Washington Redskins Predict Presidential Elections
Claim:   The outcome of Washington Redskins home football games has correctly predicted the winner of every U.S. presidential election since 1936. OUTDATED Example:  [Collected via e-mail, November 2012] Did you know....??  The Washington Redskins have proved to be a time-tested election predictor. In the previous 15elections, if the Washington Redskins have lost their last home game prior to the election, the incumbent party has lost the White House. When they have won, the incumbent has stayed in power.  This election year, that deciding game takes place on Sunday, October 31 ... vs. Green Bay.  Go Pack!!! Origins:  Our desire to understand and assert some control over the world around us is often manifested by our attempts to find predictive signs that enable us to prognosticate events  even when there is no seeming connection between predictor and event.  Sometimes one natural phenomenon supposedly forecasts another, as in the belief that a    groundhog's seeing his shadow on February 2 portends another six weeks of winter.  In other instances the linkage is between affairs of mankind, as in the superstition that the winner of football's Super Bowl augurs that year's stock market performance (or vice-versa). groundhog Super Bowl One item of this ilk which gained currency in 2004 maintained that the results of the last game played at home by the NFL's Redskins (a football team based in the national capital, Washington, D.C.) before a U.S. presidential election foretold the winner of that contest.  If the Redskins won their last home game before the election, the party that occupied the White House continued to hold it; if the Redskins lost that last home game, the challenger from the out-of-office party unseated the incumbent party.  And up until that 2004 election, the Redskins indicator had a rather remarkable record: Since 1936, the earliest  presidential election year in which the current Redskins franchise played under that team name, the team's results had currently predicted the outcome of 17 straight presidential contests.   Reality finally trumped coincidence in 2004, however: Despite the Green Bay Packers' 28-14 defeat of the Redskins at the latter's home field on 31 October, presaging a victory for Democratic challenger John Kerry in upcoming the presidential election, two days later incumbent President George W. Bush was re-elected, breaking the Redskins' predictive pattern.   The Redskins indicator failed again in 2012 as Washington suffered a 21-13 home loss at the hands of the Carolina Panthers on 4 November 2012, just two days before that year's election, but Republican nominee Mitt Romney failed to unseat incumbent president Barack Obama. defeat loss While we don't presume there is anything more behind the phenomenon than random correlation, the Redskins indicator can still boast an accuracy rate of 90% with 18 correct matches out of the last 20 elections:    After stumbling in 2004, the Redskins' power as election predictors got back on track in 2008.  In a Monday night game contested on 3 November 2008, the evening before Election Day, the Redskins were defeated at home, 23-6, by the Pittsburgh Steelers, a loss that foretold a change in party which would bring the Democratic candidate into the White House.  The following day, the Democratic presidential candidate, Senator Barack Obama, defeated the Republican presidential candidate, Senator John McCain, for the White House. defeated  On 30 October 2000 the Washington Redskins lost a Monday night game at home to the Tennessee Titans, 27-21, presaging a loss for the incumbent Democratic party.  Since President Bill Clinton had already been elected to the constitutionally-mandated maximum of two terms in office, the 7 November 2000 presidential election pitted Democratic Vice-President Al Gore against Republican Governor George W. Bush of Texas.  In the closest (and most controversial) presidential election since 1876, Governor Bush gained the White House by the slim margin of five electoral votes, thereby fulfilling the Redskin prophecy. lost   On 27 October 1996 the Washington Redskins defeated the Indianapolis Colts at home, 31-16, predicting a win for the incumbent Democrats.  Sure enough, in the 5 November 1996 general election, Democratic President Bill Clinton won re-election over his Republican challenger, Senator Bob Dole of Kansas. defeated   On 1 November 1992 the Washington Redskins lost to the New York Giants at home, 24-7, predicting a similar loss for the incumbent Republicans.  As expected, in the 3 November 1992, Republican President George H. W. Bush lost his re-election bid to Governor Bill Clinton of Arkansas. lost   On 6 November 1988 the Washington Redskins edged the New Orleans Saints at home, 27-24, predicting a win for the incumbent Republicans.  As President Ronald Reagan had already been elected twice, the 8 November 1988 election once again matched a sitting Vice-President, Republican George H. W. Bush, against a challenger, Democratic Governor Michael Dukakis of Massachusetts.  True to form, Vice-President Bush emerged victorious. edged   On 5 November 1984 the Washington Redskins bested the Atlanta Falcons in a Monday night home game, 27-14, predicting a win for the incumbent Republicans.  The next day, President Ronald Reagan handily defeated his Democratic challenger, former Vice-President and Senator Walter F. Mondale of Minnesota, winning re-election with an electoral vote landslide. bested   On 2 November 1980 the Washington Redskins were trounced at home by the Minnesota Vikings, 39-14, predicting a loss for the incumbent Democrats.  As expected, on 4 November 1980 President Jimmy Carter failed in his re-election bid, losing to his Republican opponent, former California governor Ronald Reagan. trounced   On 31 October 1976 the Washington Redskins were spooked by the Dallas Cowboys in a Halloween Day home game, losing 20-7 and predicting a loss for the incumbent Republicans.  Two days later, on 2 November 1976, Democratic Governor Jimmy Carter of Georgia unseated President Gerald Ford (who had been appointed Vice-President after the resignation of Spiro Agnew in 1973 and became chief executive in 1974 after President Richard Nixon also resigned). spooked   On 22 October 1972 the Washington Redskins edged the Dallas Cowboys, 24-20, predicting a win for the incumbent Republicans.   The 7 November 1972 election resulted in the electoral vote landslide re-election of President Richard Nixon over the Democratic nominee, Senator George McGovern of South Dakota. edged   On 27 October 1968 the Washington Redskins lost a close game to the New York Giants, 13-10, predicting a loss for the incumbent Democrats.  Since President Lyndon B. Johnson had announced several months earlier that he would not seek another term as president, the November 1968 election was a contest between sitting Vice-President Hubert Humphrey and a former Vice-President, Republican Richard Nixon.  