Is this surprising monetary gift from an unknown person genuine?
In March 2020, the prospect of the U.S. government's sending out $1,200 stimulus checks to individual taxpayers as part of a $2 trillion emergency economic package for dealing with the COVID-19 coronavirus disease pandemic created a prime opportunity for grifters who engage in scams that involve luring victims by mailing checks to them. In particular, one several-year-old, check-scam warning was widely recirculated via social media:  Such warnings served a useful purpose in alerting many viewers to be wary of receiving checks in the mail from unexpected sources. However, they also poorly served audiences in misstating how the underlying scams connected with those checks work. It is not the case, as claimed in the warning reproduced above and in the following news clip, that the scammers who mail out these checks "do this in hopes of getting your account information when you deposit the check," and then using that information to clean out your bank account:  A little common sense would be relevant here: If your simply depositing a check provided the sender of that check with the means to obtain your personal banking information and drain your bank account, it would be unsafe for any bank customer to ever deposit any check  and clearly that is not the case, as millions of people maintain checking accounts without regularly falling victim to scammers. All such check scams have two essential components: 1) Scammers mail out counterfeit checks (often made out in the names of real organizations) to lure their victims into believing they are receiving money. 2) Scammers instruct their victims to send back some of the funds they supposedly received from depositing the fake checks (usually via wire transfer, Western Union, PayPal, or gift cards). The scammers count on the fact that funds from deposited checks are often made available to bank customers before the banks can confirm that the checks are authentic and have cleared. The victims of these scams, mistakenly believing they have received "free money" once they have deposited their fake checks, are then usually receptive to sending some of that money back to the scammers for some legitimate-sounding purpose. But by the time the victims' banks discover the deposited checks were bad, the scammers already have the money their victims forwarded to them, and the victims are stuck paying all of those funds back to their banks: deposited checks The person running the scam convinces a victim to cash a check and then send, via wire transfer, a portion of the money to another location. The portion kept by the victim can be called payment for a job, part of a commission, or a prize. However, the check turns out to be a very convincing fake. Banks in the United States are required to make funds available within a few days, but it can take weeks for a fraudulent check to be discovered. This means the wire transfers will happen long before the bank, or the victim, discovers that the initial check was fake. This scheme is effective because many consumers aren't fully aware of how the check-clearance process works: check-clearance Unfortunately, the term clear sometimes gets used prematurely. An item has cleared only after your bank receives funds from the check writers bank. Bank employees might tell you that a check has cleared, and your banks computer systems might show that you have those funds available for withdrawal, but that doesn't necessarily mean you can spend the money risk-free. In many cases, when a bank employee tells you an item cleared, they are saying you can spend that money with your debit card, withdraw cash from an ATM, or set up a payment online. Most of the time, this informal terminology is fine because funds typically arrive as expected. Most of the confusion around checks comes from bank policies and federal laws that allow you to spend money before a check really clears. Banks are required to make a portion of your deposit available quickly -- usually the first $200 or, on certain official checks, $5,000 -- and they might need to release the remaining funds after several business days. But that policy might prematurely provide access to the money. It does not mean the funds successfully arrived from the check writers bank. If a check bounces, the bank reverses the deposit to your account -- even if you already spent some or all of the money from that deposit. If you don't have enough money in your account to cover the reversal, you end up with a negative account balance, and you could start bouncing other payments and racking up fees. Ultimately, you are responsible for deposits you make to your account, and youre the one at risk. The lures that scammers use to dupe their victims into sending them the illusory proceeds from the depositing of counterfeit checks are many and varied: o Mystery Shopping Scam: Scammers engage victims to act as "mystery shoppers" by making purchases from various vendors in order to rate their service. The scammers then send out counterfeit checks to their victims, instructing them to keep a portion of the funds to cover the costs of purchasing and returning the goods and to compensate them for their time, then wire back the rest of the money. o Reshipping Scam: Scammers engage job-seekers to act as work-at-home re-shippers, receiving (possibly stolen) goods and sending them on to other locations. Then the counterfeit checks those re-shippers are sent to compensate them for their efforts and to reimburse them the shipping charges they incurred bounce, and they're left holding the bag. o Payment-Processing Scam: Scammers hire job-seekers to work as payment processors. The victims are instructed to open business accounts in their own name, deposit (counterfeit) checks sent to them into those accounts, then disburse the deposited funds as directed by the scammers. When the business account overdraws because the deposited checks are fake and bounce, the victim is on the hook for making restitution to the bank. o Windfall Scam: Scammers send out counterfeit checks that they declare are the proceeds from an inheritance, lottery win, or some other type of prize giveaway. Recipients are instructed to deposit the checks and return a share of the money to cover processing fees, shipping and handling charges, legal fees, taxes, or other charges. o Online Sales Overpayment Scam: Scammers agree to purchase items that have been advertised for sale or auction online, then send out counterfeit checks for greater than the sale price and ask the victims to refund the overpayments. o Rental Scams: Scammers respond to ads seeking roommates or tenants, send a check to cover the rent plus a little extra, then ask that the overpayment be forwarded to another party to cover moving expenses. As the U.S. Federal Trade Commission succinctly describes such scams: describes Fake checks drive many types of scams  like those involving phony prize wins, fake jobs, mystery shoppers, online classified ad sales, and others. In a fake check scam, a person you dont know asks you to deposit a check  sometimes for several thousand dollars and usually for more than what you are owed  and wire some of the money back to that person. The scammers always have a good story to explain the overpayment  theyre stuck out of the country, they need you to cover taxes or fees, you need to buy supplies, or something else. But by the time your bank discovers youve deposited a bad check, the scammer already has the money you sent, and youre stuck paying the rest of the check back to the bank.  The best way to avoid falling victim to such scams is not to cash or deposit checks for people you do not know, not to wire money to people you do not know, and not to spend funds from large checks you have deposited until you have verified with your bank that those checks have fully cleared. Brunelli, Laureen Miles.  "How to Recognize a Fake Check Scam."
  The Balance.  11 November 2019. Pritchard, Justin.  "Did That Check Really Clear?"
  The Balance.  24 February 2019. Tressler, Colleen.  "Anatomy of a Fake Check Scam."
  Federal Trade Commission.  5 September 2018. Loftsgordon, Amy.  "Fake Check Scams Target Job Seekers."
