Is Michael Bublé 'Retiring' from Making Music?
In mid-October 2018, singer-songwriter Michael Bubl defused speculation generated by a newspaper interview that he would be bringing his career to a close. Bubl took a two-year hiatus from recording in the wake of his firstborn son Noah's October 2016 cancer diagnosis.  During an interview published in the Daily Mail's weekend magazine on 13 October 2018 that touched on the end of that hiatus, Bubl explained his reasons for recording his forthcoming new album in the wake of his son's battle with cancer -- and seemingly announced his retirement from the music world in a story hyperbolically headlined ""Michael Bubl QUITS Music Following Heartache Over Son Noah's 'Life-Changing' Cancer Battle as He Reveals He Is Done with Fame in Final Interview": published "One, because I felt a debt of gratitude, deeper than I can explain, to the millions of people all over the world who prayed for us and showed us compassion. That gave me faith in humanity.  "Two, because I love music and feel I can continue the legacy of my idols. And three, because if the world was ending -- not just my own personal hell but watching the political turmoil in America and watching Europe break up -- theres never a better time for music." Then suddenly he stops. "This is my last interview," he says quite solemnly. "I'm retiring from the business. I've made the perfect record and now I can leave at the very top." But a few days later a spokesperson for Bubl told NBC's Today Show that "He is NOT retiring. Definitely not." told Perhaps Bubl's comments about having given his "last interview" and "retiring from the business" were meant to be tongue-in-cheek in a way that was misunderstood or didn't come across in print, as Today suggested: Given Bubl's sense of humor, we detect a little sarcasm in his self-praise and retirement talk. At least that's the theory TODAY's Savannah Guthrie is subscribing to. "You know, he's a pretty funny guy," she said when the topic came up on the show. "Maybe he just saying (his new album) is so good, I retire!" The Canadian singer and songwriter himself also dismissed the Mail's report during a subsequent interview: dismissed After stepping back into the spotlight following a 2-year hiatus, it seemed like a strange time for Bubl to announce his departure. Fortunately, his rep calmed fans' fears, telling E! News in a statement that plans of his retirement are "not true at all." As further reassurance, the 43-year-old father of three put the speculation to rest in a new interview with SiriusXM's Fantasy Sports Radio. "Just consider the source -- that's all I say to people," he told co-hosts Mike Dempsey and Bob Harris. "My buddies wrote me. I said, 'Look at who said it.' C'mon, are you kidding me? I need the money. I'm not going anywhere." Bubl's new album, Love, is scheduled to be released on 16 November 2018.  Storey, Katie.  "Michael Bubl QUITS Music Following Heartache Over Son Noah's 'Life-Changing' Cancer Battle as He Reveals He Is Done with Fame in Final Interview."
  Daily Mail.  13 October 2018. Hines, Ree.  "Michael Bubl Is 'Definitely Not' Retiring Following Son's Cancer Battle."
  The Today Show.  15 October 2018. Hautman, Nicholas.  "Michael Buble Laughs Off Retirement Rumors: 'I Need the Money.'"
  US Magazine.   16 October 2018. Schnurr, Samantha.  "Michael Bubl Laughs Off Retirement Rumors: 'Consider the Source.'"
  E! News.   16 October 2018.