In a mirror of the Redskins game, the Democrats lost in a close contest (the two candidates were separated by a slim 0.6% margin in the popular vote). lost   On 25 October 1964 the Washington Redskins beat the Chicago Bears, 27-20, predicting a win for the incumbent Democrats.  As predicted, on 3 November 1964 President Lyndon Johnson (who had ascended to the White House after the assassination of President Kennedy in 1963) won a landslide victory over Republican Senator Barry Goldwater of Arizona. beat   On 30 October 1960 the Washington Redskins were pasted at home by the Cleveland Browns, 31-10, predicting a loss for the incumbent Republicans.  President Dwight D. Eisenhower had already served two terms, so Vice-President Richard Nixon took up the Republican mantle against Senator John F. Kennedy of Massachusetts in the 8 November 1960 presidential election.  Like the Redskins, the Republicans lost; unlike the Redskins, the Republicans made the contest a very close one. (Kennedy bested Nixon by a mere 0.2% margin in the popular vote.) pasted   On 21 October 1956 the Washington Redskins soundly defeated the Cleveland Browns at home, 20-9, predicting a win for the incumbent Republicans on 6 November 1956.  And, for the second straight election, the Republicans and their standard-bearer, Dwight D. Eisenhower, prevailed over the Democratic nominee, Adlai Stevenson. defeated   On 2 November 1952 the Washington Redskins lost a squeaker to the Pittsburgh Steelers at home, 24-23, predicting a similar loss for the incumbent Democrats.  President Harry S. Truman declined to run for re-election (he had already served eight years), leaving the field open for former Illinois governor Adlai Stevenson to stand against the Republican candidate, General Dwight D. Eisenhower.  The Democrats' loss on 4 November 1952 was not nearly as close as the Redskins' had been. lost   On 31 October 1948, the Washington Redskins walloped the Boston Yanks at home, 59-21, predicting a win for the incumbent Democrats.  Two days later, In one of the most stunning political upsets in U.S. history, President Harry S. Truman (who had assumed office in 1945 when President Franklin D. Roosevelt died shortly after beginning his fourth term) defeated his Republican challenger, Governor Thomas E. Dewey of New York. walloped   On 5 November 1944, the Washington Redskins trimmed the Cleveland Rams at home, 14-10, predicting a win for the incumbent Democrats.  And win the Democrats did, as President Franklin D. Roosevelt secured an unprecedented fourth term by defeating the Republican nominee, Thomas Dewey, on 7 November 1944. trimmed   On 3 November 1940, the Washington Redskins thrashed the Pittsburgh Pirates (forebears of today's Steelers team) at home, 37-10, predicting a win for the incumbent Democrats.  Likewise, Democrat Franklin D. Roosevelt became the first (and only) three-term president as he thrashed Republican challenger Wendell Willkie of New York (a former Democrat who had never held high elected office) on 5 November 1940. thrashed  Going back to 1936 puts us beyond the beginnings of the Washington Redskins, as that year the Redskins franchise was still playing in Boston. Nonetheless, their knack for foretelling the outcome of presidential elections was already in place.  On 1 November 1936 the Boston Redskins downed the Chicago Cardinals at Fenway Park, 13-10, predicting a win for the incumbent Democrats.  Two days later, President Franklin D. Roosevelt won  re-election over Republican Governor Alf Landon of Kansas. downed That is as far back as the streak goes.  In 1932 the Washington Redskins were neither the Redskins nor a Washington team: they were the Boston Braves, and they played in Braves Field, which they shared with the National League baseball team of the same name.  On 6 November 1932 they won at home against the Staten Island Stapletons, 19-6, a result that should have foretold a presidential victory for the incumbent Republican party.  Neither the Redskins' team name nor their predictive powers were yet evident, however, as President Herbert Hoover lost to his Democratic challenger, Governor Franklin Delano Roosevelt of New York, on 8 November 1932. won Sightings:  This Redskins home game election predictor was mentioned in an episode of the AMC television drama Mad Men ("The Wheel," original air date 18 October 2007):  Last updated:  7 November 2012
On 8 January 2019, presidential biographer Jon Meacham tweeted what he described as a quote from the year 1924 made by then-Georgia Gov. Clifford Walker during a speech given at a Ku Klux Klan gathering: America should build a wall of steel, a wall as high as Heaven" against the flow of immigrants.--Georgia Gov. Clifford Walker, at a 1924 convention of the Ku Klux Klan, then a powerful force at a time of strain for the white working class. #PastIsPrologue #PastIsPrologue  Jon Meacham (@jmeacham) January 8, 2019 January 8, 2019  The quote spread across the Internet, stripped of its context and in meme form, prompting some readers to query whether the quote and its description were real:   We confirmed that Walker did in fact make this remark in regards to immigrants at a KKK gathering. The statement was part of a speech called "Americanism Applied" and given by Walker at a "Klonvocation" in Kansas City, Missouri, in 1924. It can be found in a book called the Proceedings of the Second Imperial Klonvokation of the Knights of the Ku Klux Klan. The contents of that book have been uploaded to the Internet Archive, and we confirmed its authenticity with the Special Collections branch of the University of California at Davis' library, which also possesses a copy. Internet Archive Meacham's tweet was referencing a protracted partial shutdown of the federal government resulting from an impasse over a demand by President Donald Trump for a budget appropriation of $5.7 billion to fund wall construction along the U.S.-Mexico border. Trump had been stating on Twitter that his desired wall would be made of steel: A design of our Steel Slat Barrier which is totally effective while at the same time beautiful! pic.twitter.com/sGltXh0cu9 pic.twitter.com/sGltXh0cu9  Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) December 21, 2018 December 21, 2018  Although harsh immigration rhetoric and policies have primarily targeted Latino migrants, Walker's comments demonstrate the shifting idea of which immigrant groups are considered favorable. His declaration, in its entirety, stated: "I would build a wall of steel, a wall as high as Heaven, against the admission of a single one of those Southern Europeans who never thought the thoughts or spoke the language of a democracy in their lives." Kinights of the Ku Klux Klan, Inc.  Proceedings of the Second Imperial Klonvocation of the Knights of the Ku Klux Klan, Held in Kansas City, MO in September 1924.
  1924. Meacham, Jon.  The Soul of America: The Battle for Our Better Angels.
  Random House, 2018.  ISBN 0399589813. Baker, Kelly J.  "Make America White Again?"
