Buried Atari Cartridges
Claim:  Atari buried millions of unsold E.T. game cartridges in a New Mexico desert landfill. LEGEND Origins:  In 1982, Warner Communications could honestly claim to own a goose that laid golden eggs. Its money-producing fowl was called Atari, a video game company it purchased for $28 million in 1976  which had since burgeoned into a $2 billion concern.  In the early 1980s Atari owned 80% of the video game market, it accounted for 70% of Warner's operating profits, and in the fourth quarter of 1982 the Wall Street "whisper number" concerning Atari's expected   earnings predicted a 50% increase over the previous year. The goose died at 3:04 P.M. EST on 7 December 1982, when Atari reported only a 10% to 15% increase in expected earnings, not the 50% figure so many people had been counting on.  By the end of the following day Warner stock had plummeted to two-thirds of  its previous value, and Warner closed out the quarter with its profits down a mind-boggling 56%.  (Even worse, a minor scandal erupted when it was revealed that Atari's president and CEO had sold 5,000 shares of Warner stock a mere 23 minutes before announcing Atari's disappointing sales figures.)  Atari racked up over half a billion dollars ($536 million) in losses in 1983, and by the end of 1984 Warner had sold the company. What accounted for the sudden death of Warner's prized goose?  A number of interrelated factors brought about its fatal illness:  Most of Atari's top programmers, disenchanted with the lack of respect, compensation, and freedom they were afforded under Warner management, left to work elsewhere.  Atari was selling its game consoles as cheaply as possible and expecting to make its profits from sales of game cartridges, but other companies such as Imagic and Activision (founded by some of the disenchanted Atari programmers mentioned above) cut into Atari's sales by creating their own cartridges for Atari consoles (and their games were far superior to what Atari itself was producing).  Atari's VCS game console was several years old by 1982, and its established customer base was being eroded by newer, better systems such as Mattel's Intellivision and Coleco's ColecoVision (especially when those systems started offering adapters that allowed customers to play VCS game cartridges without needing to own Atari consoles).  Even worse, the "next generation" system Atari finally unveiled in late 1982 ,the Atari 5200, was a huge disappointment (in part because its joysticks were poorly designed and difficult to use, and because it was incompatible with the huge existing base of VCS cartridges).  Atari's home consumer division had garnered huge profits by producing home versions of popular arcade games created by its own coin-op division (Asteroids) or licensed from other manufacturers (Taito's Space Invaders and Namco's Pac-Man), but let the licensing of that year's smash arcade hit, Donkey Kong, slip away from them.  (The license for Donkey Kong was instead snapped up by Coleco, who probably could not have successfully launched its competing ColecoVision game system without it.) The first signs of the goose's fatal illness came with Atari's Pac-Man cartridge.  Atari was so sure its home version of the world's most popular arcade game would reach new sales heights that it manufactured 12 million Pac-Man cartridges in 1982 (even though at the time only about 10 million people owned and used Atari VCS consoles), counting on the game's popularity to spur additional sales of the VCS.  With most of Atari's best in-house programmers long since having fled the company, the result was a colossal disappointment.  Pac-Man's animation was jerky, its moving images flickered annoyingly, and the Pac-Man character produced only a grating "bong" sound that was nothing like the arcade version's amusing sound effects.  Atari did eventually sell 7.7 million copies of Pac-Man, earning almost $200 million in gross profit sales for the company, but Atari was still stuck with millions of unsold Pac-Man game cartridges, and the poor quality of the game in comparison to the arcade version seriously tarnished Atari's image among consumers. As Goldberg and Vendel noted of the Pac-Man issue in their history of the company, Atari, Inc.: Business Is Fun: The result backfired on Atari by causing consumers to behave differently when purchasing games. There was already a growing mass of new low quality third party 'spam' titles on the market, and now with the experience of from rushing to buy Pac-Man for a premium and getting disappointed at its look, the tipping point for a new buyer environment was created. An environment where people would no longer blindly rush out to buy a newly released game, but would cautiously wait for reviews or feedback from others who'd bought the game. As a result, games purchases appeared to be curtailed in the second half of 1982, causing another new complication that sales and marketing would have to grasp and account for. If one game cartridge could be selected as the symbol of the sudden demise of Atari's golden goose, however, it would have to be the ill-fated E.T.: The Extraterrestrial game. Steve Ross, the head of Warner Communications, made a deal with Steven Spielberg to produce a home video game version of Spielberg's blockbuster E.T. film. Basing a video game on a movie rather than an established arcade hit or a tested game premise and expecting it to sell simply because of the popularity of the film might have been a questionable enough decision on its own (although Atari did enjoy moderate success with its video game version of Spielberg's previous   blockbuster, Raiders of the Lost Ark), but on top of that Ross forked over a whopping $21 million to acquire the rights to the title, committing Atari to sell a whopping 4 million cartridges just to recoup their costs.  Moreover, Ross made the deal in late July 1982 and insisted the game be ready in time for the Christmas sales season, leaving only a five week timeframe (rather than a more typical six months) for the E.T. game to be conceived, programmed, debugged, and put into production.  The sheer awfulness of the finished product was unprecedented.  Atari rushed E.T. through development in a matter of weeks to get it onto the market in time for Christmas, and the result was something many consumers found to be a virtually unplayable game with a dull plot and crummy graphics in which frustrated players spent most of their time leading the E.T. character around in circles to prevent him from falling into pits.  Atari produced 5 million E.T. cartridges, and according to Atari's then-president and CEO, "nearly all of them came back."  That statement was a bit of an exaggeration, but Atari was once again stuck with millions of unsold cartridges for a game that moved far fewer units than were produced: In total, five million copies of  E.T. were produced. Initially, only 500,000 games were sold, with another million eventually joining the sales. Out of the five million E.T. carts that would ship out to distributors, a staggering three and a half million games would be returned in total, many still in the distributor boxes; the retailers hadn't even sold enough to break open additional distributor shipping boxes to require a restock. [T]here were three and a half million unsold games and in the end, the  E.T. licensing deal was a complete loss for Atari. In a bout of hubris at the end of 1981, Atari had told its distributors to place their orders for 1982 all at once.  The distributors, anticipating another strong sales year, ordered aggressively, but when 1982 sales didn't meet expectations, those distributors were stuck with a lot of unsold Atari game cartridge inventory, which they returned to Atari in droves.  