A federal judgeissueda temporary restraining order to block the online publication of blueprints outlining how to create untraceable and undetectable 3D-printed firearms. The blueprints were originally scheduled for an Aug. 1 release after a government settlement ended five years of litigation. But word of the release prompted panic as legislators and officials scrambled to block the action. Before the federal judges ruling, at least 21 attorneys general filed suit to stop the blueprints from going live. As conversation heated up, President Donald Trump weighed in onTwitter. I am looking into 3-D Plastic Guns being sold to the public, he said. Already spoke to NRA, doesnt seem to make much sense! I am looking into 3-D Plastic Guns being sold to the public. Already spoke to NRA, doesnt seem to make much sense! Politicians and pundits jumped at the presidents words as proof that he was unfamiliar with a decision from his own administration. Trump: My own administrations latest decision doesnt seem to make much sense! said a July 31headlinefrom Addicting Info, a liberal website. This story was flagged as part of Facebooks efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about ourpartnershipwith Facebook.) Trumps last-minute statement gave us pause, too, so we decided to look at the settlement. Was the Trump administration  or Trump  actually behind it? The White House did not respond to a request for comment (though Trump's press secretary said later that he did not get a chance to weigh in). So we searched elsewhere for our answer. On May 5, 2013, Defense Distributeduploadedblueprints online that could be used to make a working 3D-printed gun called The Liberator, as well as a 53-secondvideoof founder Cody Wilson firing one. Wilson soon received aletterfrom the Obama administrations State Department demanding that he remove the files from the internet. The letter said the technical data amounted to an illegal gun export in violation of theArms Export Control ActandInternational Traffic in Arms Regulations, because it could be accessed in countries where the United States does not sell weapons. The State Department instructed Wilson to take down the files until he applied for specific approval of the guns multiple components. By that point, the blueprints had already been downloaded 100,000 times. In response, Wilson filed alawsuitagainst the State Department with the help of Second Amendment Foundation, a guns-rights organization, in which he sought a preliminary injunction to allow continued publication of the gun files online. Under both the Obama and Trump administrations, the government stuck by its assertion that the technical data constituted an illegal gun export. Wilson countered that the governments intervention violated his First Amendment right to free speech. Ultimately, district and appeals courts both rejected Wilsons injunction request. But as the case turned to the First Amendment claim, the government made an unexpected settlement offer. With thesettlement, reached in June and announced July 10, the government waived the relevant export restrictions and allowed Wilson to post the blueprints online as early as Aug. 1. Specifically, the State Departmentannouncedthat it was in the interest of the security and foreign policy of the United States to temporarily modify theU.S. Munitions Listto exclude the technical data for the 3-D-printed guns. Defense-related items on the munitions list face tight restrictions, because they offer a critical military or intelligence advantage to the United States. The U.S. Commerce Department manages a separate export list with fewer restrictions. It is not clear what role Trump or the White House played in the settlement decision, though White House Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanderssaid during an Aug. 1 press briefing that the Department of Justice instructed the State Department to settle without White House approval. The State Department has said that its role in this issue relates solely to regulation of exports of certain types of firearms and any related technical data. But the move to shift the 3D-printed guns technical data outside of the State Departments purview was not without precedent. The governments decision came amid a longstanding but relatively behind-the-scenes administrative project  started under the Obama administration and known as export control reform  to restructure the regulations governing exports of weapons and technologies. Just as the litigation against Wilson can be traced back to the Obama years, so, too, can the export control changes that may have opened the door for the State Departments settlement. Beginning in 2009, the Obama administrationlaunchedan overhaul of export control in order to refine regulations for items that were subject to both the State Departments International Traffic in Arms Regulations and the Commerce Departments Export Administration Regulations. The goal of the reform was to streamline export controls by transferring commercially available items  such as consumer guns  off the USML and onto the less restrictive Commerce Control List. The State Department began reviewing the munitions list, sifting through each category and removing items that were not considered military-sensitive. By 2016, it had finished reviewing all but threecategories: firearms, ammunition and artillery. However, reform of those final categories stalled before it could become policy. Aproposed rulewould have handed jurisdiction of commercial firearms export controls to the Commerce Department in 2012, but it was delayed following the Sandy Hook school