," he said. After negative public reaction, AMPAC changed the name of their event to the "Million American March Against Fear" (MAMAF), which they describe as offering the following events: We invite you to stand with and join us to Rally Against Fear at 12 noon on The National Mall, then the Congress, the Supreme Court, and the White House, to hold truth to power at the three major branches of American government.We ask all individuals and organizations working for peace to attend this collective action to tell our Government leaders we want transparency and policies of peace. In the past 12 years since 9/11 the United States government as failed to protect and promote Constitutional liberties and human life, here and abroad. We feel that accountability in government has been ignored and the time has arrived to collectively speak truth to power. Speaking will be experts and individuals on the lack of transparency and questions plaguing 9/11, steady erosion of domestic civil liberties, drone policy and the very dire effect of these on of plight of American Muslims here at home, and Muslim communities globally in the scope of U.S. imperialism, and the modern face of resistance to unmanned aerial surveillance and warfare. In August 2013, motorcyclists began organizing a "2 Million Bikers to DC counter-event, which they hoped would bring even larger numbers of bikers on a Washington ride-through to "pay tribute and offer respect to those that lost their lives on that day 12 years ago, and to salute our troops engaged in the War on Terror": 2 Million Bikers to DC Example:  [Collected via Facebook, September 2013] I keep seeing posts on Face Book saying that President Obama denied bikers a permit to ride in Washington, D.C. on 9/11 but did allowMuslims the same privilege. True or false? However, the National Park Service (NPS) has jurisdiction over the issue, and the NPS has declined to issue the group a "no stop" permit that would facilitate their ride through Washington by granting them a police escort and a waiver for red lights, stop signs and other traffic signals. The NPS cited traffic issues and manpower requirements in denying the request: The National Park Services confirms that it has denied the permit for the ride-only, non-stop event after looking at it in terms of disruption and resource management.NPS spokeswoman Carol Johnson said the group's permit application was examined like all others, using the Code of Federal Regulations. Johnson said the group had asked to ride through what's called Memorial Core, near the Memorial Bridge, from 9 a.m. to 4 p.m. with 2,000 motorcyclists. NPS decided that the large ride would require closures of important roadways, block access to Rock Creek and George Washington Parkways and would cause a severe disruption to traffic. A police escort would also be needed. "It's just a case of what they asked for in the permit applications," Johnson said. The Metropolitan Police Department [said] the group was asked to move its ride to a weekend, when it would be less disruptive to traffic. "Solely to facilitate the speed and timeliness of the participants in itself does not fall within the definition of a First Amendment assembly, said police spokeswoman Gwendolyn Crump. The permits in question were under the purview of the NPS and the Metropolitan Police Department, not President Obama himself. The lack of a permit did not prevent bikers from riding through Washington on the 9/11 anniversary; the riders just weren't exempt from traffic laws and therefore couldn't navigate through the city nearly as quickly as they could have if they had been issued a "no-stop" permit. The two cases were dissimilar in that AMPAC requested a permit for a smaller gathering in a fixed location and submitted their request several months in advance; the 2 Million Bikers group requested a no-stop permit for a much larger group involving miles of roadways, street closures, and police escorts, and they didn't submit their request for a no-stop permit until a few weeks before the event, as documented by this 30 August 2013 Facebook post: Neither group came anywhere close to the "millions" of participants referenced in their event names: the Million American March Against Fear was said to have drawn between a few dozen and a few hundred people, while news accounts cited estimates for the 2 Million Bikers to DC event at somewhere between 10,000 and 75,000 participants. 10,000 75,000 Many Internet postings later claimed that Washington police had estimated the 2 Million Bikers event turnout at between 800,000 and 1.2 million participants, but we have found no documentation (other than repetition of rumor) confirming that local police made any such estimate, and when we queried the Washington Metropolitan Police Department (MPD) about the issue, the Director of the MPD's Office of Communications confirmed that "the Metropolitan Police Department does not provide crowd estimates."   Brenzing, Bob.  "10,000 Bikers Circle Washington for 9/11."
  WUSA-TV [Washington].  12 September 2013.   Davidson, Jacob.  "2 Million Bikers to DC: Motorcycle Riders Roll into Washington."
  Time.  11 September 2013.   Lee, Caroline.  "'Million Muslim March' 2013 Has Low Turnout, Lost in Sea of Motorcyclists."