  The Atlantic.  12 March 2016. During the U.S. vice presidential debate on Oct. 7, 2020, Republican candidate Mike Pence claimed he and U.S. President Donald Trump worked "from day one" in the White House to drive down American unemployment to "record" low levels  evidence, he alleged, that voters should re-elect Trump on Nov. 3 to try and reshape the economy after unprecedented job losses during the COVID-19 pandemic. Oct. 7, 2020 COVID-19 pandemic The statement echoed previous comments by the president. In October 2019, the White House issued a news release suggesting the Trump administration's "pro-growth agenda" was the reason for new jobs and a declining unemployment rate, reaching a level not seen in 50 years. news release Then, on Jan. 29, 2020, roughly one week after the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) confirmed the first COVID-19 case in the U.S., Trump reiterated on Twitter: reiterated   About six weeks later as the deadly virus spread nationwide, Trump doubled down on that "50 year" claim and said his administration is responsible for the "best unemployment numbers in the history of our Country." He tweeted: tweeted   The claim took on another layer as the pandemic worsened: Trump alleged without evidence that his administration was responsible for helping Black Americans, specifically, get jobs. For instance, on June 2, he claimed he "has done more for the Black Community than any President since Abraham Lincoln," and that the country's unemployment figure among Black Americans was evidence of that work. claimed After that, Trump supporters went a step further by circulating the below-displayed meme online, alleging that Trump not only drove down unemployment rates for people who identify as Black or African American but also women and Hispanic workers.   This was true: U.S. Unemployment Reached 50-year Low Under Trump But no evidence showed Trump was responsible for causing the dip. First, to determine the validity of the underlying claim  that Trump shaped the economy so that U.S. unemployment dipped to the lowest rate ever  we considered the data available. The Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) began calculating the country's unemployment rate  the number of people seeking work divided by the sum of that amount and total people employed  in March 1940, when demographers first launched a monthly survey of households nationwide called the "Current Population Survey." Before that, more subjective and less comprehensive data existed. So to ensure accuracy in this report, we only considered the country's unemployment figure post-1940, as compiled by BLS and the U.S. Census Bureau and to which government officials refer. Bureau of Labor Statistics According to our analysis of the labor statistics before Trump's inauguration on Jan. 20, 2017 (see below for our analysis of the jobless rate during his presidency), the country recorded the lowest unemployment rate in 1944, near the end of World War II. At that time, just 1.2% of Americans were unemployed and seeking jobs, per BLS data, which included workers over the age of 14. (Note: The survey in modern years only counted adults and teenagers over the age of 16, not 14.) The survey   Next, we considered BLS unemployment data over the course of 50 years before Trump's inauguration to determine whether the country's jobless rate indeed fell to the "the lowest level in more than 50 years" under his leadership. We learned 1969's annual unemployment rate was about 3.6%, in part, because millions of men were drafted for the Vietnam War and left the American workforce, making the sum of all those seeking or maintaining employment significantly lower. In May 1969, for instance, the unemployment rate was 3.4%. After that, we obtained statistics to gauge the country's monthly unemployment rate from the beginning of Trump's term  Jan. 20, 2017  to January 2020, when the U.S. COVID-19 outbreak began and businesses on a grand scale prepared to temporarily close or furloughed workers to prevent the spread of the deadly virus. (We did not consider U.S. unemployment during the outbreak since the claim was framed by the Trump campaign that he was more suited than Democratic rival Joe Biden to revive the pandemic-stricken economy.)  Per the BLS' Current Population Survey, the country's unemployment rate in February 2017, which was compiled including survey responses in the weeks before and after Trump took office in January, was 4.6%. From that point, the proportion of Americans seeking work compared to the total number of people in the country's workforce slightly decreased under the Trump administration. By September 2019, the percentage reached 3.5%  the lowest rate since December 1969. That meant Trump was correct in saying that unemployment dropped to the lowest point in about 50 years under his watch. However, his second tweet  that that metric was the lowest in U.S. history (or since the comprehensive unemployment data existed)  was false. The World War II-era 1.2% unemployment rate was lower. Trump was correct According to BBC economists' analysis of the recent employment figure, the change was a result of 490,000 Americans leaving the workforce. Jerome Powell, whom President Barack Obama appointed to the Federal Reserve System's board of governors and Trump promoted to the agency's chairman in 2018, told CBS News at the time that "an unusually large number of people in their prime working years" were not seeking employment or maintaining jobs for a variety of reasons, such as the U.S. opioid crisis, and that the U.S. workforce participation rate was lower than almost every other advanced country. BBC economists' analysis Federal Reserve System's board of governors CBS News We also obtained data showing the country's unemployment rate by race and gender to determine the accuracy of the above-displayed meme that alleged the percentage of unemployed female workers, as well as people who identify as Black, African Americans or Hispanic, was higher in 2009 than in 2019, among other things. According to the monthly data, these facts were true at face value: were true technically ended But that statistical snapshot is missing necessary context to consider the claim  that Trump's fiscal and regulatory policies led to millions of workers finding jobs  accurate: In February 2009, roughly one month after Obama was sworn into office, he signed a $787 billion stimulus package to save jobs and reverse the economic downturn. The increased public spending on everything from roads to science programs to unemployment benefits, as well as other market trends, created new jobs on a mass scale. And, in turn, labor statistics showed a steady increase in job growth and a gradual decrease in the country's jobless rate over the course of a decade until the pandemic hit.   Looking at the graph above, we determined no significant disruptions or changes in the country's unemployment rate when Trump took office  the steady decrease is essentially indistinguishable from the Obama years after the recession. "At best, you would say it's been a continuation of a steady trend," economist Austan Goolsbee told MSNBC. told MSNBC In other words, it was false to claim that Trump moved into the White House and jumpstarted a failing economy. Rather, conditions were improving for American workers years before voters elected the real estate billionaire as president. NBC News reported in August 2020: NBC News The president rightly takes credit for having low unemployment during his presidency. In December of 2019, the unemployment rate was a scant 3.5 percent, the lowest it had been in 50 years. However, as good as that number was, when Trump took office the rate was already at 4.7 percent. That figure is quite low by historical standards (lower than all of the 1980s as well as most of the 1990s and 2000s). In December of 2017, it was the lowest the number had been since the Great Recession. In fact, Obama saw a much steeper drop in unemployment in his second term, a 3.3 drop in the rate, than Trump did in his first three years, a decline of 1.2 points. Thats not to besmirch the remarkably low unemployment under Trump, but its hard to ignore that the unemployment track under Obama had been downward. Again, the numbers look like the continuation of a trend, not something new. Another analysis of labor statistics by NPR came to the same conclusion: that job growth remained consistent since the end of the recession in 2010 and 2018, while the unemployment rate steadily decreased. NPR reported: labor statistics by NPR So while the White House can certainly point to some yardsticks that indicate a meaningful turnaround on Trump's watch  including small business sentiment, business investment and goods-producing job growth  broader measures of the overall job market and wages show the economy continues to follow the steady, upward glide path that began under Obama. In sum, considering no evidence showed policies enacted by the Trump administration drove down the country's unemployment rate  but rather the roughly 50-year low in fall 2019 was essentially a continuation from the Great Recession's recovery, per economists' analysis of BLS data  we rate this claim "false." per economists BBC News. "US Jobless Rate At Lowest Since 1969."  3 May 2019. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. "BLS Data Viewer."  Accessed 13 October 2020. Wingfield, Brian. "The End of the Great Recession? Hardly."  Forbes. 20 September 2010. Jones, Chuck. "Trump's Economic Scorecard: 3 Years In Office."  Forbes. 10 February 2020. Horsley, Scott. "FACT CHECK: Who Gets Credit For The Booming U.S. Economy."  