shooting. That proposed rule did notregainmomentum until 2018, under Trump. On May 24, the Departments ofStateandCommercesimultaneously publishedproposalsin the Federal Register to amend the final three categories of the munitions list. The proposed revisions would keep military-grade weapons under State Department jurisdiction and place commercially available firearms under the purview or the Commerce Department. According to theNew York Times, these proposals strongly resemble the Obama administrations 2012 version. CNNreportedthat the government is currently reviewing them. This may explain the State Departments sudden decision to settle its case with Wilson. By recommending that commercial firearm exports move under Commerce Department oversight, the May 24 proposals would likely free Wilsons blueprints from the International Traffic in Arms Regulations that previously restricted them. My guess is that it was somehow wrapped up in the movement of items from the (U.S. Munitions List) to the (Commerce Control List), said Rachel Stohl, managing director at the Stimson Center and an expert in the international arms trade. If you deregulate the weapons themselves, it would follow that the technical specs could be deregulated as well. Stohl added that the settlement was unexpected and the State and Commerce Departments have been less than forthcoming on these details. For his part, Wilson has agreed to refrain from posting his blueprints for at least another month while the multi-state lawsuit travels through the courts. A headline suggested that the government settlement that would have made 3D-printable guns available for download was actually a Trump administration decision, and that Trump said that didn't make much sense. We could not independently determine the extent of Trumps involvement, although Sanders said the president was not afforded the opportunity to approve of the settlement decision. But the State Department under Trump did initiate the settlement after previously taking steps to clear a path for it. However, the Obama administrations export control reform made those steps possible, and it is not far-fetched to consider the Trump administrations move a continuation of that initiative. We rate this statement Mostly True. Officials in Jefferson County, Georgia, faced allegations of racially-motivated voter suppression in October 2018 in response to an incident in which a voter registration group was ordered to return a group of African-American seniors to a county-run senior center, after those seniors boarded a bus to cast ballots during early voting for the November elections. The liberal web site ThinkProgress reported of the incident that: reported Seniors in rural Georgia were dancing in the street, preparing to board Black Voters Matters bus to cast their ballots Monday, the first day of the states early voting period. But the county administrator ordered the senior center to take the 40 or so elderly African Americans off the bus  an act organizers described as live voter suppression. In a Facebook video about the incident, which took place on 15 October, the group's co-founders LaTosha Brown and Cliff Albright characterized the county's decision as racially-motivated voter suppression, with Albright saying: Somebody called the County Commission to complain because they saw all these black folks get on this big black bus -- it's the blackest bus in America -- somebody drove past, saw that, got nervous, got mad, called the County Commission's office, which then called the center. And the bottom line was, all the folks who had just got on the bus -- and the bus was full, this is a 50-passenger bus full of folks -- had to come off the bus. There's not a candidate on this bus, there's not a party symbol on this bus, but I'm going to tell you what is on this bus -- a whole bunch of black fists in the air with the word "power" underneath it. That's what scared them and made them say "Those folks have to come off that bus." However, Jefferson County administrator Adam Brett insisted that the event constituted "political activity," something that the county purportedly does not allow on county property or at county-sponsored events. Jefferson County Democrats Chair Diane Evans was on the bus in question and helped organize the visit to the senior center in the first place, as revealed in email correspondence published by Augusta television station WJBF. WJBF Furthermore, Brett said he had not "vetted" Black Voters Matter, and that allowing the senior citizens to leave with an unfamiliar outside group could have been a "liability" for the county, which operates the senior center in Louisville and also organizes its own chartered buses for seniors to get to polling stations. said In a statement sent to us, Brett wrote: The Jefferson County Board of Commissioners has a practice of not allowing political activities during normal business hours on County property or at County sponsored activities. On October 15th, the Senior Center staff declined to allow a third party and unknown bus operator to pick County residents on County property for political purposes. The Senior Center staff routinely arrange Jefferson County Public Transit to transport senior citizens to vote. In an email, Albright rejected Brett's "liability" argument, calling it "paternalistic" and pointing out that the Louisville senior center is an activities center, not a residential center: Seniors can come [and] go when they please and with whomever they choose to leave with. If they want to leave with a family member, an Uber driver, or an organization they trust, that is their own choice. These