  Lawyers.com.  Accessed 2 April 2020.
Social media users love to share words of inspiration and wisdom  if you can pair a profound (or at least vague) life lesson with a striking photo of a celebrity, all the better.  That was the case in early 2018, when a photograph of California's former governor Arnold Schwarzenegger appeared along with an elaborate, but false, back story. A photograph of Schwarzenegger in a sleeping bag in front of a statue of himself bore the following caption: caption Famed actor Arnold Schwarzenegger posted a photo of himself sleeping on the street under his famous bronze statue, and sadly wrote "How times have changed"... The reason he wrote the phrase was not only because he was old, but because when he was governor of California he inaugurated a hotel with his statue. Hotel staff told Arnold, "at any moment you can come and have a room reserved for you." when Arnold stepped down as governor and went to the hotel, the administration refused to give him a room arguing that he should pay for it, since they were in great demand. He brought a sleeping bag and stood underneath the statue and explained what he wanted to convey: "When I was in an important position, they always complimented me, and when I lost this position, they forgot about me and did not keep their promise. Do not trust your position or the amount of money you have, nor your power, nor your intelligence, it will not last. " Trying to teach everyone that when you're "Important" in the people's eyes , everyone is your "Friend " But once you don't benefit their interests , you won't matter. " You are not always who you think you will always be, nothing lasts forever."    The story is riddled with falsehoods, and its primary claim  that Schwarzenegger slept outside a hotel after being refused a free room is a fabrication.  In reality, the photograph (which is legitimate) was taken in January 2016, while the Hollywood star was shooting a film in Columbus, Ohio. Schwarzenegger posted it to his Instagram account on 15 January 2016, apparently as a joke: shooting account   The statue is located outside the city's convention center and has never been situated in front of a hotel, despite the false claims in the Facebook post.  located Schwarzenegger first helped unveil the statue in 2012, outside the Franklin County Veterans Memorial, and then took part in its rededication in 2014, after it was moved to its current location. The former bodybuilder has longstanding ties to Columbus, which is host to an annual bodybuilding competition called the Arnold Sports Festival.  2012 competition Finn, Natalie.  "Here Is Arnold Schwarzenegger Sleeping Next to a Statue of His Bodybuilder Self in Ohio."
  E! Online.  15 January 2016. Associated Press.  "Arnold Schwarzenegger Statue Rededicated in Downtown Columbus."
  WBNS-TV.  6 October 2014. Audi, Tamara.  "Hello, Columbus: Arnold Schwarzenegger Is Back, Bigger Than Ever in Ohio."
  The Wall Street Journal.  2 March 2012. Following the Oct. 25, 2023, election of U.S. Representative Mike Johnson, R-La., to the post of Speaker of the House, a meme attributing the statement "Every American woman has a duty to birth at least one able-bodied worker" to him went viral: meme  Snopes has not identified any instance of Johnson saying these words. They instead appear to stem from an inaccurate paraphrase of a statement Johnson made about Roe v. Wade. Democrats on the House Judiciary Committee, and others, posted the seed that spawned that meme on social media following Johnson's election: others posted During a House Judiciary Committee hearing, Rep. Mike Johnson attacks Roe v. Wade, insisting that if only women were compelled to bring more "able-bodied workers" into the world, Republicans wouldnt need to slash Social Security and Medicare. pic.twitter.com/RGzg09TYEW pic.twitter.com/RGzg09TYEW  House Judiciary Dems (@HouseJudiciary) October 25, 2023 October 25, 2023  "During a House Judiciary Committee hearing," the post read, "Rep. Mike Johnson attack[ed] Roe v. Wade, insisting that if only women were compelled to bring more 'able-bodied workers' into the world, Republicans wouldnt need to slash Social Security and Medicare." This is a fair characterization of arguments made by Johnson during a May 11, 2022, House Judiciary Subcommittee hearing that discussed, in part, Supreme Court ethics. post hearing Johnson shared this excerpt to his official YouTube channel in the form of a video titled "Congressman Johnson on Overturning Roe v. Wade: I will not yield" on the day of the hearing. Viral versions of the video circulating in October and November 2023 omitted the middle paragraph of Johnson's remarks, which are shown below: a video Roe v. Wade gave constitutional cover to the elective killing of unborn children in America. Period. Think about it. Let it settle on you. As a result, the lives of more than 63 million American children have been lost. Think about the staggering implications of that. I was born in January, 1972. I'm just a year older [...] than Roe. [...] 63 million represents somewhere between one half and one third of my entire generation. My high school class should have been almost twice as large as it was [...]. If you're under the age of 50, your class should have been twice as larger, maybe a third larger than it was. Your classmates were not allowed to be born. You think about the implications of that on the economy. We're all struggling here to cover the bases of social security and Medicare and Medicaid and all the rest. If we had all those able-bodied workers in the economy, we wouldn't be going upside down and toppling over like this. Listen, [...] Roe was a terrible corruption of America's constitutional jurisprudence. Viral posts on social media following the shorter Oct. 25 release of the video were quick to paraphrase the statement in ways similar to the meme form in circulation now. One representative post from Oct. 28 on X that had received over 500,000 views at the time of this reporting compared Johnson to Chinese President Xi: post Chinese President Xi: "Every ... woman has a duty to birth at least one able-bodied worker." Wait... That wasn't Xi. Or any communist. That was GOP Speaker of the House Mike Johnson. NPR affiliate Red River Radio KDAQ, which serves East Texas, Louisiana, Arkansas and parts of Mississippi, quoted a local activist who repeated the above characterization of the quote as if it were fact in an Oct. 31, 2021, story: serves quoted Local LGBTQ activist Alana Oldham tells me the mood has changed lately, into a climate of fear for some. Im 53 years old and Ive been out as a lesbian since I was 18 and Ive never once been afraid for my safety until 2023 happened. Oldham cites one remark in particular by Johnson that left the greatest impression on her: Im looking at this quote from Mike Johnson where he says every American woman has a duty to birth at least one able-bodied worker. And that is just, thats Handmaids Tale level scary stuff. remark duty to birth The KDAQ story, which repeated a second-hand characterization, is the only media source attributing the quote  as it appears in memes  to Mike Johnson. Because the underlying source that serves as the basis for that statement does not use these words, the claim that he said them is False. About Us. Red River Radio, https://www.redriverradio.org/about-us. Accessed 6 Nov. 2023. Chinese President Xi: Every ... Woman Has a Duty to Birth at Least One Able-Bodied Worker. X (Formerly Twitter), https://twitter.com/iche_me/status/1718251006092324882. Accessed 6 Nov. 2023. Congressman Johnson on Overturning Roe v. Wade: I Will Not Yield. www.youtube.com, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fdyifVvEO-w. Accessed 6 Nov. 2023. During a House Judiciary Committee Hearing, Rep. Mike Johnson Attacks Roe v. Wade, Insisting That If Only Women Were Compelled to Bring More Able-Bodied Workers into the World, Republicans Wouldnt Need to Slash Social