  UPI.  11 September 2013.   Somers, Meredith.  "Bikers, Muslims Pledge Return to D.C. Next 9/11."
  The Washington Times.  11 September 2013. On Nov. 14, 2020, supporters of President Donald Trump rallied in Washington D.C., in an event dubbed the "Million MAGA March," either to commiserate with each other about Trump's recent loss in his failed bid for re-election, or to foster Trump's spurious claims that the presidential election had been "stolen" from him. rallied Some posts shared on social media about the event purported to document the display of Nazi and Confederate flags offered for sale at the rally:  However, the photograph seen above was taken in a different time and place that had no connection to "Million MAGA March." It had been snapped at the Braddock's Inn flea market in Pennsylvania over two months earlier, and the vendor displaying the offending material removed it upon request: flea market A handout urging voter support for aproposed $1.05 billion Austin school district bond issueon the November 2017 ballot singles out the need to repair and renovate schools averaging 40 years of age plus a desire to modernize or build 16 schools. Moreover, the handout from the Committee of Austins Children PAC says: Did you know? AISD Prop. 1 bonds will require no tax rate increase, a claim the group also makes onits website. Is that rate statement accurate? To rehash, the handout saysthe sought bondswont require a rate increase. Its silent on whether district residents will pay more in taxes if the proposition passes--which struck Austin lawyer Bill Aleshire, formerly Travis Countys elected judge, as misleading. Aleshire, who brought the handout to our attention, said by email: No one in their right mind should believe AISD can borrow $1 billion plus interest and not have a property tax increase as a result. When we asked, David Butts, a consultant to the PAC, told us by phone the group based its rate claim on district presentations. Butts said: Weve never said that you wouldnt pay higher taxes, in that barring an economic recession, escalating local property values stand to drive up how much the district reaps--without the district needing a rate bump. Property taxes are tied to assessed property values which in Austin (like other prosperous cities) lately spiral nearly every year. In this fact-check, well share assumptions behind the no-hike scenario and unpack estimates of how much money the proposed bonds would likely cost homeowners in increased tax bills. Its also worth noting the speculative quality of tax predictions. To our inquiry, Roger Falk of theTravis County Taxpayers Union, which opposes the proposition, questioned anyones ability to fact-check rate-related claims because, he said by phone, tax effects depend on unknowns including whether and how much total appraised property values change and if the districts intended debt repayment schedules and interest rates bear out. You cannot assume its a sunny day every day, Falk said. Its going to rain sometime. Austin districts assumptions District leaders have said that presuming total assessed property values continue to increase and also that the district repays more than half the proposed debt within a decade, the school board will be spared from considering an increase in the districts total tax rate of $1.192 per $100 valuation--the bulk of which covers day-to-day maintenance and operations. A September 2017Austin American-Statesmannews storyelaborated: The district points to its last bond election $392 million approved by voters in 2013 as an example of how it can tamp down the impact on property tax bills. Those bonds were expected to raise the tax rate by 3 cents, or about $38.40 a year to the property tax bill for a $200,000 home. But instead, the story said, the district, buoyed by increasing property values, lowered the tax rate by 5 cents per $100 of a homes assessed value. Homeowners are still paying more, of course, because property values in Austin have shot up 12 percent a year, on average, for the past five years. Tiffany Young, a district spokeswoman, emailed us the districts August 2017tax capacity analysisof the proposed bond costs, which included a summary of annual changes--of late 11-percent-plus annual increases--in total assessed property valuations in the district from 2008 through 2017:           SOURCE:Document showing tax capacity analysis of proposed bond debt, Austin Independent School District, Aug. 10, 2017 (received by email from Tiffany Young, senior communication specialist, AISD, Sept. 26, 2017) That news story noted that the districts payback plan for the proposed bond package assumes an annual increase in total assessed property values of 7 percent in the first two years and 1.5 percent for each subsequent year. Property values actually have a 10-year average growth rate of nearly 8 percent, the story said. School leaders advised that if theres a flattening in property-value increases, the district could tap $46 million in reserves, or savings, to make up for lost revenue. Also, the story quoted Ellen Wood, who chairs the Greater Austin Chamber of Commerces board of directors, calling district assumptions behind no tax-rate hike prediction conservative and appropriate. By phone, Wood told us chamber members based that judgment on talks with the districts chief financial officer, Nicole Conley Johnson, and a firm advising the district on the proposed issuance. To