are grown adults who decided who they wanted to leave with, and despite Mr. Bretts paternalistic need to feel comfortable with that decision, he has no control over those choices, nor liability [for them]. We asked Brett what the legal basis was for his order (carried out by staff at the senior center) not to "allow" the seniors to travel to the polling station with Black Voters Matter and requested that he clarify Jefferson County's legal authority and liabilities relating to people who use the senior center. We did not receive a response to those questions. Albright told us that staff at the senior center had given advance permission for Black Voters Matter to visit the center and hold an event there, but not for them to escort seniors to polling stations. However, he maintained this was because the group had not initially planned to take the bus trip, which he said the seniors themselves had asked for, spontaneously: The seniors requested to ride the bus to go vote after they saw it and were excited. The center director approved/supported the request, which is why the seniors even got on the bus. It was not until the county administrator called the center director that it became a problem. Albright also questioned the sincerity of Brett's invocation of county policy on "political activities," pointing out that Jody Hice, a Republican member of the U.S. House of Representatives, is scheduled to host an event at the senior center on 27 October. (Albright emphasized that he thought the event in question was very worthy and should be allowed to take place at the center, but he saw it as an example of a double standard.) scheduled In fact, on the same day that the seniors were prevented from travelling with Black Voters Matter to a polling station, the Jefferson County Board of Commissioners actually promoted Congressman Hice's event at the senior center on their Facebook page, in a post that was taken word-for-word from Hice's earlier press release: press release   We asked Brett to explain why the county had forbidden an event in which a bus carrying a local Democratic party official -- but no elected politician or candidate -- was to escort seniors to a polling station away from the center itself, but allowed a sitting Republican Congressman, who is actively campaigning for re-election, to host an event in the center itself. We also asked why the Board of Commissioners had promoted that event. We did not receive a response to those questions. re-election In a separate Facebook post, the Board of Commissioners explained that the bus trip had been forbidden because it "was led by the President of the Jefferson County Democratic Party [Diane Evans] and as such was considered a political event." However, the Black Voters Matter's visit had been organized with the assistance of Evans, and yet it was still allowed to take place. post We asked Brett why the Black Voters Matter visit was allowed to go ahead despite the involvement of Evans, but the bus trip was not, and asked whether he had considered requesting that Evans disembark the bus (given that her involvement was purportedly the source of the county's objections) rather than ordering the seniors to return to the center. Again, we did not receive a response to these questions. Conclusion It is true that on 15 October 2018, staff at the Jefferson County senior center in Louisville enacted the instructions of County Administrator Adam Brett by insisting that a group of seniors return to the center after they voluntarily boarded a bus operated on behalf of Black Voters Matter, a voter registration group. The leaders of that group characterized the incident as racially-motivated voter suppression, but Brett insisted otherwise, stating that the reasons for his order were twofold: the involvement of Jefferson County Democrats Chair Diane Evans meant that the bus trip constituted "political activity," something the county could not allow, and county officials had not vetted Black Voters Matter or the bus operator, creating a potential liability for the county which Brett was unwilling to assume. However, it must be acknowledged that significant problems exist with the coherence of the twofold rationale outlined by Brett. First, it is not clear that Jefferson County actually has any legal liability for anything that happens to those who use the center once they have left the center. Likewise, it's not clear that Brett had any legal authority to "not allow" seniors to travel to the polling station or Black Voters Matter to escort them there. Second, the consistency with which Jefferson County enforces their prohibition on "political activities" at the senior center is questionable. On the one hand, Brett forbade the bus trip to the polling station on this basis due to the involvement of a local Democratic official, even though the bus trip would have taken the seniors away from the senior center, and even though the county allowed a visit to the senior center which had been organized with the help of that same Democratic official. But Jefferson County's Board of Commissioners also sanctioned a forthcoming event to be hosted by Jody Hice, a sitting Republican Congressman and active election candidate, which is scheduled to take place in the center itself, and the Board of Commissioners has promoted that event on Facebook in a post taken word-for-word from Hice's earlier press release. Lerner, Kira.& nbsp; "'This Is Live Voter Suppression': Black Voters Matter Blocked grom Taking Seniors to Vote."
  ThinkProgress.  15 October 2018. DuBose, Renetta.  "Jefferson County: 'It Was Miscommunication, Not Voter Suppression.'"