Security and Medicare. X (Formerly Twitter), https://twitter.com/HouseJudiciary/status/1717183190463336780. Accessed 6 Nov. 2023. Markup: H.R. 6943, the Public Safety Officer Support Act of 2022" | Part 1. www.youtube.com, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z6Um3ZwhDKU. Accessed 6 Nov. 2023. Speaker Johnsons Shifting Sands of Public Opinion. Red River Radio, 31 Oct. 2023, https://www.redriverradio.org/2023-10-31/speaker-johnsons-shifting-sands-of-public-opinion. Republican Senate candidate George Allen recently accused Democratic opponent Tim Kaine of being a tax hiker, even on people of modest means.During a July 21 debate in Hot Springs, Allen criticized Kaine for actually proposing tax increases that would be hitting people earning as little as $17,000 a year.We checked to see if Kaine, who was governor from 2006 to 2010, really did try to raise taxes on people at that income level.The Allen campaign, in awebsite post, backed Allens statement by citing news articles about a proposal Kaine unveiled in December 2009 as part of his farewell biennial budget proposal for 2010-2012. Kaine called for adding a 1 percent income tax surcharge and giving all proceeds to localities in return for them scrapping the car tax they levy on personal vehicles.Legislators in 1998 adopted a five-year plan to phase out the personal property tax on most cars and reimburse localities for their lost revenues. But the program was more expensive than anticipated and legislators eventually capped the state reimbursement at $950 million a year. The remaining share is paid by vehicle owners.Ending the car tax would mean the state wouldnt have to provide the annual $950 million payment to localities, Kaine said in aspeechto the General Assemblys money committees. Kaine wanted to use the savings to help balance the states recession-wracked budget.News articles from the time said Kaines policy would raise the maximum state income tax rate from 5.75 percent to 6.75 percent. That maximum rate applies to all taxable income above $17,000 after deductions and exemptions are taken into account.The state charges gradually higher income tax rates up to that level. Virginia puts a 2 percent levy on the first $3,000 of taxable income, 3 percent of the next $2,000, 5 percent on the next $12,000 and then 5.75 percent on all taxable income above $17,000.Thebilladvancing Kaines proposal did not say the added tax would only be levied on taxable income of $17,000 or more. The added 1 percent surtax would have pertained to all income levels, according to Joel Davison, a spokesman for the Virginia Department of Finance.Virginia does not require individuals with a state adjusted income below $11,950 and married couples with a state adjusted income below $23,900 to pay state income taxes. So they wouldnt have been affected by the tax increase.Kaines proposal was killed by the General Assembly.It should be noted that some people earning $17,000 would have benefitted from Kaines plan if their savings from the elimination of the car tax outstripped their increased income tax. There are no estimates of the number of Virginians who would fallen into this category, but we suspect it would be a small group. Heres why:For starters, we can eliminate those who didnt own cars.Now, lets consider those who did own vehicles. A single filer with no children earning $17,000 would have a taxable income of $13,070 after taking the standard deduction and exemption. A 1 percent income tax increase for that person would come to almost $131 a year.The car levy paid by that person would depend on where he or she lived because each locality sets it own tax rate based on the assessed value of the vehicle. In Richmond, a person wouldnt pay a $131 levy unless they had a car worth about $9,000. In rural Henry County, a vehicle would have to be valued at about $17,500 to merit a $131 tax.Our rulingAllen said that Kaine proposed a tax increase that would have affected people earning as little as $17,000 a year. Not everyone at that level would have paid more under Kaines plan, but its a safe bet that large number of them would have seen their overall tax bill rise.We rate Allens statement True. In early March 2022, we reviewed several reader emails that inquired about purported voucher offers for Olive Garden and Chick-fil-A on Facebook. The posts on multiple Facebook profiles and pages showed pictures of food at both restaurants and claimed to provide a "meal for two with drinks" for "everyone." Olive Garden Chick-fil-A Facebook However, these were not legitimate offers. The fake voucher offer for Chick-fil-A appeared on facebook.com/ChickFans as well as other profiles and pages. This page is not managed by the fast food chicken chain: Chick-fil-A facebook.com/ChickFans  This was the first step of a scam. We recommend reporting posts like these to Facebook.  The post read as follows: Hello everyone Im Michael Gorham. I am very happy to announce Im the new CEO of Chick-Fil-A. Id like to start my new job off with a good deed for everyone as I know recent times have been tough which is why Im going to be rewarding everyone who shares&comments in the next 24 hours with a voucher to get meal for two at any Chick-Fil-A for lunch or dinner. To be clear, Andrew Truett Cathy is the CEO of Chick-fil-A, not someone named "Michael Gorham." Andrew Truett Cathy Chick-fil-A Several helpful readers sent in screenshots of the purported voucher offer for Olive Garden. It was similar to the posts for Chick-fil-A, and had been going around since at least September 2021: Olive Garden Chick-fil-A  This did not come from a legitimate Facebook page.  The scam Facebook posts with the fake "meal for two with drinks" voucher offer for Olive Garden read as follows: Olive Garden Meal for two with drinks voucher offer for everyone! I'm Dave George, the president of Olive Garden. I know times have been tough so to help everyone out I have a special surprise for everyone who shares&comments then. Every person who does this by Sep 28th can get a voucher. Each voucher can be used at any Olive Garden restaurant to get a meal for two with drinks! Olive Garden Olive Garden Not only was there no voucher since it was a scam, but also Dave George hasn't been with Olive Garden since he retired in 2020. As of early 2022, the company's president was Dan Kiernan. Olive Garden he retired in 2020 Dan Kiernan After users commented on the above posts, the scammers directed them to other posts that looked like the one below:  These scams have been going around since at least 2021.  Notice that the post pictured above has photographs for Olive Garden but also a Chick-fil-A profile picture in the top-left corner. This indicated that the Facebook accounts that were involved had managed scams for both restaurant chains. The post read: Olive Garden Chick-fil-A #CONGRATULATIONS For those of you who have received comments from us, you have a chance to win them.To Enter???Step 1 = Like and ShareStep 2 = Enter here ? (link removed) ?Step 3 = coment DONELike and share our page below??????god bless you Upon clicking the link in the posts  something we advise readers against doing  we were led to rewardgiantztesters.com and then promotionsonlineusa.com. These websites appeared to lead to endless offers and surveys. Similar websites can also potentially lead to attempts for phishing, identity theft, or other similar outcomes. According to multiple pages we found that were pushing the same scams, these pages and profiles that promised the fake offers for Chick-fil-A and Olive Garden may have been managed from Vietnam and Indonesia. multiple pages we found same scams Chick-fil-A Olive Garden Several of the profiles named "Olive Garden Fans" that are linked in the paragraph above appeared to have switched profile pictures from Olive Garden to Chick-fil-A to run one or both scams. Olive Garden Chick-fil-A Some of the profiles and pages that displayed the scams showed other businesses