our inquiries, Conley Johnson reaffirmed the districts conclusion that the proposed bonds can be paid off without a tax-rate hike. In fact, Conley Johnson said by phone, she expects the district to land interest rates perhaps 2 percentage points less than the 5 percent rate assumed in its modeling, a decrease that would reduce repayment costs. Noting increased assessed property valuations in recent years, Conley Johnson also said its reasonable to expect assessed values to surge more each year than the 1.5 percent rate assumed in the modeling past the first couple years. If the proposition fails at the polls, Conley Johnson confirmed,the school board could reduce the debt portionof the district tax rate in 2021-22 by $0.0297 per $100 valuation to $0.0833 with additional reductions doable most subsequent years through 2039-40--though that scenario depends, perhaps improbably, on no additional costs accumulating in the intervening years. If the proposition passes, Conley Johnson said, in 2022, the district will need some $35.5 million to pay incremental costs on the proposed bonds. An estimated $35.5 million would be raised by from that $0.0297 per $100 valuation in tax rate, the district projects. Worst-case scenarios? We separately asked Conley Johnson andChris Allenof First Southwest, the firm hired by the district as financial advisers on the proposition, to lay out a worst-case scenario that might cause district officials to recommend a rate increase after all. Youd have to have a major economic downturn, Allen said by phone. Youd have to have the housing market plummet. Allen, referring to the districts assumed 7 percent increases in total assessed valuations in both 2019 and 2020, said: I think the 7 percent is conservative. If you look around, there are cranes everywhere. The housing and commercial market is on fire. Conley Johnson said by email: We estimate that if total assessed valuation growth stayed flat for the next 8 years or there was a cumulative decline in AV of 20%, we would need to consider increasing the tax rate. Of course. she said, these events would buck historical trends of the last 10 years where there was only year that AV declined, in 2011 due to the national recession--arguably the worst in history. Even still, there was subsequent growth thereafter and the decline was made-up after two years and growth doubled after that. Falk, the proposition foe, questioned the assumption that the district can repay the bonds at a 5 percent interest rate past this next year. Theres no science--no way to know--past one year, Falk said. Falk called the assumed annual increases in total property valuations a best guess. We also askedCharles Gilliland, a land-market expert at Texas A&M University, to evaluate the no-rate-increase claim. Gilliland said by phone the districts post-2020 assumption that total assessed property values will increase 1.5 percent annually seems pretty conservative. The rest of the story is its not going to be a nice steady increase, Gilliland said. There are going to be ups and downs. Generally, Gilliland said by email: Without exhaustive historical studies of the parameters of their model and an examination of the operating conditions of the district, I have no evidence to cast doubt on the assumptions underlying the districts analysis. Costs to taxpayers Falk called the tax-rate claim by itself a head fake intended to dupe voters into overlooking that each taxpayer would be paying more dollars to cover bond repayments. He also emailed us thetaxpayer groups analysis, which provides estimated effects on property tax bills by assuming that  total assessed valuations within district boundaries wont go up or down. Then again, the district has acknowledged that property owners will pay more in taxes to pay debt service on the bonds, if approved. A June 2017American-Statesmannews storyon school board members voting to place the proposition before voters initially noted that district officials said the tax rate would remain flat at $1.192 per $100 of assessed property value, with $1.079 designated for operations and $0.113 of the rate going toward repaying debt issued to fund capital improvements. Still: For the owner of the districts average taxable value home of $355,947, the school tax bills would total nearly $4,243. As properties increase in value, the story said, that same tax rate would lead to increasingly higher tax bills. District web pages devoted to the proposition similarly indicate property owners will likely face increases in what the district bills. We initially spotted no estimates of how much more, but estimates were provided when we asked. Lets cover those web posts, then turn to what the district gave us. Heres a question on the districts main FAQ section about the proposition: I've heard AISD say this bond will not raise my property tax rate. How is that possible? The 202-word reply stresses the districts plan not to issue the sought debt all at once plus plans to draw on other funds; it doesnt concede additional direct-to-taxpayer bond costs. We saw this question on a separate districtFinance FAQ web pageabout the proposition: So does this mean that I wont have an increase in my tax bill? The districts reply opens, No. That reply otherwise says higher taxes depend on the appraised value of taxable property, which is determined by the Travis Central Appraisal District, not AISD. An increase or decrease in