NPR. 12 September 2018. Ruhle, Stephanie. "Which President Gets The Credit For The Booming Economy?"  MSNBC. 10 September 2018. A big part of President Barack Obama's first State of the Union speech on Jan. 27, 2010, focused on the economy.To set the stage, he said his predecessor was largely responsible for the country's fiscal shape.At the beginning of the last decade ... America had a budget surplus of over $200 billion, Obama said. By the time I took office, we had a one-year deficit of over $1 trillion and projected deficits of $8 trillion over the next decade. Most of this was the result of not paying for two wars, two tax cuts, and an expensive prescription drug program.We've checked several claims to this effect in the last year,most recently one by Obama adviser David Axelrod. Indeed, we found that the government was enjoying a surplus of about $236 billion circa 2001. Later, when Obama took office, the Congressional Budget Office reported the deficit was over $1.2 trillion. A good chunk of the deficits racked up by the Bush administration came from tax cuts, the war in Iraq and actions that Bush and a Democratic Congress took to prop up the economy right before he left office.In the same report, the CBO projected a 10-year deficit of about $3.1 trillion. But Obama said $8 trillion, based on budget numbers published by the White House Office of Management and Budget shortly after Obama took office.Why the discrepancy? When we checked the similar claim by Axelrod, we spoke with Josh Gordon, policy director for the Concord Coalition. He said it has to do with how the two offices estimate the future. The CBO bases its projections on the assumption that the Bush tax cuts would expire in 2010 and that a patch to fix the alternative minimum tax would expire, among other things. The White House does not; instead, it assumes that nothing changes in current law.So, Obama's overall point is correct that the government was enjoying a substantial surplus when Bush took office and had a big deficit when he departed; he's spot on about the surplus Bush began with. He's also correct about the deficit at the end of Bush's presidency, but there are two different ways to measure the 10-year projection when Bush left office. The CBO's estimate is $5 trillion lower than the White House numbers, though economists don't quibble with the White House methodology. So given that discussion, we'll take Obama down a notch to Mostly True. Claim:  Congress has eliminated the child tax credit, the earned income tax credit (EITC), and mortgage deductions from the tax code under pressure from lobby groups and the Koch brothers.  Example:  [Collected via Twitter, November 2014] Are u kidding!? Congress Eliminates Child Tax Credit, Mortgage Deduction & E.I.T.C   Origins:  On 11 November 2014, the National Report published an article claiming a "heavy burst of lobbying" by groups including the Koch brothers' Koch Industries preceded a vote whereby Congress rescinded several common tax breaks long afforded to millions of Americans.  article According to the article, the child tax credit, the earned income tax credit and the mortgage interest deduction were all forms of "entitlement payouts" that had been eliminated beginning with the 2014 fiscal year to allow "job creators" to flourish: The deeply unpopular congress, whose approval rating hovers around a historic low of 10%, has voted to remove the child tax credit, the earned income tax credit and the mortgage interest deduction from the tax code starting with the 2014 fiscal year. The move is almost assured to solidify the perception of the 113rd Congress of the United States as deeply disconnected from the struggles and desires of the populace it is supposed to serve.  The move, long championed by entitlement reform advocates like congressman Paul Ryan R-Wisconsin and Ted Cruz R-Texas, will cut entitlement payouts by a staggering 177 billion dollars. 54.33 billion dollars in savings will be realized from discontinuing the earned income tax credit, which generally pays those making less than 12 thousand dollars yearly large cash tax rebates far in excess of the actual tax they paid. 69.7 billion will be saved from the mortgage interest tax deduction, which critics say primarily favors top income earners. The elimination of the child tax credit, which critics say serves no fair purpose, will result in an additional 54 billion dollar savings. The article was nothing but a chain-yanking spoof, however: The National Report is a well-known fake news outlet notorious for publishing click-baiting, completely false stories such as "15 Year Old Who 'SWATTED' Gamer Convicted of Domestic Terrorism," "Solar Panels Drain the Sun's Energy, Experts Say," and "Vince Gilligan Announces Breaking Bad Season 6." 15 Year Old Who 'SWATTED' Gamer Convicted of Domestic Terrorism Solar Panels Drain the Sun's Energy, Experts Say Vince Gilligan Announces Breaking Bad Season 6 The article also quoted economist "Paul Horner" on Congress' purported tax credit repeal.  If that name sounds familiar, it's because Paul Horner is a National Report writer whose name is used as a recurring character in various stories published by the site.     Last updated:  13 November 2014 < In mid-August 2020, Snopes readers inquired about a meme circulating on Facebook that claimed money given to AARP (formerly American Association of Retired Persons), an advocacy organization that lobbies on behalf of retired Americans, goes "directly" to the Democratic party.   It's unclear what exactly is meant by the phrase, "what you pay AARP." The organization has an estimated 38 million members, all of whom typically pay annual dues at $16 per year. As a 501(c)4 tax-exempt organization, it also accepts charitable donations. estimated dues at tax-exempt accepts Either way, any money paid to AARP through membership dues or donations does not go "directly" to the Democratic party. The AARP lobbies the government on behalf of causes that affect people aged 50 and older. Those activities may include taking a stand on health care and Social Security. stand Social Security In terms of candidates and political parties, however, AARP's official position is that it is non-partisan. The organization states it "does not support, endorse or contribute to political candidates or parties." states Instead, per AARP, the organization's role in terms of election politics is "connecting voters to information about where the candidates stand on issues most important to them including the future of Social Security and other critical issues related to financial security, health and well-being." We checked the AARP's federal campaign finance data using the website Open Secrets, a project operated by the government accountability organization The Center for Responsive Politics. We found no contributions to any political candidates or parties, Democratic or otherwise, from AARP, the organization. However, contributions from individuals who work for AARP is another matter. Open Secrets "AARP does not have any record of direct contributions to political parties or candidates based on my review of federal campaign finance and tax filings covering recent years, but AARPs officers [executives] and employees can still make political donations in a personal capacity, and contributions from donors listing AARP as their employer in Federal Election Commission records have primarily gone to Democratic candidates in recent years," said Anna Massoglia, a researcher for The Center for Responsive Politics. AARP policy prohibits employees or officers from engaging in any personal political activity using AARP resources or during work hours. policy According to campaign finance data tracked by Open Secrets, individual donors associated with AARP made a total of $96,381 in political contributions as of this writing in the 2020 federal election cycle, the majority (87.45%) of those donations going to Democratic candidates. total majority Massoglia said that as a 501(c)4 organization, the AARP is allowed under U.S. tax code to engage in some political campaign activity. But their activities have been issue-oriented and bipartisan. For example, a 2018 AARP ad praised U.S. President Donald Trump on drug pricing policy. The organization has also supported upholding the Affordable Care Act, the landmark health care law signed by Trump's Democratic predecessor, President Barack Obama. praised supported AARP spokesperson Jason Young told us by phone that the organization, as a 501(c)4 non-profit, is prohibited by law from making political contributions. "Not only does AARP not make donations of this sort, we never have and we don't have a PAC," Young added. Young said that although some AARP employees have made political contributions in a personal capacity, the sum of donations is relatively small. "It's fair to say we are largely absent form this type of political engagement, and that's because AARP as an organization is focused on policy, not politics," Young stated. Although it's true that individuals who work for AARP have donated primarily to Democratic candidates, individual donations are not the same as contributions by an organization. Because AARP as an organization has not contributed to the Democratic party or its candidates, we rate this claim,  Hahn, Steve.  "Voter and Candidate Reminder: AARP Is Strictly Non-Partisan."
  AARP.  26 August 2016. AARP.org. "How Much Does AARP Membership Cost?"
  Accessed 18 August 2020. AARP.org.  "IRS Definition."
  3 March 2011. AARP. org.  "AARP Policy on Personal Political Activity."
  Accessed 19 August 2020. Bunis, Dena."AARP Urges Federal Appeals Court to Preserve the ACA."