as well. The scammers appeared to also push fake voucher offers for Costco, Texas Roadhouse, and KFC. appeared to also push fake voucher offers Costco Texas Roadhouse KFC In sum, no, Chick-fil-A and Olive Garden were not giving away vouchers, gift cards, or anything else on Facebook that included a "meal for two with drinks voucher offer." This was a scam. The official Facebook pages for Chick-fil-A and Olive Garden feature blue verified badges. This symbol is an indication that a page is genuine. Chick-fil-A Olive Garden Chick-fil-A Olive Garden verified badges North Carolina Gov. Roy Cooper called for more money to renovate the states aging public schools during hisState of the State addresson Feb. 25. Right now, four in 10 public schools in our state are at least 50 years old, Cooper said. That means theyre still using the schools you and I went to. We wondered whether the states public schools are actually that old, so we decided to check out Coopers numbers ourselves. As it turns out, the data is not so easy to come by. We started with Jamal Little, the governors spokesman, who told us that the information about the ages of public schools came from the North Carolina Department of Public Instruction, which collected that data in 2016 while compiling itsmost recent surveyon school facility needs. Little gave us a table that said 949 of 2,306 public schools that reported construction dates were at least 50 years old (325 schools did not report their dates). He said the table came from the Department of Public Instruction but was not publicly available online. According to the table, about 41 percent of the schools that reported construction dates are more than 50 years old. But Drew Elliot, communications director for the Department of Public Instruction, said he could not confirm the table came from his department. He said he believes his office could get those numbers or something very close to it but could not validate them without a weeks time. We have no reason to think that his numbers are off, he said. Nothing in there looks anomalous to what we know about the age of school buildings in North Carolina. We wanted more definitive evidence, so we asked Elliot for the data the state did have. He sent us a copy of thedepartments list of construction datesso we could crunch the numbers for ourselves. That wasnt easy. The list assigns multiple construction dates to each school, and its not immediately clear what each date refers to. But Elliot said the dates correspond to construction of separate structures and that the earliest date listed for each school would offer the best approximation of the schools age. So, we did our best to sort through the raw numbers. It turns out that the number of old schools may actually be larger than Cooper claimed. Out of 2,631 total schools, we counted 2,299 that had construction dates listed beside them. And judging by the earliest dates listed for each, 1,118 of those 2,299 schools were built during or before 1969, making them at least 50 years old. That means that, by our calculations, nearly half the public schools are greater than 50 years old. But because the dates on the list were not labeled, even our calculations may be imperfect. Also, the totals could change with more information about the schools that did not report their ages for the 2016 survey. And theres potentially a big caveat because some schools have been renovated since their original construction, making them newer than their age suggests. Cooper said, Right now, four in 10 public schools in our state are at least 50 years old. The raw numbers from the department  the best information available  put Coopers statement in the right ballpark and showed it may even be an underestimate. But there are some uncertainties. So we rate this statement Mostly True. This story was produced by the North Carolina Fact-Checking Project, a partnership of McClatchy Carolinas, the Duke University Reporters Lab and PolitiFact. The NC Local News Lab Fund and the International Center for Journalists provide support for the project, which shares fact-checks with newsrooms statewide. To offer ideas for fact checks, email[email protected]. On 29 May 2016, Facebook user Frank Huguenard published a Huffington Post link leading to an article titled "Hillary Clinton to be Indicted on Federal Racketeering Charges" and an article bylined to him: published    The claims caused a stir, then disappeared as quickly as they manifested. Clicking through to the link on 30 May 2016 led to an error message:  error   However, the text of the article remains accessible on forums, blogs, and archives. Huguenard's original piece reported that Clinton would be indicted under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (or RICO) Act, and maintained that the Federal Bureau of Investigation would recommend to Attorney General Loretta Lynch that Clinton be indicted on charges related to money laundering, among other things: reported The Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) is a United States Federal Law passed in 1970 that was designed to provide a tool for law enforcement agencies to fight organized crime. RICO allows prosecution and punishment for alleged racketeering activity that has been executed as part of an ongoing criminal enterprise. Activity considered to be racketeering may include bribery, counterfeiting, money laundering, embezzlement, illegal gambling, kidnapping, murder, drug trafficking, slavery, and a host of other nefarious business practices. James Comey and The FBI will present a recommendation to Loretta Lynch, Attorney General of the Department of Justice, that includes a cogent argument that the Clinton Foundation is an ongoing criminal enterprise engaged in money laundering and soliciting bribes in exchange for political, policy and legislative favors to individuals, corporations and even governments both foreign and domestic. Initially, Comey had indicated that the investigation into Hillarys home brewed email server was to be concluded by October of 2015. However, as more and more evidence in the case has come to light, this initial date kept being pushed back as the criminal investigation has expanded well beyond violating State Department regulations to include questions about espionage, perjury and influence peddling. There were no citations for these claims. There was also no information about how the article's author learned of the supposedly impending indictment: Heres what we do know. Tens of millions of dollars donated to the Clinton Foundation was funneled to the organization through a Canadian shell company which has made tracing the donors nearly impossible. Less than 10% of donations to the Foundation has actually been released to charitable organizations and $2M that has been traced back to long time Bill Clinton friend Julie McMahon (aka The Energizer). When the official investigation into Hillarys email server began, she instructed her IT professional to delete over 30,000 emails and cloud backups of her emails older than 30 days at both Platte River Networks and Datto, Inc. The FBI has subsequently recovered the majority, if not all, of Hillarys deleted emails and are putting together a strong case against her for attempting to cover up her illegal and illicit activities. A conviction under RICO comes when the Department of Justice proves that the defendant has engaged in two or more examples of racketeering and that the defendant maintained an interest in, participated in or invested in a criminal enterprise affecting interstate or foreign commerce. There is ample evidence already in the public record that the Clinton Foundation qualifies as a criminal enterprise and theres no doubt that the FBI is privy to significantly more evidence than has already been made public. Under RICO, the sections most relevant in this case will be section 1503 (obstruction of justice), section 1510 (obstruction of criminal investigations) and section 