taxable property value, even with no change in the tax rate, would result in an increase or decrease in the actual amount of taxes paid. The reply goes on to note that residents who qualify for Travis Countys over-65 homestead exemption wouldnt pay more in school taxes. Moreover, the reply continues, other governing entities levy property taxes including the city of Austin, Travis County, the Austin Community College District and the Travis County Health Care District. The rates for each entity are set annually by the elected or governing officials, the district says. The rate for each of the taxing entities is then applied to your home value, it says. We also noticed the last, 18th question on the districts main FAQ page for the proposition: What's the bottom line, the one thing you want voters to know? The districts reply: AISD needs to address facility deficiencies and is committed to creating 21st-century learning spaces for our students. We can do so without a tax rate increase. Conley Johnson told us that in 2021-22 (the third year of the district starting to sell and repay the bond debt being presented to voters), the cost to taxpayers of the new debt would range from $29.70 for the owner of a property with an assessed value of $100,000 up to $297 for the owner of a property with an assessed value of $1 million.See the districts full chart here. According to what Conley Johnson described as the districts worst-case modeling of the proposed bonds effect on taxes, the owner of an Austin homestead at theaverage 2017-18 assessed value($332,103) would see the debt portion of her or his district tax bill increase from $375 in 2017-18 to $484 in 2027-28--driven by expected bumps in assessed property values. Absent the sought bonds or other approved debt, this modeling indicates, the 2027-28 costs to such a homeowner for district debt would total $250.57. An owner of a homestead at the 2017-18median value($262,282) would face $382.75 in district debt-tied taxes in 2027-28--up from $296 in 2017-18 and greater than the $197.89 in such taxes the homeowner would face if the district doesnt issue additional debt. Theres more: As we made our inquiries, the district posted adocumentestimating each homesteading homeowners future tax payments to the district related to paying off the proposed bonds. Upshot: Starting in 2022, some $0.0297 per $100 valuation of the districts tax rate would generate sufficient revenue to pay debt service on the sought bonds, the document says. The share of the districts tax rate needed to pay that debt service will escalate in subsequent years, the document says, with that share reaching its maximum of $0.0530 per $100 valuation as of 2029. According to the document, the district estimates the dollar costs in annual taxes on the median-value homestead in the district--which in 2017 had an appraised value of $287,282--to be $77.90 in 2022 and $139.01 in 2029. At the upper end, the estimated annual dollar costs due to debt service on the proposed bonds to a homestead appraised at $1 million in 2017 is shown as $289.58 in 2022, $516.75 in 2029. Our ruling The PAC said the proposed Austin school district bonds will require no tax rate increase. Missing from this claim: Individual homeowners are expected to pay more in property taxes even if the tax rate remains the same, which looks likely thanks to rising property valuations in a hot real-estate market. We rate this statement, which lacks the important clarification that only the tax rate isnt expected to rise, Mostly True. MOSTLY TRUEThe statement is accurate but needs clarification or additional information. Click here formoreon the six PolitiFact ratings and how we select facts to check. Austin voters should doubt mayoral aspirant Mike Martinezs commitment to an affordable city, his opponent in a Dec. 16, 2014, runoff maintains. The narrator of a Steve Adler TV ad says that as an Austin City Council member, Mike Martinez has voted to raise taxes and utility rates while ending free bus service for seniors. That statement is made against this visual backdrop:  Source: TV ad from Steve Adler, Austin mayoral candidate,Mike Martinez Record on City Council, posted online Dec. 2, 2014. Martinez has been a council member since June 2006. So its no surprise he would have had a say on taxes and rates charged by the city-owned utilities, though unsaid here is that no single council member controls any such decisions; its been a seven-member body, including the mayor. Martinez also chairs theeight-person boardoverseeing Capital Metro, which provides local bus and limited rail service. So he could have voted on fares charged the elderly. Lets recap Martinezs actions on fares, city taxes and utility rates. Bus fares To our inquiries, Adlers campaign didnt provide comprehensive backup for his ad claim. But by email, spokesman Jim Wick pointed out a September 2010Austin American-Statesmannews storystating the Cap Metro board voted to require bus riders 65 and older to pay 50 cents a ride or $15 for a 31-day bus pass, starting in 2011. The story also said the board was deciding to charge seniors and people with disabilities to ride buses for the first time since 1989. For Capital Metro, spokeswoman Francine Pares told us by email Martinez has been a board member since June 2007 and chairman since January 2010. Pares also confirmed the boards decision to charge the 50-cent fares, though she said that change was