When ordinary distributor returns were added to the millions of unsold Pac-Man  cartridges and more millions of useless E.T. cartridges, Atari found itself with tons of unsellable merchandise to dispose of, which led to the rumor that Atari buried millions of E.T. cartridges in a landfill in the New Mexico desert. There is no question that Atari dumped and buried a whole lot of stuff in Alamogordo, New Mexico, in September 1983, as the New York Times (and other sources) reported at the time: With the video game business gone sour, some manufacturers have been dumping their excess game cartridges on the market at depressed prices. Now Atari Inc., the leading video game manufacturer, has taken dumping one step farther. The company has dumped 14 truckloads of discarded game cartridges and other computer equipment at the city landfill in Alamogordo, N.M. Guards kept reporters and spectators away from the area as workers poured concrete over the dumped merchandise. An Atari spokesman said the equipment came from Atari's plant in El Paso, Tex., which used to make videogame cartridges but has now been converted to recycling scrap. Atari lost $310.5 million in the second quarter, largely because of a sharp drop in video game sales. Due to the all the bad publicity over Atari's recent negative experiences with its Pac-Man and E.T. games, when news of the company's New Mexico landfill disposal became public knowledge many people assumed that those truckloads of discarded material included nothing but millions and millions of unsold E.T. cartridges (with perhaps some of those millions of unsold Pac-Man carts thrown in as well), all shamefully and furtively buried by Atari in an attempt to keep those embarrassingly colossal failures out of sight.  Exactly what Atari buried in that New Mexico landfill remains a subject of dispute, and in recent years various sources have challenged the notion that what Atari dumped there was millions of unsold E.T. game cartridges (or other unsold game titles).  According Goldberg and Vendel, the New Mexico site was actually used for disposal of a relatively small amount of unused and faulty stock and parts for cartridges, consoles, and computers from the company's El Paso plant, which was being retooled and automated to focus on the of manufacture of game consoles and home computers rather than the production of game cartridges (the latter operation being shifted to Asia).  While Atari did bury some millions of units of unsold game cartridge overstock, that (unpublicized) action took place near the company's headquarters in California, not in New Mexico: Manufacturing game cartridges had been a large part of the El Paso plant, but the new retooling left no room for them in this time of overstock ... The resulting clearance of truckloads of faulty and unused stock starting on September 22nd [1983] resulted in anything but positive press for the company, though, as it seemed Atari just couldn't catch a break from the media. Under cover of the night, several semi-trailers convoyed out of the [El Paso] plant to drive about an hour and a half south west. They were bound for a city dump in Alamogordo, New Mexico, chosen because New Mexico had a state law forbidding scavenging of landfills. The landfill was run by Browning Ferris  Industries (BFI), who contracted with the city and was making $300-$500 a truckload from Atari, all to cover their dumped contents with garbage and dirt and then steamroll them. [Three days later] Atari had already dumped eight truckloads when promising BFI only three a week, and still more were on the way. But that wasn't the worst of it; the public had found out. First it was the locals, who when word got out that Atari was dumping lots of cartridges, consoles and computers in their backyard, started sneaking into the dump to pilfer what they could. The hardware may have been crushed beyond use, but many of the games were still salvageable. It was when those games started showing up around town, titles like E.T., Pac-Man, Ms. Pac-Man, and Raiders of the Lost Ark, that the local media picked up on the story.  Atari had brought in a security guard to watch over the site to stop the pilfering, but it did little to stop the prying eyes of the media, and by [September 26th] the national press was all over the story. This innocent dumping, a miniscule amount when compared to the entire size of Atari's actual overstock across the country, was done as an afterthought. However, thanks to article titles like UPI's "City dump gobbles Pacman," the dumping was fast becoming a symbol of the industry's problems. [Y]ou don't pour concrete over unusable scrap, [but] that's exactly what Atari did on September 29th, which only further fueled the interest over the dumping. Around 14 truckloads had been dumped before the PR nightmare was over. Yes, this is the very happening that gave rise to the myth of the supposed dumping of almost 3.5 million E.T. cartridges in the Alamogordo dump. Most of the overstock of game cartridges languishing in warehouses around the U.S., comprised of a wide breadth of Atari's home titles, were indeed disposed of  that's where myth meets reality. But this occurred in a dump in Sunnyvale [California]. In May 2013 Alamogordo's City Commission approved a deal for a Canada-based film production company (Fuel Industries) to excavate the Atari landfill site and produce a documentary about the legend of the buried E.T. cartridges.  That excavation was scheduled to take place on 26 April 2014 and to be open to the public: excavation Become a part of gamer history. Unearth the truth behind the ultimate urban legend. We're excited to announce that the excavation of the long-rumored "E.T. the Extra-Terrestrial" video game burial site will occur on April 26, 2014 and will be open to the public. Spectators are invited to watch the team uncover the infamous Atari game cartridge grave.  The Atari Corporation  faced with overwhelmingly negative response to the "E.T. the Extra-Terrestrial" video game  allegedly disposed of millions of unsold game cartridges by burying them in the small town of Alamogordo, New Mexico in 1983. Fuel Entertainment took an interest in the legend, and in December 2013, with help from local garbage contractor Joe Lewandowski, acquired the exclusive rights to excavate the Alamogordo landfill. Fuel Entertainment brought the opportunity to Xbox Entertainment Studios, and now, as part of a documentary series, the team will excavate the legendary New Mexico landfill to reveal the true story of Atari's bizarre burial.  Director Zak Penn will be documenting the dig and the events around it. In addition to fans and media, a variety of people tied to the dig, video game, and film will be in attendance  including "E.T. the Extra-Terrestrial" video game designer Howard Scott Warshaw, a team of archeologists, and representatives from Xbox Entertainment Studios. We hope you'll join us as we get to the bottom of one of gaming's biggest mysteries. A lucky handful of fans could even be interviewed for the film. See you in Alamogordo! On that date, news accounts reported the recovery of "hundreds" (not millions) of E.T. game cartridges from the Alamagordo landfill: A documentary film production company has found buried in a New Mexico landfill hundreds of the Atari "E.T." game cartridges that some call the worst video game ever made. Film director Zak Penn showed one "E.T." cartridge retrieved from the site and said that hundreds more were found in the mounds of trash and dirt scooped by a backhoe. About 200 residents and game enthusiasts gathered in southeastern New Mexico to watch backhoes and bulldozers dig through the concrete-covered landfill in search of up to a million discarded copies of "E.T. The Extraterrestrial" that the game's maker wanted to hide forever. "I feel pretty relieved and psyched that they actually got to see something," said Penn as members of the production team sifted through the mounds of trash, pulling out boxes, games and other Atari products.  Whatever the answer, it seems Atari sent its goose away not with the traditional gold watch, but with a pair of cement overshoes. Additional information:       Atari's E.T.: The Extraterrestrial  (AtariAge)   Last updated:  26 April 2014    Goldberg, Marty and Curt Vendel.  Atari Inc.: Business Is Fun.   Carmel, NY: Syzygy Company Press, 2012.  ISBN 978-0-9855974-0-5.    Kent, Steven L.  The First Quarter: A 25-Year History of Video Games.   Bothell, WA: BWD Press, 2000.  ISBN 0-9704755-0-0.    Llorca, Juan Carlos.  Diggers Find Atari's E.T. Games in Landfill.   Associated Press.  26 April 2014.    The New York Times.  "Atari Parts Are Dumped."    28 September 1983  (p. D4).