  1 April 2019. Updated to include comments from AARP spokesperson Jason Young. As she campaigns to upend GOP state Sen. Robert Cowles in one of the closely watched Wisconsin recall campaigns, Democrat Nancy Nusbaum is talking up her long record of public service.Now anally of Cowles, the Wisconsin Manufacturers & Commerce, is trying to use that record against Nusbaum.In a television ad paid for by its issues fund, the heavyweight business group is ripping Nusbaums fiscal record during her eight years as Brown County executive, which ended in 2003.Spending went up, taxes went up,theadsays in part. Everything Nancy Nusbaum touches goes up. When Nusbaum was Brown County executive, spending went up nearly 50 percent. Tell Nancy Nusbaum we expect fiscal responsibility to be real, not a lot of hot air.In the ad, hot air balloons and rockets rise to underline the point.When we sought backup from WMC, the group did not return calls. So we checked the record.Brown County officials looked up the budget numbers for us, focusing on the seven budgets Nusbaum signed from late 1995 to early 2003.Operating spending went up 53 percent over those seven years. That works out to an average increase of 6.3 percent per year. State, local and federal funds contribute to the budget.So the ad is on target numerically.Indeed, Nusbaum does not dispute the numbers in it and did not criticize the ad as unfair but noted the County Board had a role in the budgets.By contrast, the spending increase over the seven years following Nusbaums tenure was 34 percent, which is 4.2 percent per year on average.The ad pulls the statistic out without any context for what was behind it.Why the dramatic difference in spending?Nusbaum pointed to replacement of an overcrowded jail, the cost of state-mandated services, increasing urbanization and associated social service costs, and the costs of caring for an aging population, among other reasons.Property values and state aid to counties were rising, welfare and jail spending grew rapidly, and counties saw big increases in administrative costs for things such as information technology, said John Reinemann, legislative director for the Wisconsin Counties Association.Levy limits on counties were minimal compared with today, Reinemann noted.Reinemann told us that 7 percent to 8 percent annual spending increases such as those in Brown County were not uncommon in the late 1990s among Wisconsin counties.His view is backed up by a ranking of counties that shows Brown in the middle of the pack in growth of spending per capita from 1993-2001. That is from the Wisconsin Taxpayers Alliance, a research organization.Spending in six key categories went up 6.3 percent annually during that time, the group found.Nusbaum, a retired teacher and former mayor of De Pere, said she prefers to point to the property tax rate instead of the total tax levy and kept it stable as executive. Brown County records show she did that.But the rate does not reflect the true cost of government, especially when it comes to property taxes. The rate can stay steady or decline, but tax bills can rise if the property tax levy (an indicator of spending) goes up.In Brown County, as elsewhere, increasing property values in the 1990s helped hold down the tax rate even as total tax levy collections rose. Statewide values jumped up 7.7 percent a year from 1993-2002, WTA found. In fact, statewide, net property tax rates actually dropped during the decade as property values soared.Lets conclude.A business group spotlighted the budget increases during Nusbaums term, suggesting through words and graphics that they were sky high.They certainly were large compared with the years that followed, for reasons related to decisions by Nusbaum, county supervisors, the state, and local residents -- as well as demographics and sociological trends.The number -- 50 percent -- is on target.But the ad leaves out information about the other factors that went into the spending. Indeed, Brown Countys spending was not atypical for the time and by at least one groups measure was in the middle of the pack.We rate the WMC claim Mostly True. An image graphic supposedly documenting the various misdeeds of the "Pelosi Crime Family" -- including perjury, securities fraud, and simply being rich -- was circulated on social media in January 2019. We've examined each of the accusations leveled within against House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, her husband, her father, her brother, and her son individually and found them to be largely overstated, misrepresented, or based on unreliable information:     Was Nancy Pelosi's father, Thomas D'Alesandro, Jr., a constant companion of Benjamin "Benny Tratta" Magliano? Status: UNPROVEN The facts: This claim is a verbatim reproduction of the introductory paragraph of a June 2015 blog post published on the Typepad blog "Bitterqueen" by Phillip Crawford, Jr., the author of the 2015 book The Mafia and the Gay, which was reportedly based on FBI files obtained pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). Bitterqueen The Mafia and the Gay Crawford wrote that Peter Galiano, a boxer who was caught up in a draft-dodging scheme in the 1940s, told federal agents in 1947 that D'Alesandro was a "constant companion" of the Boston mobster. When the FBI examined these associations in 1961, however, before D'Alesandro received a presidential appointment to the Federal Renegotiation Board, Galiano said that his statements were based on rumor and hearsay and that he couldn't recall where he had come across that information: 1947: Peter C. Galiano, Baltimore, Maryland, advised that Thomas D'Alesandro was a constant companion of John Cataneo, Benjamin Magliano, also known as Benny Trotta, and [redacted], who were described as "local big-time gamblers." Mr. Galiano stated that these individuals had worked hard for Thomas D'Alesandro's re-election to Congress and in his campaign at that time to become Mayor of Baltimore. Peter C. Galiano, Baltimore, Maryland, advised during the current investigation that his previous statements were based only on rumor and hearsay. He stated that he could not recall who gave him this information or whether or not there was any truth to the allegations. He further explained that he was never well acquainted with any of the men he had mentioned and had no personal knowledge of their affairs. Galiano wasn't the only person to accuse D'Alesandro of having ties to the Boston mob, but those allegations were never officially corroborated and they never resulted in any charges being brought against D'Alesandro. In fact, D'Alesandro was appointed to the Federal Renegotiation Board by President John F. Kennedy in 1961 despite an FBI investigation into those alleged associations. Does Nancy Pelosi own Goat Hill Pizza, a restaurant suspected of harboring trafficking? Status:  The Facts: Nancy Pelosi does not own a pizza parlor, and Goat Hill Pizza is not suspected of harboring child trafficking by any law enforcement agencies. This claim first started circulating in 2016 as part of a larger nonsensical and repeatedly debunked conspiracy theory known as "Pizzagate," in which online trolls asserted that innocuous words such as "pizza" and "cheese" were actually code words referring to child sex trafficking. Although this conspiracy theory was largely focused on the Washington, D.C,. pizza parlor "Comet Ping Pong," Pelosi was also accused of running her own pedophilia ring back in San Francisco out of Goat Hill Pizza. 2016 Pizzagate code words Why? Because a single document from 2004 listed "Philip@GoatHill.com" as the email address for Nancy Pelosi. While conspiracy theorists may contend that this tidbit of information is somehow proof that a high-profile politician was running a pedophilia ring out of the basement of a pizza parlor, a much more plausible (and far less sensational) explanation is evident: it was a filing error. 2004 Philip DeAndrade co-founded Goat Hill Pizza in the 1970s, but by 1987 he was working on Nancy Pelosi's staff. It's likely that DeAndrade accidentally put his own email address, instead of Pelosi's, into a form. Regardless, one spurious appearance of an email address can in no way be construed as proof that Pelosi owns a pizza parlor. Furthermore, the only persons who have suspected this pizza parlor of facilitating child trafficking are online conspiracy theorists and not genuine law enforcement agencies. staff Did Nancy Pelosi hold a secret fundraiser for Islamist and Hamas-linked groups? Status:  The Facts: Despite the wording suggesting that Pelosi hosted a "secret fundraiser" to for Islamist- and Hamas-linked groups, this claim refers to a fundraiser held for the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee. The Islamist and Hamas-linked groups portion of the claim is largely based on the fact that Nihad Awad, the co-founder of the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR), attended the fundraiser. A number of other Muslim groups were also reportedly in attendance at the fundraiser, along with Keith Ellison, the first Muslim to be elected to the U.S. Congress. The Daily Caller was among the first to draw attention to Awad's attendance at this fundraiser: Daily Caller Democratic leader Rep. Nancy Pelosi headlined a high-dollar fundraiser in May that was attended by U.S.