1511 (obstruction of State or local law enforcement). As in the case with Richard Nixon after the Watergate Break-in, its the cover-up of a crime that will be the Clintons downfall. Furthermore, under provisions of title 18, United States Code: Section 201, the Clinton Foundation can be held accountable for improprieties relating to bribery. The FBI will be able to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that through the Clinton Foundation, international entities were able to commit bribery in exchange for help in securing business deals, such as the uranium-mining deal in Kazakhstan. It is a Federal Crime to negligently handle classified information under United States Code (USC) 18 section 1924. It is a Federal Class A Felony under USC 18 section 798. Hillary certified under oath to a federal judge that she had handed over to the state department all of her emails, which she clearly did not. In spite of her repeated statements to the effect that everything that she did with her home brewed email server as Secretary of State was above-board and approved by the State Department, the Inspector General Report vehemently refutes this claim. Hillary refused to be interview by the Inspector Generals office in their investigation, claiming that her upcoming FBI interview took precedent but it seems more likely that Hillary is more concerned about committing perjury or admitting to anything that can be used against her in a court of law. Huguenaud concluded (again, with little to no supporting evidence) that Hillary Clinton was guilty of exposing classified documents to foreign governments and conspiring to circumvent Freedom of Information Act requests by avoiding the use of State Department servers: Some of the documents were so highly classified the the investigators on the case werent even able to examine the material themselves until they got their own clearances raised to the highest levels. While there is an excellent [case] to be made the Hillary committed treasonous actions, the strongest case the FBI has is charging both Bill and Hillary Clinton as well as the Clinton Foundation of Racketeering. Theres no wonder why its taken this long for the FBI to bring forward a recommendation. The rabbit hole is so deep on this one that it has taking dozens of investigators to determine the full extent of the crimes that have been committed. Perhaps the most interesting question here is whether or not the FBIs investigation will be able to directly link The Clinton Foundation with The Hillary Victory Fund. If this happens, the DNC itself may be in jeopardy of accusations of either being an accomplice or of being complicit in racketeering. After the article vanished, rumors swirled that Huffington Post retracted it under pressure from the Clintons, the Democratic National Committee, or other entities with a possible interest in suppressing the information it contained. However, the archived version of the article contained the following caveat: This post is hosted on the Huffington Posts Contributor platform. Contributors control their own work and post freely to our site. If you need to flag this entry as abusive, send us an email. Huguenaud published the item himself as a contributor to Huffington Post, where a disclaimer warned that information published through that platform is not vetted or official. In July 2016, the FBI recommended that no charges be brought against Clinton in connection with her use of a private e-mail server. Amid national debates about income inequality and tax cuts for the ultra-rich, one talking point is frequently highlighted in online memes and by political figures such as Bernie Sanders is that online retailing giant Amazon.com, despite taking in $5.6 billion in profit in 2017, paid no federal corporate income taxes for that year: Bernie Sanders   (With respect to the claim about Amazon employees on welfare, see our fact check on that topic here.) here In regards to U.S. federal income taxes, the claim that Amazon paid none in 2017 is almost certainly factual. While Amazons tax filings are not public, their SEC filing for the year 2017 illustrates that the company used the tax code expertly (and legally) to their advantage, so well that the company anticipated a $137 million tax refund from the federal government (numbers are in millions of dollars): SEC filing   Amazon did pay taxes to individual U.S. states ($211 million) and to international jurisdictions ($724 million), but their federal income tax burden was (less than) zero. The filings indicate that two factors provided the lion share of Amazons reduced federal tax liability: $220 million worth of tax credits, and $917 million in tax-deductible executive pay derived from the sale of stocks:   The third negative item in the SEC filing, $789 million in reduced tax burden as a result of the 2017 Tax Act, will be applied to future tax years, according to a report from the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy. report SEC filings do not require a company to list the specific credits they utilize, but there are several avenues Amazon would likely have pursued. Annette Nellen, a professor and director of the Master of Science in Taxation program at San Jose University, said that Amazons write-offs likely include credits for research and development, domestic production, and equipment depreciation. And according to a report from the Economic Policy Institute, Amazon receives myriad tax incentives from state and local governments as well: said report The expansion of Amazons physical distribution network has coincided with a strategic business plan of negotiating millions in tax abatements, credits, exemptions, and infrastructure assistance from state and local governments in the name of regional economic development. By the end of 2016, Amazon had likely received over $1 billion in state and local subsidies for its facilities, which would include not only fulfillment centers but sortation centers that only sort packages, mailing centers, and other facilities. Publicly-traded corporations can list the stock options they grant to employees as a business cost in their accounting, and if an option-receiving employee makes over $1 million a year in salary, the profits from the sale of those stocks can be then counted as a federal income tax deduction for the corporation (primarily due to a Clinton-era compromise over how to cap executive pay). Stock options allow an employee to purchase stock in their employers company at a set price, regardless of its current market value: list Options give executives and investors the right to buy shares of a company at a later date and at specific prices. For example, if a chief executive joins a media company when its stock is trading at $55 a share, but years later, the share price has skyrocketed to $100, that chief executive can still buy the shares at $55, pocketing the massive difference. In the cases of their highest paid employees, Amazon and other companies are able to deduct the massive difference employees make when they sell that stock at a profit. According to the Center for Tax Justice, because companies typically low-ball the estimated values, they usually end up with much bigger tax write-offs than the amounts they deduct as a 'cost' in computing the profits they report to shareholders. The $917 million in stock-based compensation listed in Amazon's SEC filing likely stems from their top employees' cashing in on their stock options for a large profit. deduct While it is impossible to know the exact amount of money Amazon did or did not pay to the federal government in 2017, their own accounting suggests that they expected their federal corporate income tax burden to be negative that year.  U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission.  Amazon.com Inc. Form 10-K"
  2 February 2018.
 Gardner, Mathew.  "Amazon Inc. Paid Zero in Federal Taxes in 2017, Gets $789 Million Windfall from New Tax Law."
  Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy.  13 February 2018.
 Tobias, Manuela.  "Bernie Sanders Says Amazon Paid No Federal Income Tax in 2017. He's Right."
  Politifact.  3 May 2018. 
 Jones, Janell and Ben Zipperer.  "Unfulfilled Promises."
  Economic Policy Institute.  1 February 2018. 
 Gunjan, Banerji.  "Potential Loser in Tax Overhaul: Executive Stock Options."
  The Wall Street Journal.  19 December 2017.
 Citizens for Tax Justice.  Fortune 500 Corporations Used Stock Option Loophole to Avoid $64.6 Billion in Taxes Over the Past Five Years."
  9 June 2016. Snopes is still fighting an infodemic of rumors and misinformation surrounding the COVID-19 pandemic, and you can help. Find out what we've learned and how to inoculate yourself against COVID-19 misinformation. Read the latest fact checks about the vaccines. Submit any questionable rumors and advice you encounter. Become a Founding Member to help us hire more fact-checkers. And, please, follow the CDC or WHO for guidance on protecting your community from the disease.  fighting Find out Read Submit Become a Founding Member CDC WHO In August 2021, as a new wave of COVID-19 cases rose in Kentucky, U.S. Sen. Rand Paul urged Americans to resist mask mandates and other guidelines from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) related to stopping the now nearly two-year pandemic in a video posted to his Twitter account. Paul captioned his video: COVID-19 cases rose in Kentucky Rand Paul resist mask mandates We are at a moment of truth and a crossroads. Will we allow these people to use fear and propaganda to do further harm to our society, economy, and children? Or will we stand together and say, absolutely not. Not this time. I choose freedom. As this video went viral, many Twitter users responded by posting a photograph of Paul that supposedly showed him receiving the COVID-19 vaccination. This photograph was frequently shared with captions claiming that Paul was a hypocrite, as he was urging others to "resist" the CDC while the picture supposedly showed him receiving a vaccine urged by the CDC.    The picture was taken in 2015, and shows Paul receiving a booster vaccination for Hepatitis A from a physician at the U.S. Capitol. You can read more about the benefits of a Hepatitis A vaccine on this page from the CDC.  shows Paul receiving a booster vaccination Hepatitis A vaccine The New York Times reports that Paul received this vaccine shortly after he set off an "uproar" when he seemingly made anti-vaccination comments amidst a measles outbreak. The following day, the Kentucky senator invited a New York Times reporter to go along with him as he received a vaccination. New York Times reports anti-vaccination comments From the NY Times: NY Times On Tuesday, Mr. Paul sought to clarify those comments, inviting a New York Times reporter to accompany him to the Capitol physicians office to watch him receive a hepatitis A booster vaccination. During the visit, Mr. Paul said he believed that the science was definitive on the matter and that vaccines were not harmful. It just annoys me that Im being characterized as someone whos against vaccines, he said as he rolled up his T-shirt sleeve before the shot. Thats not what I said. I said Ive heard of people whove had vaccines, and they see a temporal association and they believe that. As for the COVID-19 vaccinations, it doesn't appear that Paul ever received his vaccine. The senator tested positive for COVID-19 back in March 2020. Paul survived the ordeal and appears to have been largely asymptomatic. Afterward, Paul claimed that since he had COVID-19, there was no need for him to get the vaccine. This claim  that natural immunity provides better protection than vaccines  is disputed by the science. tested positive Paul claimed that since he had COVID-19 On Aug. 6, 2021, the American Hospitals Association publicized two recent studies from the CDC that showed those with "natural immunity" were more than twice as likely to be reinfected than those who had received vaccines.  The AHA writes: AHA writes The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention today released a study confirming the comparative effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines versus natural immunity, including immunity gained from prior SARS-CoV-2 infection. Researchers found that, among hundreds of Kentucky residents with previous infections through June 2021, those who were unvaccinated had 2.34 times the odds of reinfection compared with those who were fully vaccinated. CDC says the research suggests that among people who have had COVID-19 previously, getting fully vaccinated provides additional protection against reinfection. A second CDC study, published concurrently, shows the extent to which vaccines prevented COVID-19-related hospitalizations among the highest risk age groups. Snopes is still fighting an infodemic of rumors and misinformation surrounding the COVID-19 pandemic, and you can help. Find out what we've learned and how to inoculate yourself against COVID-19 misinformation. Read the latest fact checks about the vaccines. Submit any questionable rumors and advice you encounter. Become a Founding Member to help us hire more fact-checkers. And, please, follow the CDC or WHO for guidance on protecting your community from the disease.  fighting Find out Read Submit Become a Founding Member CDC WHO In the final months of 2020, scientists around the world raced to develop a vaccine for the novel coronavirus, which at that point had reached more than 50 million cases and resulted in the deaths of at least 1.2 million people. reached On Nov. 9, the biopharmaceutical company Pfizer announced in a news release  not a peer-reviewed journal that interim results testing the efficacy of vaccine candidate BNT162b2 showed a 90% success rate in protecting against COVID-19 infection, making it one of the first and most promising immunization potentials to date. news release And politicians were quick to weigh in. U.S. Vice President Mike Pence said in a tweet that the public-private partnership between U.S. President Donald Trump's administration and Pfizer led to the success of the vaccine:  While former U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Nikki Haley, whose policies closely align with Trump, furthered the notion that the vaccine was a part of the presidents Operation Warp Speed (OWS), an effort led by the Trump Administration to accelerate the testing of COVID-19 vaccines and therapeutics:  These claims are half-truths and misrepresent the role that OWS played in developing this particular vaccine candidate. Although the very preliminary findings of the vaccine look promising, a detailed look at the reported findings revealed that there is cause to be cautious about its availability and timeliness. A deal between OWS and Pfizer was announced in a July news release that outlined a bid by the U.S. government to receive 100 million doses (with the option to acquire up to 500 million more doses) of a vaccine  pending approval by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA)  for $1.95 billion. news release Today is a great day for science and humanity. The first set of results from our Phase 3 COVID-19 vaccine trial provides the initial evidence of our vaccines ability to prevent COVID-19, said Dr. Albert Bourla, Pfizer Chairman and CEO. We are reaching this critical milestone in our vaccine development program at a time when the world needs it most with infection rates setting new records, hospitals nearing over-capacity and economies struggling to reopen. With todays news, we are a significant step closer to providing people around the world with a much-needed breakthrough to help bring an end to this global health crisis." OWS is a joint effort by the Trump administration and the U.S. departments of Defense (DOD) and Health and Human Services (HHS) in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, launched on May 15 to accelerate the testing, supply, development, and distribution of safe and effective vaccines, therapeutics, and diagnostics by January 2021. Part of its mission is to also accelerate the vaccine approval process from the typical 73 months to just 13 months. Generally, receiving approval for a new drug or therapy is a long and tenuous process that can sometimes last years.  