In April 2021, American readers may have been intrigued to see a curious article about Denzel Washington and Netflix. The headline from the We Got This Covered website read, "An Underrated Denzel Washington Movie Has Been Dominating Netflix All Week."  Mysterious and sometimes misleading content might be what a lot of Google Discover users are shown these days.  Some readers may have noticed the article in their Google Discover feed. For those unfamiliar with Google Discover, it's a free and personalized news feed that displays content that Google thinks each user might find interesting and relevant. The headline likely led American readers to believe that the "underrated" film was available to stream in the U.S. After all, Netflix's headquarters are located in Los Gatos, California. This was all somewhat misleading. The source referenced by the We Got This Covered article did not show that the movie in question, "The Equalizer 2," was "dominating" Netflix. Instead, FlixPatrol.com indicated that the film barely made the top 10 worldwide movies on Netflix during week 16 of 2021. week 16 of 2021 Further, not included in the Google Discover card for the story was one important tidbit: "The Equalizer 2" was not available to be streamed by Netflix users in the U.S. According to an unofficial website that tracks Netflix availability by country, "The Equalizer 2" was only available on the streaming service in Australia, Canada, Czech Republic, Hungary, Israel, Japan, Lithuania, Poland, Romania, and Slovakia. unofficial website This was not the first time that the We Got This Covered website published a misleading article about a famous actor and Netflix. In February 2021, the same website also claimed: "Tom Hanks New Movie Has Been Dominating Netflix All Week." The film in question was the 2020 flick "News of the World." claimed As with "The Equalizer 2," "News of the World" wasn't exactly "dominating Netflix," nor was it available for streaming in the U.S. "The Equalizer 2" was originally released in 2018. It received a 51% critic rating on Rotten Tomatoes and a score of 50 out of 100 on Metacritic. 51% critic rating a score of 50  The film reunited director Antoine Fuqua with Washington after they had previously worked together on 2001's "Training Day," a film that is available on Netflix in the U.S. The synopsis for "The Equalizer 2" read: "Denzel Washington returns to one of his signature roles in the first sequel of his career. Robert McCall serves an unflinching justice for the exploited and oppressed  but how far will he go when that is someone he loves?" As of April 2021, no plans had been announced by Netflix to bring "The Equalizer 2" to American audiences. However, it's available to rent for $3.99 on YouTube, Amazon Prime Video, and a number of other streaming services. YouTube Amazon Prime Video In sum, a movie starring the actor was not "dominating Netflix," nor was it even available in the U.S. A video purportedly showing Chelsea, Bill, and Hillary Clinton prematurely celebrating a presidential election victory was widely shared on the internet in the wake of the Democratic nominee's loss on 8 November 2016: While this video was distributed by several web sites along with the assertion that it showed the Clintons prematurely celebrating a victory on election night that proved to be unrealized, little evidence was provided to back up this claim. The video contains no audio, is only a few seconds long, and as of this writing the sourceis still unknown. The earliest version we could uncover was published by LiveLeak on 16 November 2016, but that video was also lacking context. The Gateway Pundit attempted to prove to their readers (or possibly to mislead them into believing) that the video was takenon election night by providing a photograph ofBill, Chelsea, and Hillary Clinton in similar clothing at an 8 November 2016 campaign event: Although that photograph was taken on Election Day 2016, there were some obvious differences between the clothes the Clintons were wearing in that image and the ones they are seen wearing in the video. Mainly, Chelsea Clinton was garbed a sort of aqua sleeveless dress in the still photograph, but she sports a dark blue long-sleeved dress in the video:  photograph  Perhaps more telling is the change in Bill Clinton's attire. Photographs from Election Day 2016 show that Bill Clinton was wearing a light blue shirt with a dark blue and white tie, but in the video he is seen clothed in a white shirt with a salmon-colored tie:  In addition to the optical discrepancies, the narrative behind the claim doesn't quite add up. Clinton was likely confident heading into the election since most polls showed her with a large advantage, so it's hard to fathom a moment which would have elicited such an act of jubilation in the course of an election night in which she lost. So when was this video taken? Bill, Hillaryand Chelsea Clinton were wearing outfits that match those shown in the video at the first presidential debate of 2016 at Hofsfra University:   Embed from Getty Images   It's plausible that the Clintons would have engaged a short but jubilant celebration after this event, as many observed felt that Clinton had won the debate. won The "premature celebration" video is frequently shared in close proximity to a similar claim holding that Clinton threw a tantrum following her election night loss. This rumor, too, is largelyunfounded. unfounded The Economist.  "A Win for Hillary Clinton: The First Presidential Debate."