-based Islamist groups and individuals linked by the U.S. government to the Hamas jihad group and to the Egypt-based Muslim Brotherhood movement. The donors at the undisclosed May 16 event included Nihad Awad, the co-founder of the Council on American Islamic Relations, according to data provided by the nonpartisan Investigative Project on Terrorism. The CAIR group was named an unindicted conspirator in a 2007 trial of a Hamas money-smuggling group. While it's true that CAIR was named as an unindicted co-conspirator during the 2007 case of the Holy Land Foundation (HLF), an Islamic charity eventually convicted of funding Islamic militant groups, CAIR was not charged with any criminal activity in connection with that case. Furthermore, CAIR was one of nearly 250 organizations who were given the "unindicted co-conspirator" label during the HLF case: 250 organizations CAIR is an aggressive Muslim civil liberties organization, modeled on the Anti Defamation League, that has made it a target for criticism. It was indeed named as an unindicted co-conspirator or joint venturer in the Holy Land Foundation case -- an Islamic charity that in 2008 was convicted of funding Islamic militant groups. But CAIR was not alone in that designation; nearly 250 other organizations and individuals were also named. The federal government said the organizations were included on the list in order to produce evidence at the trial, but the district court and a federal appeals court later ruled that it had been a mistake to make the list public. The New York Times also reported that "unindicted co-conspirators" on this list were not charged with any crimes: reported Technically, the prosecution can introduce statements made by any individual or organization named as an unindicted co-conspirator without such statements being dismissed as hearsay. Those on the list have not been charged with anything, but they are concerned that the label of unindicted co-conspirator will forever taint them, particularly if the Holy Land group is convicted, and that they will have no legal recourse. CAIR, of course, also denied having links to any terrorist organizations. denied So Pelosi and other Democrats held a Democratic fundraiser in 2012 that was attended by a number of leaders from various Muslim groups. While some critics may label groups such as CAIR as "Hamas-linked," that label is disputed. Was Nancy Pelosi's son, Paul Pelosi, Jr., charged with securities fraud? Status: false The Facts: In July 2014, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) announced they were bringing fraud charges against four individuals involved with the company Natural Blue Resources Inc. Although Paul Pelosi, Jr. did work for that company, he was not one of the individuals charged with securities fraud by the SEC, who didn't even mention Pelosi Jr.'s name when they first announced the charges: announced The Securities and Exchange Commission today announced fraud charges against four individuals and a microcap company for concealing from investors that two lawbreakers ran the company. According to the SECs orders instituting administrative proceedings, the mission of Natural Blue Resources Inc. was to create, acquire, or otherwise invest in environmentally-friendly companies, including an initiative to locate, purify, and sell water recovered from underground aquifers in New Mexico and other areas with depleting water resources. What investors didnt know was that two individuals with prior law violations -- James E. Cohen and Joseph Corazzi -- secretly controlled the operational and management decisions of Natural Blue while calling themselves outside consultants. This arrangement enabled them to be de facto officers of Natural Blue and personally profit from the company without disclosing their past brushes with the law to investors. Cohen, who lives in Windermere, Fla., was previously incarcerated for financial fraud. Corazzi, who resides in Albuquerque, N.M., was previously charged with violating federal securities laws and permanently barred from acting as an officer or director of a public company ... The other two individuals charged in the case are Toney Anaya and Erik Perry, who were former chief executive officers at Natural Blue. The SECs orders find that they misled investors by failing to disclose that Cohen and Corazzi were running the company in spite of their criminal or disciplinary histories. Subsequent SEC filings listed Paul Pelosi, Jr. as President and Board member of Natural Blue from 24 August 2009 to 10 January 2010. So Nancy Pelosi's son was involved with a company that was charged with securities fraud years later, he was never personally charged with a crime. filings Was Nancy Pelosi's brother, Franklin D. Roosevelt D'Alesandro, charged with lying during a rape trial? Status:  The Facts: Nancy Pelosi's brother, Franklin D. Roosevelt D'Alesandro, was charged with perjury during a rape trial in the 1950s. However, he was eventually acquitted of those charges. acquitted In 1953, D'Alesandro and 13 other youths went on trial in Baltimore for "moral charges" involving two young girls, aged 11 and 14. D'Alesandro, who was 20 at the time and was charged with statutory rape, testified that he had never seen the victims before. Although he was eventually acquitted of the rape charges (he was the only defendant to be acquitted during the trials), he was later charged with perjury. trial The Denton Journal reported at the time that "The perjury charge resulted from that trial. The state contended D'Alesandro lied in denying he had ever seen the girls before, or had been in a car with three other youths who testified at their trials he was with them." reported Just as with the rape charges, however, D'Alesandro was eventually acquitted of the perjury charges: A jury of four women and eight men deliberated 6 hour and 16 minutes here last night before acquitting Franklin Roosevelt D'Alesandro, 21-year-old son of Baltimore's mayor, of a perjury charge. The "not guilty" verdict, delivered in a loud voice by Mrs. Stella B. Hughes, jury foreman, to a tension-taught crowd in Wicomico County Circuit Court, ended a 5-day trial. Young D'Alesandro, calm and poised throughout the long hours of testimony and argument and seemingly endless wait on the verdict, was jubilant when he heard the decision. After receiving a kiss on the hand from his fiancee and hugs and kisses from his crying mother, D'Alesandro planted a kiss on the cheek of Joseph Sherbow, former Baltimore Circuit Court judge, who headed the defense staff. It was Sherbow who successfully defended young D'Alesandro on a statutory rape charge in Baltimore last November when he was the only one of 16 defendents to be acquitted in a series of morals trials resulting from sex charges brought by two young girl cousins .. "In order to acquit this defendant," Asst. State's Atty. J Harold Grady said. "You must be convinced these eight witness who appeared before you entered into a conspiracy and made up their story out of whole cloth." The defense countered that the only evidence of contraindications came from a "parade of trash." Chief witness for the defense Mary Ann Jankowski, 20-year-old petite blonde fiancee of the defendant. She testified that at the time of the alleged sex offenses last July, young D'Alessandro spent every evening with her and her parents. Although it's possible that D'Alessandro's political power had something to do with his acquittal (whether directly or indirectly), the fact of the matter is that he was found not guilty of any crimes. Nancy Pelosi's husband Paul has a net worth of over $200 million? Status: UNPROVEN The Facts: Nancy Pelosi's husband Paul is indeed a successful businessman and investor, but the claim that he has a net worth of $202 million (which has nothing to do with criminal activity) appears to be based on a misreading of a 2015 article published by the National Review. The conservative publication reported at the time that Pelosi (not specifically her husband) listed assets worth between $43.4 million and $202 million on her 2014 financial disclosure forms: National Review Though financial-disclosure forms list only ranges of assets and liabilities, Pelosi listed between $42.4 million and $199.5 million in assets in 2013, which was enough for Bloomberg Business to deem her the richest member of House leadership from either party. By 2014, she and her husband, investment banker Paul Pelosi, were doing even better: She reported between $43.4 million and $202 million in assets. The "Pelosi Crime Family" meme refers to the highest possible figure within a very broad range and incorrectly refers to this number as Pelosi's net worth. However, the figure actually states the estimated value of Pelosi's assets and doesn't offset it with other financial aspects such as debt: [T]he financial disclosures dont just show substantial assets -- the Pelosis have gone into lots of debt, too. Pelosi and her husband are currently paying mortgages on seven properties, totaling between approximately $9.8 million and $46.5 million in 2014, likely accruing big tax savings in the process. The couple also opened home-equity lines of credit on four of these properties, adding between approximately $1.7 million and $6.5 million to their liabilities. A 2015 Politico article reported Pelosi's net worth at around $30 million. $30 million Sherman, Jake.  "Boehner's Condo, Pelosi's Vineyard: A Peek at Leaders' Wealth."