Department of Defense  Department of Defense   OWS offered $456 million to vaccine research and development projects by Johnson & Johnson for its Phase 1 clinical trials, as well as a total of $955 million to Moderna for late-stage clinical testing. However, the $1.95 billion allocated to Pfizer was for large-scale manufacturing and nationwide distribution. In short, the government intended to buy doses of a vaccine from Pfizer once an effective vaccine was made available, but it did not fund the research and development of Pfizer's vaccine. offered Johnson & Johnson Moderna Pfizer is proud to be one of various vaccine manufacturers participating in Operation Warp Speed as a supplier of a potential COVID-19 vaccine, Sharon Castillo, a Pfizer spokesperson, told Snopes in an email. While Pfizer did reach an advanced purchase agreement with the U.S. government, the company did not accept the Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority (BARDA) funding for the research and development process. All the investment for R&D and manufacturing has been made by Pfizer at risk. Technically, the work conducted by Pfizer and its partner, German drugmaker BioNTech, is an expansion of OWS and was operating under an agreement to meet the goal of OWS to deliver 300 million doses of a vaccine in 2021. As part of the agreement, the U.S. government would receive 100 million doses after the successful manufacturing of the vaccine and its approval by the FDA. However, that is not to say that the government had any hand in the research or development of the vaccine. Rather, it just agreed to buy the vaccines from the companies once they had gone through final approval. We made the early decision to begin clinical work and large-scale manufacturing at our own risk to ensure that product would be available immediately if our clinical trials prove successful and an Emergency Use Authorization is granted. We are honored to be a part of this effort to provide Americans access to protection from this deadly virus, said Dr. Albert Bourla, Pfizer chairman and CEO, at the time. Pfizer and BioNTech have similar agreements with the European Union. European Union The specific details about the Pfizer vaccine are not readily available. What we do know is that BNT162b2 is an mRNA-based vaccine that contained SARS-CoV-2 spike protein  the same protein that nearly all vaccination studies are targeting  that allows the virus to enter human cells and elicits an immune response from its host. The first doses administered to U.S. study participants, half of whom received the vaccine and the other half a placebo, were done so in May via intramuscular injection, which is similar to the flu shot. As part of a randomized placebo trial, two doses were each given three weeks apart with the vaccine not taking full effect until at least a week after the final dose. That means that a person couldnt expect protection until about a month after they were immunized. SARS-CoV-2 spike protein administered  A three-dimensional simulation of the coronavirus spike protein just before binding to the human cell receptor. University of Arkansas  University of Arkansas   An analysis of the interim results suggested that the vaccine is 90% effective in preventing the disease in study volunteers who did not have evidence of a prior COVID-19 infection  a rate that is similar to the measles vaccine administered in early childhood. No safety concerns were observed, but as the trial continues those findings could change. measles vaccine Thats because the results are based on limited data from an early clinical trial, and its unclear whether the vaccine prevents infection or just reduces symptoms. This is a very timely and encouraging development in the race to get an effective vaccine. It is difficult to fully evaluate the interim data without more information but it appears that the vaccine is able to protect against COVID-19 disease, said Lawrence Young, a professor of molecular oncology at Warwick Medical School. The big question is whether the vaccine can block virus infection and subsequent transmission. This additional data will be generated as further confirmed cases are identified and analyzed. said The promising results were met with both encouragement and skepticism by the broader scientific community, which by and large said that it remains cautiously optimistic. First and foremost, the results are interim and still await full trial results, meaning that these are non-peer-reviewed findings that were published midway through the clinical trial. Releasing the findings in the middle of a trial may further influence the integrity of the study, potentially biasing how future study participants respond or how their observations are reported. That could in turn make long-term follow-up with adequate randomization more challenging. There are other important limitations to the research that must be considered. Snopes read through the a 123-page study protocol document and found that while researchers describe the more than 43,000 participants as ethnically diverse," they do not specify other characteristics that may make an individuals infection more extreme, such as age or co-morbidities. And while it is written that study participants were between the ages of 18 and 85, their exact demographics were not known. Furthermore, individuals with a high risk of severe infection were excluded from the first phase of testing and the preliminary findings did not determine how long the vaccination lasts. protocol document  NurPhoto / Contributor  NurPhoto / Contributor Even after addressing the limitations, the results of an effective vaccine will not be felt immediately. With the best will in the world, this vaccine  or any other vaccine currently in trials  isnt going to change things for the majority of us this winter, said Elenor Riley, a professor of immunology and infectious disease at the University of Edinburgh. said So, we all need to accept that the current public health measures are going to remain in place at least until the end of the winter, possibly longer. But if this vaccine lives up to this early promise, and other vaccines work equally well, we may be able to look forward to a much better summer and autumn in 2021. If the vaccine is proven to be robustly effective at the wider community level, experts warn that there must still be public trust and buy-in  a challenge given some political leaders have been quick to dismiss the severity of the outbreak. Then there is the logistical challenge of manufacturing and distributing vaccines