  27 September 2016. On 2 October 2018, journalist Jamal Khashoggi disappeared during a visit to Saudi Arabia's consulate in Instanbul, Turkey. Although foul play was suspected, the Saudi government at first denied that any harm had been done to the journalist. Then they began releasing conflicting accounts, beginning with the claim that Khashoggi died accidentally in a "fistfight." Ultimately, the Saudis acknowledged that evidence provided by Turkish investigators pointed to his being slain in a "premeditated" attack, which they said was undertaken in a "rogue operation" not authorized by the Saudi royal family. Two senior government officials were dismissed, and 18 Saudi nationals allegedly involved in the murder were arrested. President Trump was criticized in the immediate aftermath of Khashoggi's disappearance for his apparent reluctance to hold the Saudis responsible for the incident. "We want to find out what happened," he said. But he also maintained that the United States' relations with the kingdom were "excellent" and he would not consider stopping arms sales to Saudi Arabia despite calls from members of Congress to do so. Various commentators, including Washington Post contributor Brian Klaas, suggested that Trump's official dealings with Saudi Arabia are "compromised by deep financial conflicts of interest": suggested His business interests -- past, present, and future -- make it impossible for him to contemplate the kind of consequences that the Saudis deserve. In 1991, when Trump was $900 million in debt, he was bailed out by a member of the Saudi royal family, who purchased his 281-foot yacht, Trump Princess. Trumps other princess, Ivanka, is married to Jared Kushner, who has deep ties to the crown prince. In 2015, when asked about his relationship with the Saudis, Trump said: I get along great with all of them. They buy apartments from me. They spend $40 million, $50 million. Am I supposed to dislike them? I like them very much. As recently as December 2016, Trump owned companies in Saudi Arabia, as he sought to build a hotel there. Three days after Trumps inauguration, lobbyists working for the Saudi government funneled $270,000 directly to the Trump Organization by booking rooms at his Washington hotel. More recently, Trumps flagging Manhattan hotel got bailed out thanks to a lucrative visit from none other than the Saudi crown prince. It raises the disturbing possibility that Saudi Arabia will get away with abduction or murder because the president is beholden to Saudi money. Trump responded by tweeting that he has no financial interests in Saudi Arabia: tweeting For the record, I have no financial interests in Saudi Arabia (or Russia, for that matter). Any suggestion that I have is just more FAKE NEWS (of which there is plenty)!  Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) October 16, 2018 October 16, 2018  That same day, Fox News Research (a Fox News Twitter account that regularly posts newsworthy data) tweeted a list highlighting some of Trump's business relationships with the Saudis: tweeted Trump & Saudi Business:1991: Sold yacht to Saudi Prince2001: Sold 45th floor of Trump World Tower to SaudisJun 2015: I love the Saudis...many in Trump TowerAug 2015: "They buy apartments from me...Spend $40M-$50M"2017: Saudi lobbyists spent $270K at Trump DC hotel  Fox News Research (@FoxNewsResearch) October 16, 2018 October 16, 2018  Shortly afterward, Trump's tweet and the Fox News tweet were combined into a meme and unleashed on Facebook:   The meme presented the Fox News tweet as a refutation of Trump's, but although each of the former's statements can be confirmed via reliable sources, they don't necessarily disprove President Trump's claim that he has no financial interests in Saudi Arabia. The sticking point (and the reason we're rating the claim a mixture of true and false) is that the term "financial interests" usually denotes the ownership of property or investments in a given place, company, or industry. We have found no evidence that either Trump or Trump Organization (the umbrella company operated by Trump's sons, Donald Jr. and Eric), currently owns property or investments in Saudi Arabia. According to Federal Election Commission (FEC) filings, the Trump Organization was pursuing plans to open businesses in Saudi Arabia as recently as 2016, but the Associated Press reported in October 2018 that the companies had been shut down by the time Trump took office: reported Shortly after he announced his run for president, Trump began laying the groundwork for possible new business in the kingdom. He registered eight companies with names tied to the country, such as "THC Jeddah Hotel Advisor LLC" and "DT Jeddah Technical Services," according to a 2016 financial disclosure report to the federal government. Jeddah is a major city in the country. "Saudi Arabia, I get along with all of them. They buy apartments from me. They spend $40 million, $50 million," Trump told a crowd at an Alabama rally on Aug. 21, 2015, the same day he created four of the entities. "Am I supposed to dislike them? I like them very much." The president's company, the Trump Organization, said shortly after his 2016 election that it had shut down those Saudi companies. The president later pledged to pursue no new foreign deals while in office. In a statement this week, the company said it has explored business opportunities in many countries but that it does "not have any plans for expansion into Saudi Arabia." There is no question that Trump has profited from business dealings with the Saudis, however. Let's take the items in the Fox News Research list one by one: Fortune reported in 2017 that Trump, facing financial difficulties in 1991, sold a yacht he purchased from the Sultan of Brunei in the 1980s to Saudi Arabia's Prince Al-Waleed bin Talal. reported The Associated Press reported that the Kingdom of Saudi purchased the entire 45th floor of Trump World Tower in New York City in 2001, "the biggest purchase in that building to that point." reported During a 16 June 2015 speech at Trump Tower announcing his presidential candidacy, Trump said: "Saudi Arabia, they make $1 billion a day. $1 billion a day. I love the Saudis. Many are in this building." At a campaign rally one month later, he said: "I like the Saudis; they are very nice. I make a lot of money with them. They buy all sorts of my stuff -- all kinds of toys from Trump. They pay me millions and hundreds of millions." speech said At a campaign rally in Mobile, Alabama in August 2015, Trump said: "Saudi Arabia, I get along with all of them. They buy apartments from me. They spend $40 million, $50 million. Am I supposed to dislike them? I like them very much." said The Wall Street Journal reported in June 2017 that Trump International Hotel Washington, D.C., received payments amounting to roughly $270,000 for services provided to lobbyists working for the Saudi government. Although Trump had announced earlier in the year that any Trump Organization profits from foreign governments would be donated to the U.S. Treasury, the company did not respond to the Journal's questions about what would be done with the Saudi payments, which were made through a third party. reported Despite his not owning businesses, properties, or investments in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, Trump has clearly, and by his own admission, profited to the tune of tens of millions of dollars from business dealings with the Saudis, and over a long period of time. We reached out to the Trump Organization for comment but received no reply. Beavers, Olivia.  "Saudis Spent $270K at Trump Hotel Amid Lobbying Efforts: Report."
  The Hill.  5 August 2017. Condon, Bernard et al.  "'I Love the Saudis': Trump Business Ties to Kingdom Run Deep."
  Associated Press.  16 October 2018. Fahrenthold, David A. and Jonathan O'Connell.  "'I Like Them Very Much:' Trump Has Longstanding Business Ties with Saudis, Who Have Boosted His Hotels Since He Took Office."
 The Washington Post.  11 October 2018. Kirkpatrick, David D.  "Trump's Business Ties in the Gulf Raise Questions About His Allegiances."
  The New York Times.  17 June 2017. Klaas, Brian.  "Jamal Khashoggi's Fate Casts a Harsh Light on Trump's Friendship with Saudi Arabia."