  Politico.  15 June 2015. Denton Journal.  "Wicomic Jury Acquits D'Alesandro of Perjury."
  28 May 1954. Rogers, Brooke  "Nancy Pelosis Life in the 0.1 Percent."
  The National Review.  1 July 2015. Munro, Neil.  "Pelosi Holds Secret Fundraiser with Islamists, Hamas-Linked Groups."
  The Daily Caller.  2 November 2012. The News.  "Youths Trial Underway In Baltimore."
  30 October 1953. SEC.gov.  "SEC Announces Charges in Scheme to Secretly Enable Lawbreakers to Run Microcap Company."
  16 July 2014. SEC.gov.  "SEC Announces Charges in Scheme to Secretly Enable Lawbreakers to Run Microcap Company."
  16 July 2014. Kessler, Glenn.  "The King Hearings: Is CAIR a 'Terrorist Organization?'"
  The Washington Post.  10 March 2011. Lindsey, Robert.  "20 Years After a 'Summer of Love,' Haight-Ashbury Looks Back."
  The New York Times.  2 July 1987. Aischm Gergor.  "Dissecting the #PizzaGate Conspiracy Theories."
  The New York Times.  10 December 2016. Crawford, Phillip.  "FBI Files: Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi's Father Thomas D'Alesandro Jr. Was 'Constant Companion' of Notorious Mobster Benjamin Magliano."
  BitterQueen.  4 July 2015. Amid tense talks between Congressional Republicans and Democrats over the 2018 federal budget, the attention of many observers turned to each side's record on government spending, benefits and entitlements, and fiscal priorities.  In that vein, a widely-shared Facebook meme took aim at Republican Senator Tom Cotton of Arkansas, accusing him of supporting a modified version of a long-standing liberal bte noire  drug-testing for welfare recipients.  On 21 January 2018, Facebook user Ken Stanley wrote: wrote Tom Cotton calls for every person who receives Social Security to be drug tested those who test positive will lose benefits.     This claim is false. We searched Cotton's speeches, op-eds, and press releases, as well as the Congressional Record and news archives, and found no evidence of the Senator ever having advocated such a policy. In an e-mail, a spokesperson for Cotton told us the meme was "completely false": Senator Cotton does not support (nor has he ever supported) drug testing for Social Security recipients.  Indeed, even those who call for drug-testing for welfare recipients do not typically propose the same policy for Social Security. This is because Social Security is more widely regarded as an earned benefit (workers contribute to it through payroll taxes), while programs such as housing assistance or the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (formerly known as food stamps) are regarded as welfare. Senator Cotton does, however, have a record of making statements and advocating policies around welfare assistance which have raised eyebrows.  In 2015, Salon and Raw Story headlines accused Cotton of "blaming" drug addiction on Social Security benefits, and claiming that receiving Social Security disability benefits causes individuals to "spiral" into drug addiction. The articles, as well as Cotton's actually comments were more nuanced.  blaming spiral In a speech at the Heritage Foundation, a conservative think thank, Cotton advocated for reform of the Social Security disability system, and drew a link between population decline and social ills (including drug addiction) in certain counties and regions, and rates of Social Security disability insurance uptake:  It's hard to say what came first or caused the other: population decline or increased disability usage. Or maybe economic stagnation caused both. Regardless, there seems to be  at least at the county and regional level  something like a disability tipping point. When a county hits a certain level of disability usage, disability becomes a norm. It becomes an acceptable way of life and an alternative source of income to a good-paying, full-time job...After a certain point, when disability keeps climbing and becomes endemic, employers will struggle to find employees, or begin  or continue  to move out of the area.  Population continues to fall, and a downward spiral kicks in, driving once-thriving communities into further decline. Not only that, but once this kind of spiral begins, communities could begin to suffer other social plagues as well, such as heroin or meth addiction and associated crime. In 2014, while running for the Senate, a Huffington Post writer accused Cotton of "calling food stamp recipients addicts." Again, his comments were much more nuanced than that description.  accused According to a Huffington Post transcript of a virtual town hall hosted by Cotton in July 2014, the then-Congressman defended voting down a Democratic bill relating to agricultural payments and federal food aid, on the basis that it did not sufficiently reform the food stamps program, including by requiring drug testing for applicants: voting I dont think that we should be using farmers as a way to pack more welfare spending into Barack Obamas government, Cotton said. Nor should we have a food stamp program that isnt reformed, that doesnt have job training and work requirements, that doesnt have drug testing requirements, so we can get people who are addicted the help they need. Or make sure that long-term addicts or recidivists are not abusing taxpayer dollars. In March 2017, Cotton joined with Republican Senate colleagues in voting to nullify an Obama-era Department of Labor rule which limited the circumstances under which states could conduct drug-testing for individuals applying for unemployment insurance.  voting rule President Donald Trump later formally reversed the guideline, effectively giving states greater powers in conducting drug screening for jobless benefits. So Senator Cotton has certainly supported drug testing for welfare programs  but never for Social Security.  reversed Gauthier, Brendan. "Tom Cotton Blames Social Security for 'Heroin and Meth Addiction' Because Reasons."
 Salon. 10 November 2015. Edwards, David. "Sen. Tom Cotton: Social Security Benefits Cause People to 'Spiral Downward' Into Heroin Addiction."
 Raw Story. 9 November 2015. Lachman, Samantha. "GOP Senate Candidate Tom Cotton Calls Food Stamp Recipients 'Addicts.'"
 Huffington Post. 17 July 2014. Brady, Rep. Kevin. "House Joint Resolution 42 -- Disapproving the Rule Submitted by the Department of Labor Relating to Drug Testing of Unemployment Compensation Applicants."