globally. First doses must be prioritized for health care workers and vulnerable populations. And a logistical challenge lies in manufacturing and rolling out a vaccine that needs to be stored and maintained at very low temperatures (-94 to -112 degrees Fahrenheit). As the world waits, experts warn that the promise of a vaccine cannot allow the findings to seed complacency and cause people to shy away from public health guidance. On the cusp of the vaccine candidate announcement, most nations in the world saw massive upticks in new coronavirus cases reported each day in October and November, according to data published by Johns Hopkins Coronavirus Resource Center. On Nov. 4, 5, and 6, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reported over 100,000 new coronavirus cases each day data reported Pfizer applied for an emergency use authorization (EUA) of the two-dose vaccine with the FDA on Nov. 20. At this point, researchers had collected two months of safety data required to use the drug in some cases. However, that does not constitute full approval of the drug. At the time of this writing, just 94 of the nearly 44,000 trial participants had contracted COVID-19 and the study is expected to continue until at least 164 people test positive. applied EUA Though the long-term safety and efficacy data remains to be seen, it is estimated that the manufacturers could produce globally up to 50 million vaccine doses in 2020 and up to 1.3 billion doses in 2021 to be distributed on an as-needed basis if a EUA is granted. The Pfizer study is estimated to be completed by Dec. 11, 2022. estimated Update [Nov. 20, 2020]: This article was updated to reflect Pfizers official filing of a EUA on Nov. 20. The nasty political ads have been gone for weeks, but the launch of a marketing campaign aimed at trumpeting Ohios improving economy offers a preview of the next great election battle.JobsOhio, the states private economic development agency, is on air witha 30-second commercialthat celebrates workers of all stripes and conveys an optimistic message.The agency is the brainchild of Republican Gov. John Kasich, who has ridden Ohios rising fortunes to rising poll numbers. And the Thrive in Ohio spot, which also asks viewers to share their success stories ona web site, has rankled Democrats hoping to unseat Kasich in 2014.Never mind that the spot doesnt feature Kasich or identify him or the governors office in any way. Democrats see a calculated political move bankrolled by state development money. The push also includes print advertising and will cost $1.4 million,the Columbus Dispatch reported.Cuyahoga County Executive Ed FitzGerald, one potential challenger to Kasich, haspublicly calledon Kasich to suspend the campaign, declaring it a waste of taxpayer dollars.Given the dust-up surrounding the JobsOhio blitz and the role the states economy is sure to play in the gubernatorial race, PolitiFact Ohio decided to evaluate the claim central to the TV spot.In the past year alone, Ohio businesses have created more jobs than almost every other state in the country, an unseen narrator says, his words scored to an inspirational piano melody. And its only the beginning.So how does the statement stack up when peeled away from such slick marketing?Laura Jones, communications director for JobsOhio, cited employment data from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. Via email, Jones said the numbers showed that from October 2011 through October 2012, only California, Texas and New York created more jobs than Ohio.Jones referred us to the bureausRegional and State Employment and Unemployment report. According to seasonally adjusted employment numbers in October, 30 states reported statistically significant increases in employment year-over-year -- Ohio among them.Table E, found on page seven of the 21-page report, breaks down the employment trends by state. Since October 2011, according to preliminary data, Ohio has added 96,500 jobs. Indeed, that increase ranks fourth, behind the more-populated California, Texas and New York.Because the report was dated Nov. 20, three days after JobsOhio posted the commercial to YouTube, PolitiFact Ohio went back to look atthe previous months report, which evaluated the period from September 2011 and September 2012. We found the Buckeye State in the same position: fourth among states with statistically significant employment increases.We also checked with George Zeller, an economic research analyst from Cleveland. He was familiar with the Thrive in Ohio campaign and, after paging through the BLS reports agreed that the numbers cited by JobsOhio were legitimate.But what do the numbers prove?What theyre saying there is that Ohios No. 4, Zeller said. What you have to recognize is that of course were going to gain more jobs than Vermont, because Vermont is smaller. There are 50 states, so being fourth is higher than others. But were by no means at the top.Zeller makes a valid point. Ohio, by virtue of being one of the nations most populous states, is destined to have and add more jobs than smaller states. Ohio is the seventh-most populous state,according to Census figures, ranking behind California, Texas, New York, Florida, Illinois and Pennsylvania. In terms of jobs added, Ohio is up there with other highly populated states.Zeller also noted that Ohios recovery, while real, is coming slowly. At current pace, said Zeller, citing his research, it will take the state 11 years to recover all jobs lost during the recession.Theres nothing untrue about what [JobsOhio] said, Zeller continued via telephone. Now does that mean that we are outstripping the rest of the country? No. First of all, because we lost more jobs than the rest of the country did  we have to do a lot more to make them up.Of course Democrats will come armed with other numbers as the gubernatorial fight nears. They often citeBLS datathat show the states unemployment rate began dropping in early 2010, under Democratic Gov. Ted Strickland and and Democratic President Barack Obama.To their point, its worth noting that public policy set outside Ohio affects the states economy. Exhibit A: The federal governments bailout of the U.S. auto industry, a huge Ohio employer.As such, Democrats argue that Ohio was en route to economic recovery months before Kasich defeated Strickland in the November 2010 election. Ironically, Kasichs constant ballyhooing of these improved prospects was at odds with the message pushed by Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney and might have helped Obamas re-election bid this year.Now that the race for the White House in the rearview mirror, it is no surprise that Democrats see the JobsOhio commercial as the unofficial kickoff of Kasichs re-election campaign. Perhaps that makes this the unofficial kickoff of PolitiFact Ohios monitoring of the contest, whether its FitzGerald, Strickland or another candidate who takes on the incumbent governor in 2014.For its Thrive in Ohio campaign, JobsOhio said businesses here have created more jobs than almost every other state in the country over the last year. A second later, the ads narrator added: And its only the beginning. That qualifier is appropriate given the perspective Zeller supplied. Considering Ohios size, a statement about the states comparatively high level of job creation is not the ultimate benchmark of success.JobsOhio seems to realize this. On the Truth-O-Meter, the agencys statement rates True.