 The Washington Post.  10 October 2018. Mangan, Dan.  "Trump Claims He Has 'No Financial Interests in Saudi Arabia' --- But He Makes Lots of Money from It."
  CNBC.  16 October 2018. Myre, Greg.  "The Big Overlap Between Trump's Global Holdings and U.S. Foreign Policy."
  NPR.  22 November 2016. Orden, Erica.  "Saudi Disappearance Puts Spotlight on Trump's Business Ties."
  CNN.  12 October 2018. Smith, Geoffrey.  "This Is the 420-Foot Yacht Donald Trump Wanted -- Before He Filed for Bankruptcy."
  Fortune.  13 February 2017. Tau, Byron and Rebecca Ballhaus.  "Trump Hotel Received $270,000 from Lobbying Campaign Tied to Saudis."
  The Wall Street Journal.  6 June 2017. Watson, Kathryn.  "What's at Stake in the Trump Administration's Ties to the Saudis."
  CBS News.  12 October 2018. Wong, Edward et al.  "Trump Calls Relations with Saudi Arabia 'Excellent,' While Congress Is Incensed."
  The New York Times.  11 October 2018. Associated Press.  "A Timeline of Events in the Khashoggi Case."
  25 October 2018. CBS News.  "Transcript: Donald Trump Announces His Presidential Candidacy."
  16 June 2015. Voting in the 2020 U.S. Election may be over, but the misinformation keeps on ticking. Never stop fact-checking. Follow our post-election coverage here. here On Sept. 27, 2020, The New York Times published a report after obtaining several years of U.S. President Donald Trump's tax returns. published a report As news broke that Trump had paid just $750 in federal income tax in 2016 and 2017  no federal income taxes in 10 of the past 15 years  in addition to the fact that he took an approximate $70,000 deduction for hairstyling during "The Apprentice," and that he has more than $300 million worth of loans coming due, a rumor started to circulate on social media that White House senior adviser Jared Kushner had quietly deleted all of his tweets from his Twitter account: no federal income taxes   This rumor is false. Kushner didn't delete all of his tweets following the NYT article about Trump's taxes.  The above-displayed tweet contains a genuine screenshot of the @JaredKushner Twitter account. This account has been online since 2009, but it has been used sparingly by its owner. Archived pages show that this account posted three messages back in March 2011  none of which was related to taxes  but was then inactive for at least three years. The few messages that were posted to this account were deleted sometime between 2014 and 2016, and no new messages have been posted since then.  JaredKushner March 2011 at least three years In other words, Kushner didn't wipe his Twitter account clean on the evening of Sept. 27 after the NYT published a story about his father-in-law's taxes. This account rarely posts tweets, and the three tweets that were shared to the account in 2011 (again, none of which were related to taxes) were deleted years ago.  This isn't the first time that someone has stumbled across Kushner's Twitter account in the aftermath of a controversy, noticed that it was barren, and then incorrectly assumed that Kushner had recently scrubbed it clean. In October 2017, shortly after Special Counsel Robert S. Mueller III revealed charges against former Trump presidential campaign chair Paul Manafort and two other campaign officials, social media users noted then that Kushner's Twitter account was suspiciously void of content, and falsely claimed that he had recently deleted all of his tweets. falsely claimed A few months later, when it was reported that Mueller may have interviewed Kushner in the course of his investigation into Russia's meddling in the 2016 presidential election, this false rumor again was circulated on social media:  reported   The @JaredKushner account has been devoid of content since at least 2016. Claims that he recently deleted his tweets in the wake of breaking news stories are false.  Apuzzo, Matt.  "Muellers Prosecutors Are Said to Have Interviewed Jared Kushner on Russia Meeting."
  The New York Times.  29 November 2017. Buettner, Russ; Craig, Susanne; McIntire, Mike.  "Long-Concealed Records Show Trump's Chronic Losses and Years of Tax Avoidance."
  The New York Times.  27 September 2020. In September 2022, some social media users shared a quote erroneously attributed to actress Marilyn Monroe: "If you cant handle me at my worst, then you sure as hell dont deserve me at my best."  The quote has also been attributed to the "Some Like It Hot" star in a longer form: "I'm selfish, impatient, and a little insecure. I make mistakes, I'm out of control, and at times hard to handle. But if you can't handle me at my worst, then you sure as hell don't deserve me at my best." longer form  As of this writing, we have been unable to locate the original source of the quote  but we found no evidence that it was said by Monroe. One source claimed in 2013 it was a line of dialogue from the 1953 noir film "Niagara," though we searched the screenplay at Scripts.com but didn't find any such dialogue there. We also viewed the portion of the movie Monroe is in, but Monroe's character Rose Loomis never makes the remark. screenplay According to Dictionary.com, the quote has been online for many years, since the 2000s, and hasn't always been attributed to Monroe. It has often been used in "before" and "after" or "best" and "worst" memes. Here's one example without attribution, posted by pop superstar Mariah Carey in 2018: Dictionary.com posted by  Falsely attributing pieces of faux internet wisdom to famous people is a common occurrence. Recently, we reported actor Morgan Freeman never made a remark widely credited to him. Another popular quote widely misattributed to Monroe read, "Well-behaved women seldom make history." never misattributed Although fascination with Monroe has remained fairly constant since her lifetime, there may be renewed interest in September 2022 because of the release of a controversial Netflix movie titled, "Blonde." The movie is based on a 2000 novel of the same name by Joyce Carol Oates. controversial novel 4 Marilyn Monroe Quotes Youre Taking The Wrong Way. Thought Catalog, 3 Mar. 2013, https://thoughtcatalog.com/amy-shock/2013/03/4-marilyn-monroe-quotes-youre-taking-the-wrong-way/. If You Cant Handle Me at My Worst Meme | Meaning & History. Dictionary.com, https://www.dictionary.com/e/memes/if-you-cant-handle-me-at-my-worst/. Accessed 20 Sept. 2022. Lemire, Christy. Blonde Movie Review & Film Summary (2022) | Roger Ebert. Https://Www.Rogerebert.Com/, https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/blonde-movie-review-2022. Accessed 20 Sept. 2022. Niagara Movie Script. https://www.scripts.com/script.php?id=niagara_14741&p=14. Accessed 20 Sept. 2022. Showalter, Elaine. Joyce Carol Oatess Blonde Is the Definitive Study of American Celebrity. The New Yorker, 13 Apr. 2020. www.newyorker.com, https://www.newyorker.com/books/second-read/joyce-carol-oatess-blonde-is-the-definitive-study-of-american-celebrity. Beto ORourke, the Democratic nominee challenging Republican U.S. Sen.Ted Cruzof Texas, said that vast U.S. wealth differences show the economy doesnt work for everyone. The El Paso congressmans half-page ad, in theHouston Defenders July 26, 2018,issue, shows ORourke shaking hands with an African-American man. Accompanying text says: Our economy isn't working for everyone when black Americans have 10 times less wealth than white Americans. Let's level the playing field by ensuring access to good jobs, higher pay, skills training, and a fair shot at economic success. A reminder: Wealth is distinct from income. It measures how much we own, not how much we make. While the two are closely tied, economists talk about wealth in terms of net worth. A house, for example, adds to net worth if its value is higher than the amount of the mortgage. Assets minus debts gives you net worth. 