adopted at the boards November 2010 gathering, which Martinez didnt attend, she said. According tominutes of the Nov. 10, 2010, board meeting, the six members who were there unanimously approved a resolution authorizing higher fares in part, the resolution said, to generate additional operating revenues while striving to meet growing demand for transportation options. Martinez and another board member were recorded as absent. Pares told us theboard in September 2013approved another increase in senior fares, to 60 cents, effective in 2015. Generally, she said, senior citizens receive 50 percent off regular fares. By phone, Martinez agreed he and fellow board members agreed to charge the fares for elderly residents. But that happened, he said, only after a state panel issued marching orders including a recommendation calling for Capital Metro to raise more money from fares. In a 2010 report, the staff of the Sunset Advisory Commission recommended the authority charge a bus fare of 50 cents for groups currently riding free. The commission had said 30 percent of Capital Metros passengers were riding for free and, it noted, the board had rejected proposed fares in 2008 and 2009. In its finalJuly 2011 reporton Capital Metro, the commission said: While fare increases are difficult, requiring only a portion of its ridership to bear the burden of these increases is not equitable or sustainable, especially in bad financial times. Martinez pointed out the sunset review occurred in keeping withlegislation passed into lawby the 2009 Legislature, which wanted Capital Metro to get its finances in order. City taxes On taxes, Wick of Adlers camp offered as backup news stories indicating thatin 2009, Martinez said taxpayers would have to pay a little more in taxes and fees through 2010 to maintain services andin 2010, the council acting to raise the citys property tax rate from 42.09 cents per $100 of property value to 45.71 cents; the city tax on a median value home was expected to increase $52 to $843. Wick followed up by emailing us achart made by Adlers campaignindicating city property taxes on a median-valued home going up on Martinezs watch. For a non-campaign analysis, we turned to the Travis Central Appraisal District; the chief appraiser, Marya Crigler, emailed us achartindicating city property taxes on a median-value homestead in 2007 were $715; in 2014, the comparable figure was $1,014. We converted the 2007 figure to 2014 dollars, using afederal inflation calculator. Upshot: Adjusted for inflation, city taxes on a median-value Austin homestead went up $278, or 34 percent, from 2007 through 2014, Martinezs council years. Over those years, according to the district, the median taxable value of an Austin homestead went from $177,257 to $228,032. Adjusting for inflation suggests there was a nearly $18,800, 9 percent, increase. Martinez agreed property owners paid more in taxes in his council tenure, results influenced by surging property values, he said. Still, he said, in five of eight years, council members voted to keep the citys property tax rate the same or to lower it. When the rate was raised, he said, the economy was in recession. For another fact check, the city provided this chart of tax rates, which shows the council raised the rate three times in Martinezs tenure, most recently for 2013,  but cut the rate four times, most recently for 2014. In September 2014, the council left the 2014 rate intact for 2015. Utility rates In 2011,we found Mostly Truea claim that Austin Energy, the city electric utility, was considering its first hike in rates since 1994. The base electric rate, covering staff, the electric system, power plants, vehicles and the like, hadnt changed since 1994. Meantime, residential customers were paying less for electricity than they once had, taking inflation into account. On June 7, 2012, the council unanimously voted to raise the base rate, theAmerican-Statesmanreported. The news story said: The complicated new rate structure will hit customers in different ways; generally speaking, the larger and more energy-hungry the home, the higher the percentage increase, effective October 2012. A typical home, which uses an average of 1,000 kilowatt-hours a month over the course of a year, will see its monthly bill rise by $8, to $113, according to Austin Energy calculations. A home that uses a lot of electricity would see its monthly bill increase by $59, to $332, the story said. How would Adler have voted? We asked Wick how Adler would have voted on the bus fares, tax and utility rate hikes we confirmed. Theres no simple answer, Wick said by email, but Adler favors free fares for senior citizens. Our ruling Mike Martinez has voted to raise taxes and utility rates while ending free bus service for seniors. Austin residents pay more in taxes and could be paying more for electricity thanks to council actions Martinez supported. He also backed a decision by the Capital Metro board to charge half fares to elderly bus riders who had previously not been charged, though Martinez hardly did this by himself; its worth clarifying, too, that Capital Metro was under pressure to improve its finances and that Martinez missed the vote creating the then-50-cent fare. We rate this statement Mostly True. MOSTLY TRUE The statement is accurate but needs clarification or additional information. Click here formoreon the six PolitiFact ratings and how we select facts to check.