 Congressional Record. 31 March 2017. U.S. Department of Labor. "Final Rule --Federal-State Unemployment Compensation Program; Middle Class Tax Relief and Job Creation Act of 2012 Provision on Establishing Appropriate Occupations for Drug Testing of Unemployment Compensation Applicants."
 Federal Register. 1 August 2016. U.S. Department of Labor. "President Trump Nullifies Drug Testing Rule."
 U.S. Department of Labor. 31 March 2017. Claim: A real-life tour guide for inner city children compiled their humorous observations for a blog called Ghetto Hikes.  Origins: In March 2015, social media sharing sites including the Meta Picture and DumpADay published articles curating content from an older blog called Ghetto Hikes, which was a set of social media accounts that was briefly popular in 2012 before its creators suddenly stopped updating it. published articles  Ghetto Hikes was initially described as a blog inspired by the comments of inner city children during trips to the country. The site's creator, who identified himself as "Cory," described the children as "urban" and explained: I'm 28. I have a full time job leading urban kids on nature hikes. I simply write down shit they say. email: ghettohikes@gmail.com The description was later updated to include the modifier "of all races" following "urban kids" after readers opined that "urban" was a code word for black. A Twitter account for Ghetto Hikes was last updated on 22 February 2012 and its final tweets were representative of humor many readers likened to a minstrel show: account "E.J. back there havin' a starin' contest with da sun, slowin' down the whole pack ... homeboy shoulda gone to Space Camp." "Mr. Cody, I ain't no snitch or nuffin' but Denny back there shovin' colored rocks in his pockets. Homie lootin' the forest!" "Is rabbits eatable? Or you just s'posed to cuddle the fuck outta them?" "Yo Mr. Cody, how many these mushrooms I gotta eat fo' I Super Mario da fuck outta dis place?" "I thought Lamar done snuck his puppy Jason on da trip ... turns out that crazy ass just makin' shadow puppets." Ghetto Hikes was briefly popular in the online world throughout January and February of 2012, but readers quickly became suspicious about the veracity of its content. Several critics observed that the premise of Ghetto Hikes (i.e., inner city youth outreach) created a convenient excuse for readers to laugh at thinly-veiled racist jokes that would otherwise be deemed offensive or unacceptable. observed The sudden interest generated by Ghetto Hikes brought with it scrutiny of who was behind the briefly popular social media phenomenon. The cessation of those accounts on or around 22 February 2012 coincided with at least two articles that revealed its connection to other humor sites, Lamebook and MensHumor, as explained by the Daily Dot: @HumorForMens tweeted a screenshot of the domain-name registration for MensHumor.com, an apparently related site. The man behind the account? Jonathan Standefer. According to the domain search conducted by @HumorForMens, Standefer registered the MensHumor.com domain name and most likely tweets from the corresponding Twitter account. We used the Whois search tool on InterNIC's domain-name registry also, but it now comes up as private. But the date Standefer registered the website is the same in the screenshot: Aug. 15, 2011. He also registered GhettoHikes.com, which has a Twitter account of the same name. @GhettoHikes is an offensive, racist account from "Cody" who leads hikes for "urban kids." The tweets are essentially the 21st century version of the racist "blackface" films produced during the Jim Crow era. Some screenshots of the purported domain registration were circulated before it was amended in order to conceal information about the site's registrant to new queries. Ghetto Hikes hasn't been updated since those details came to light in early 2012, but the site's content has been intermittently revived on Twitter and Facebook by users newly discovering it. screenshots Despite its continued circulation, Ghetto Hikes was just a hoax consisting of fabricated quotes based upon things that some people believed inner city children might say.    Last updated:  3 February 2016   Valinsky, Jordan.  "The Hater: Exposing the Man Behind @MensHumor"   Daily Dot.  22 February 2012. With control of the U.S. House at stake, Republicans and Democrats are waging fierce election campaigns across the country. In Ohio, at least four seats are considered in play, including the 16th Congressional District seat held by freshman Democratic Rep. John Boccieri of Alliance, a former state legislator who faces a well-financed Republican challenge from businessman Jim Renacci, a former Wadsworth mayor.The American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees union has joined the fight, attacking Renacci in two television advertisements. We recently looked into astatementin the first ad, which accused Renacci of backing a massive tax increase, and found it to be Half True.The second ad levels an even harsher accusation that Renacci cheated on his income taxes and labels him a deadbeat citizen.Renacci hasfiled a defamationlawsuitin Stark County Common Pleas Court over the ad, which says he hid more than $13 million, and was forced to pay $1.4 million in back taxes and penalties. We wanted to see if AFSCME got closer to the truth the second time around.The basis of the attack is a dispute between Renacci and the Ohio Department of Taxation. Renacci has built a fortune from business interests that include nursing homes, real estate investments, auto and motorcycle dealerships, a bar and grill, an arena football team and a minor-league baseball team.The tax department assessed Renacci about $1.4 million in back taxes, interest and penalties for misreporting his income in 2000. Renacci and his wife, Tina, filed a state tax return for that year that claimed they had a loss of $247,336, but an audit found they actually made $13,730,440. The couple filed a tax appeal when the state dinged them for $954,650 in back taxes, $146,938 in interest and $293,876 in penalties.At issue was Renaccis trust income from an S corporation that had not been subject to state taxes for several years before Ohios tax commissioner issued an information release in January 2000 that changed the states policy and directed taxpayers to add such trust income to their federal adjusted gross income. S corporations permit income to be taxed at an individual rate for federal tax purposes and avoid double taxation on corporate income.The tax department followed up with another information release in 2002 warning that it was launching audits and would impose fraud penalties on taxpayers who did not file amended returns reflecting the trust income and pay the taxes due.Renacci was among a group of taxpayers who fought the state decision. He contended that the trust income should have been tax-free and that he had reasonable cause to exclude it on his tax return, according to tax department and court documents.Others dropped their appeals, but Renacci continued to fight, despite an Ohio Supreme Court ruling in 2006 in a similar case in which the court said the trust income was subject to taxation. In that case, the taxpayers reported their S corporation income on their 2000 tax return and then unsuccessfully asked for a refund.Court records show the Renaccis eventually settled the tax dispute and sent the state the full amount due.He was proud of his fight, and to have fought till the end, along with many other Ohioans for tax fairness, Renaccis campaign spokesman Jim Slepian said in an interview for a Plain Dealer story in April.The AFSCME ad cites as its source an Associated Press story from April that said Renacci fought vigorously but eventually paid the back taxes and other assessments.Websters New World Dictionary defines cheat as a person who defrauds, deceives, or tricks others; swindler. And it defines deadbeat as a person who tries to evade paying debts.It seems legitimate to raise questions about Renaccis failure to properly report his income. Some facts are not in dispute. But in the end, after taking his dispute to court and working within the system to resolve it, he did ultimately pay the state the full amount due and he wasnt ever charged with tax fraud.We rate AFSCMEs statement as Mostly True. Comment on this item.