2016 federal survey We asked ORourkes campaign about the basis of ORourkes 10 times less claim in the ad, which had come to our attention in a Texas Tribunenews storyon ORourkes advertising expenditures. By email, Chris Evans of ORourkes campaign pointed out an October 2017Washington PostWonkblogstoryand other reports rooted in 2016 consumer survey data summed up by the Federal Reserve in fall 2017. That data, Evans told us, pegged the median net worth of white families at 10 times the median net worth of black families. The Wonkblog story says that according to the survey results, the median net worth of white families  $171,000  is now 10 times that of black families and eight times that of Hispanic families. A factor, the story says, is that white families are five times more likely than black or Hispanic families to inherit money. That translates into opportunity  a down payment on a home, tuition to go to school, capital to build a small business, savings to retire on. Other factors, the story says, include distinct rates of home ownership and participation in job-related savings plans. Median and average wealth differences According to apairofSeptember 2017 Federal Reserve articles, the agencys 2016 Survey of Consumer Financesreached6,254 familieswith queries onhouseholds total pre-tax income, balance sheets, pensions, income and demographic characteristics. No other study for the country collects comparable information, the agency says. The 2016 survey found about a 10-to-1 difference in the median wealth/net worth of white and black Americans--the ratio between $171,000 and $17,600. Net worth is defined as the difference between families' gross assets and their liabilities. The survey results otherwise suggest the difference in the average wealth of white and black Americans is nearly 7-to-1--$933,700 for white residents and $138,200 for black residents. (An equal number of households earn more and less than each median. Averages are based on adding up reported incomes and dividing by the number of households.) The Fed offered one other comparison: Nearly 1 in 5 black households reported zero or negative net worth compared to a smaller share of white households, 9 percent, the study says. Factors behind white-black difference We spotted a Fed chart specifying disparities by race identified in the survey in household income and by whether people reported owning  homes and cars or having retirement accounts: SOURCE:Excerpted from chart in data analysis,Recent Trends in Wealth-Holding by Race and Ethnicity: Evidence from the Survey of Consumer Finances,FEDS Notes, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, Sept. 27, 2017 (accessed Aug. 17, 2018) As ORourkes spokesman also noted, the Pew Research Center took a longer view of the wealth disparity singled out by ORourke. Pews November 2017 Fact Tankstorysays that according to the Feds surveys over the years, the wealth gap between white and black and Hispanic households shrank by about half from 2007 to 2016. The month before, another non-partisan entity, the Urban Institute,updated its chartsdrawing on the Feds surveys. For more than 50 years, the institute says, white families have outpaced black and Hispanic families in average wealth. We asked the institute to evaluate ORourkes claim. The statement had the right spirit, we heard back, thoughCaroline Ratcliffe, a senior fellow, offered a caveat in that the 2016 Fed survey suggests that black Americans had one-tenth the median wealth of whites, not 10 times less. Older survey A 2014PunditFact fact-checkled us to fetch what turned out to be older results from a different survey. In June 2017, the U.S. Census Bureaureleasedits estimates of household net incomes attributed to its 2013Survey of Income and Program Participation. Tables in the release suggest that white households at the time had median net worths of $103,796 and black households had net worths of $9,211--signaling an 11-to-1 ratio. White households had average net worths of $292,217, the bureau says, compared to $91,595 for black households--indicating a 3-to-1 ratio. Our ruling ORourke said that black Americans have 10 times less wealth than white Americans. Survey results pinpoint two ways to gauge such disparities. According to the Feds 2016 consumer survey, black Americans had one-tenth the median wealth of white Americans while black Americans had a little over one-seventh the average wealth of white Americans. We rate this claim Mostly True. MOSTLY TRUE The statement is accurate but needs clarification or additional information. Click here formoreon the six PolitiFact ratings and how we select facts to check. Claim:  "Poison pill" amendment inserted into Health Care Bill by Senator Reid makes proposed bill unamendable if passed. false Example:  [Collected via e-mail, March 2010] The impudent tyranny of Sen. Harry Reid Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada is proving once again the maxim that darkness hates the light. Buried in his massive amendment to the Senate version of Obamacare is Reid's anti-democratic poison pill designed to prevent any future Congress from repealing the central feature of this monstrous legislation! Beginning on page 1,000 of the measure, Section 3403 reads in part: ". it shall not be in order in the Senate or the House of Representatives to consider any bill, resolution, amendment or conference report that would repeal or otherwise change this subsection." In other words, if President Barack Obama signs this measure into law, no future Senate or House will be able to change a single word of Section 3403, regardless whether future Americans or their representatives in Congress wish otherwise!! [Rest of article here.] here   Origins:  The gist of this piece, a reproduction of a Washington Examiner editorial, is that Senator Harry Reid of Nevada furtively slipped language into a health care reform bill which would absolutely prevent Congress from ever modifying or repealing the section of the bill to which it applied.  Although the language cited does appear in the bill, it has been quoted out of context and its applicability has been exaggerated. editorial It is true that beginning on page 1,001 of the referenced measure, Section 3403 reads in part:  '... it shall not be in order in the Senate or the House of Representatives to consider any bill, resolution, amendment or conference report that would repeal or otherwise change this subsection.'"  However, that sentence fragment is a misleading, selective excerpt which doesn't provide the full context.  The passage reads, in full: measure (A) IN GENERAL   It shall not be in order in the Senate or the House of Representatives to consider any bill, resolution, or amendment, pursuant to this subsection or conference report thereon, that fails to satisfy the requirements of subparagraphs (A)(i) and (C) of subsection (c)(2).  (B) LIMITATION ON CHANGES TO THE BOARD RECOMMENDATIONS IN OTHER LEGISLATION  It shall not be in order in the Senate or the House of Representatives to consider any bill, resolution, amendment, or conference report (other than pursuant to this section) that would repeal or otherwise change the recommendations of the Board if that change would fail to satisfy the requirements of subparagraphs (A)(i) and (C) of subsection (c)(2). (C) LIMITATION ON CHANGES TO THIS SUBSECTION.  It shall not be in order in the Senate or the House of Representatives to consider any bill, resolution, amendment, or conference report that would repeal or otherwise change this subsection. What that means, in effect, is that Congress may not make modifications to the referenced section if such modifications do not meet criteria specified elsewhere  ["subparagraphs (A)(i) and (C) of subsection (c)(2)"] in the measure.  Those criteria are: (A) REQUIREMENTS.  Each proposal submitted under this section in a proposal year shall meet each of the following requirements:(i) If the Chief Actuary of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services has made a determination under paragraph (7)(A) in the determination year, the proposal shall include recommendations so that the proposal as a whole (after taking into account recommendations under clause (v)) will result in a net reduction in total Medicare program spending in the implementation year that is at least equal to the applicable savings target established under paragraph (7)(B) for such implementation year. In determining whether a proposal meets the requirement of the preceding sentence, reductions in Medicare program spending during the 3-month period immediately preceding the implementation year shall be counted to the extent that such reductions are a result of the implementation of recommendations contained in the proposal for a change in the payment rate for an item or service that was effective during such period pursuant to subsection (e)(2)(A). (C) NO INCREASE IN TOTAL MEDICARE PROGRAM SPENDING.  Each proposal submitted under this section shall be designed in such a manner that implementation of the recommendations contained in the proposal would not be expected to result, over the 10-year period starting with the implementation year, in any increase in the total amount of net Medicare program spending relative to the total amount of net Medicare program spending that would have occurred absent such implementation. In other words,  these prolix passages do not absolutely bar any changes to the measure; they're simply protections that prohibit Congress from enacting modifications to the referenced section that would create an increase in net Medicare program spending or cause it to go over budget.  Moreover, page 1002 specifically states that such protections may be waived by a three-fifths vote of the Senate: (D) WAIVER.  This paragraph may be waived or suspended in the Senate only by the affirmative vote of three-fifths of the Members, duly chosen and sworn. (E) APPEALS.  An affirmative vote of three-fifths of the Members of the Senate, duly chosen and sworn, shall be required in the Senate to sustain an appeal of the ruling of the Chair on a point of order raised under this paragraph. Last updated:  22 March 2010 PHOTOS STORED IN AN OLD BROWNIE CAMERA Thought you might find these photo's very interesting, what quality from 1941.Pearl Harbor Photos found in an old Brownie stored in a foot locker.  THESE PHOTOS ARE FROM A SAILOR WHO WAS ON THE USS QUAPAW ATF-11O. INTERESTING, I THINK THEY'RE SPECTACULAR.                    On Sunday, December 7th, 1941 the Japanese empire launched a surprise attack against the U.S. Forces stationed at Pearl Harbor, Hawaii. By planning his attack on a Sunday, the Japanese commander Admiral Nagumo, hoped to catch the entire fleet in port. As luck would have it, the Aircraft Carriers and one of the Battleships were not in port. (The USS Enterprise was returning from Wake Island, where it had just delivered some aircraft. The USS Lexington was ferrying aircraft to Midway, and the USS Saratoga and USS Colorado were undergoing repairs in the United States.)  In spite of the latest intelligence reports about the missing aircraft carriers (his most important targets), Admiral Nagumo decided to continue the attack with his force of six carriers and 423 aircraft. At a range of 230 miles north of Oahu, he launched the first wave of a two-wave attack. Beginning at 0600 hours his first wave consisted of 183 fighters and torpedo bombers which struck at the fleet in Pearl Harbor and the airfields in Hickam, Kaneohe and Ewa. The second strike, launched at 0715 hours, consisted of 167 aircraft, which again struck at the same targets.  At 0753 hours the first wave consisting of 40 Nakajima B5N2 "Kate" torpedo bombers, 51 Aichi D3A1 "Val" dive bombers, 50 high altitude bombers and 43 Zeros struck airfields and Pearl Harbor Within the next hour, the second wave arrived and continued the attack.When it was over, the U.S. losses were:  CasualtiesUSA : 218 KIA, 364 WIA..USN: 2,008 KIA, 710 WIA.USMC: 109 KIA, 69 WIA.Civilians: 68 KIA, 35 WIA.TOTAL: 2,403 KIA, 1,178 WIA.-------------------------------------------------   BattleshipsUSS Arizona (BB-39) - total loss whe n a bomb hit her magazine.USS Oklahoma (BB-37) - Total loss when she capsized and sunk in the harbor.USS California (BB-44) - Sunk at her berth. Later raised and repaired.USS West Virginia (BB-48) - Sunk at her berth. Later raised and repaired.USS Nevada - (BB-36) Beached to prevent sinking. Later repaired.USS Pennsylvania (BB-38) - Light damage.USS Maryland (BB-46) - Light damage.USS Tennessee (BB-43) Light damage.USS Utah (AG-16) - (former battleship used as a target) - Sunk.-------------------------------------------------CruisersUSS New Orleans (CA-32) - Light Damage.USS San Francisco (CA38) - Light Damage.USS Detroit (CL-8) - Light Damage.USS Raleigh (CL-7) - Heavily damaged but repaired.USS Helena (CL-50) - Light Damage.USS Honolulu (CL-48) - Light Damage.-------------------------------------------------DestroyersUSS Downes (DD-375) - Destroyed. Parts salvaged.USS Cassin - (DD-37 2) Destroyed. Parts salvaged.USS Shaw (DD-373) - Very heavy damage.USS Helm (DD-388) - Light Damage.-------------------------------------------------MinelayerUSS Ogala (CM-4) - Sunk but later raised and repaired.-------------------------------------------------Seaplane TenderUSS Curtiss (AV-4) - Severely damaged but later repaired.-------------------------------------------------Repair ShipUSS Vestal (AR-4) - Sever ely damaged but later repaired.-------------------------------------------------Harbor TugUSS Sotoyomo (YT-9) - Sunk but later raised and repaired.  ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Aircraft188 Aircraft destroyed (92 USN and 92 U.S. Army Air Corps.) The images seen above are genuine photographs of the Japanese attack on American military forces at Pearl Harbor in Hawaii on 7 December 1941, but not  as claimed in the accompanying text  all of them pictures taken by a sailor with a Brownie camera that remained undiscovered in a footlocker for many decades.   Brownie For a "sailor" to have snapped pictures from all the perspectives shown above, he would had to have been in the harbor aboard his ship, on the ground, and aloft in an airplane  all while the attack was in progress.  Moreover, the ship on which this wide-ranging sailor supposedly served, the first USS Quapaw, wasn't even built until well after the attack on Pearl Harbor. USS Quapaw Most (if not all) of these images are readily identifiable as archival U.S. Navy photos that have been available since the early 1940s and have appeared in countless articles and books about the Pearl Harbor attack. archival In mid-June 2021, Snopes readers inquired about memes posted to social media that purportedly showed a wind turbine that had melted in scorching Texas heat (some versions sent in by readers claimed the turbine was melted in Nebraska). Texas heat   National Weather Service Houston tweeted an image of the turbine in question on June 14, 2021. The turbine, located in Wadsworth, a community southwest of Houston, was damaged by powerful winds during a storm in the area.  Claims about turbines failing during extreme weather events in Texas have been a topic of interest in the past. In February 2021, conservative commentators and legislators falsely claimed that frozen turbines played a major role in the loss of power to millions of Texans as they experienced record cold temperatures. falsely claimed As we reported at that time, half of Texas' wind turbines went offline during the cold snap, but only accounted for a small fraction of the power outage, which was mostly caused by failure of systems producing power from natural gas, coal, and nuclear sources. After Texas Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick saluted legislation potentially giving voters more sway over local property taxes, we wondered afresh about how Texas ranks nationally in terms of property tax burden. Patrick, talking upa proposalhatched by fellow Republicans led by Houston state Sen. Paul Bettencourt, said in a Nov. 29, 2016,press release: Texans pay the sixth-highest property tax in the nation, and Texans have told us loud and clear that common-sense property tax reform legislation is long overdue. In January 2016,we found Mostly Truethe same claim by a Bexar County legislative aspirant. The business-orientedTax Foundation, a national group, drew on 2013 Census Bureau datato mapthe average amount of residential property tax paid as a percentage of home value state by state. By that metric, the Texas rate of 1.9 percent proved higher than the rates in 44 states; it was topped by the rates for Wisconsin, Connecticut, New Hampshire, Illinois and No. 1 New Jersey at 2.38 percent. Still, we noted, property taxes in Texas are levied locally in Texas, resulting in ample differences in the burden depending on where taxpayers live. Rankings yet to be updated Not a lot has changed since we reached that conclusion. For starters, the rankings  showing Texas with the sixth highest mean effective property tax rate on owner-occupied housing  havent been updated, the foundations Jared Walczak said to our inquiry. Yet, Walczak also told us by email, this does not make Texas a high-tax state. Texas has chosen to rely more heavily on property taxes, and less heavily on other taxes, than many peer states, foregoing some altogether. The state's tax structure is an important part of its economic success, and it is inevitable that, when a state foregoes an individual income tax, some other tax will be somewhat higher than it might otherwise have been. In fact, the foundation has previously reported that in 2012Texas ranked 46thin state-local taxes per resident. Why property taxes can be high Property taxes might be higher here becauseunlike most states, Texas levies no state income tax. Notably too, unlike in some states, Texas property tax rates are set locally, not by the state,according to the Texas state comptroller, with government units spending the revenue to provide local services including schools, streets and roads, police and fire protection and many others. Moreover, the state lacks the constitutional authority to levy a property tax, as the Texas Legislative Council noted in a2002 overviewof local taxes statewide. Generally under the current system, a county appraisal district does an annual property valuation, then each area city, county, school and special district (like hospital and road districts) sets the respective tax rate necessary to raise the money needed to fund the related adopted budget. And according to Census data, property taxes in 2013, the latest year of available data, were the source of 81.6 percent of local tax revenue in Texas (the national average for this figure was 46.7 percent). Updated information is to be posted Dec. 9, 2016, bureau spokesman Sean Patrick told us by email. Regional differences When we looked into this topic before, advocates including Dick Lavine of the liberal-leaning Center for Public Policy Priorities and Dale Craymer of the business-backed Texas Taxpayers and Research Association suggested we consider acomparison studyby the Lincoln Institute of Land Policy showing that property owners in the biggest cities of Texas, especially Houston and San Antonio, had some of the highest property taxes in 2014 compared with large cities in other states. That remained so the next year, according to aJune 2016 institute studyindicating, for instance, that El Paso homeowners in 2015 ranked No. 3 among the countrys 50 most populous cities in homestead property taxes on a $150,000 property or $300,000 property. Among the 50 cities, homestead taxes in large Texas cities including Austin, Dallas and San Antonio ranked No. 5 (Fort Worth) to No. 13 (Houston), according to the report. The disparity between property taxes by county comes through in real-dollar terms, although measures of taxes in terms of dollars paid can be distorted by the difference in home prices from county to county. A Tax Foundationmapshows in real dollars just how much property taxes vary from county to county based on IRS data reflecting the amount of real estate taxes deducted from federal taxes. In 2013, Texas counties with residents paying the most were Travis ($7,553), Kendall ($6,916) and Fort Bend ($6,813), while those paying the least are Dickens ($1,325), Stonewall ($1,425) and Hudspeth ($1,450). Another factor to think about when considering the property tax burden for the average Texan is the rate of home ownership. The Tax Foundation map showing Texas tied for sixth-highest in property taxes considered the percentage of home value thats paid in property taxes on owner-occupied housing. In 2015, 61.1 percent of Texas housing was owner-occupied, tying the state with Oregon for the nations sixth-lowest rate,according tothe Census Bureau. Our ruling Patrick said: Texans pay the sixth-highest property tax in the nation. While it may be true that on average, Texas property taxes are the sixth-highest in the nation, the actual taxpayer burden on residents can vary greatly by locality, making the average less representative. We rate the claim Mostly True. MOSTLY TRUE The statement is accurate but needs clarification or additional information. Click here formoreon the six PolitiFact ratings and how we select facts to check