  WJBF-TV.  17 October 2018. Hice, Jody.  "Press Release -- Hice to Host Helping Our Heroes Veterans' Event."
  U.S. Representative Jody Hice.  10 October 2018. The New York Times.  "Georgia Primary Election Results: 10th House District."
  29 May 2018. Correction [22 October 2018]: In some instances, this article previously referred to the Chairperson of the Jefferson County Democrats as Diane Davis. She is Diane Evans. Facebook giveaways that promise $750 or other large cash prizes in the Cash App finance app are just about always going to be scams. We found at least three such Cash App scam giveaways in early June 2022 that claimed multiple $750 prizes were being given away by former U.N. Ambassador and South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley, rapper Snoop Dogg, and celebrity chef Paula Deen. Facebook Cash App scams Cash App Nikki Haley Snoop Dogg Paula Deen The pages for Haley, Snoop Dogg, and Deen all used both their image and likeness without their permission, and appeared like this: Haley Snoop Dogg Deen All of the pages that promised $750 in Cash App also used specific wording that we'd seen before with other scams that appeared to involve scammers from outside the U.S. We removed the scammers' website link from the example text below: we'd seen before CONGRATULATIONS for those of you who have received comments from me have been selected as winnersStep 1 = Like and ShareStep 2 = Coments "DONE"Step 3 = Register here (link removed) receive my prize. And the Gift will be sent after you successfully register (this is authentic and official) God bless youGood Luck The links in these Facebook giveaways all led to survey scam websites. The Facebook posts appeared to be created by people acting as affiliate marketers who were trying to earn money by driving traffic to survey scam websites. We found affiliate ID numbers in the full website addresses that resulted from the Facebook posts. It might be possible to take part in a large number of surveys on these scam websites and end up receiving something in return. However, such survey websites often require that users jump through various hoops in order to do so, all of which are usually spelled out in the fine print on terms and conditions pages. For the number of hours and the concentration that would be needed to obtain any sort of reward, we recommend that our readers don't waste their time. The American Association of Retired Persons (AARP) and the U.S. Better Business Bureau (BBB) both published pages with advice on how to avoid survey scams and what to look out for. Basically, proceed with caution before taking a survey on an unfamiliar website. Some of these websites will ask users to sign up for free trials of various products that, in reality, will charge them a recurring fee in the future. Also, bear in mind that if the reward sounds too good to be true (like $750 in Cash App), it probably is. American Association of Retired Persons U.S. Better Business Bureau In sum, no, Haley, Snoop Dogg, and Deen were not giving away $750, or any other amount of prizes, in Facebook giveaways in Cash App, nor were any other noteworthy figures from the world of entertainment or politics. If readers see any other Facebook giveaway scams like these, please contact us with details. If possible, include a link to the post or the Facebook page. contact us BBB Tip: How to Identify a Fake Website. International Association of Better Business Bureaus, https://www.bbb.org/all/spot-a-scam/signs-of-a-fake-survey. Beware of Survey Scams That Require Personal Information. AARP, https://www.aarp.org/money/scams-fraud/info-2021/survey.html. In late 2021 and early 2022, critics of former U.S. President Donald Trump, primarily left-leaning, enthusiastically shared a social media post which appeared to add some credibility to long-standing rumors about him.  On Dec. 29, a jury in New York convicted English socialite Ghislaine Maxwell of assisting her longtime companion, the disgraced billionaire financier Jeffrey Epstein, in procuring underage girls to be sexually abused, over a period of many years. Epstein died in prison in August 2019, while facing sex trafficking charges, in what the New York City medical examiner determined was a suicide.  convicted English socialite Ghislaine Maxwell died in prison Like other influential and well-connected politicians and businessmen, Trump knew and socialized with both Epstein and Maxwell, and he has long been the subject of so-far unsubstantiated rumors of sexual impropriety involving young women and even girls.  knew socialized rumors Against that background, @USAlight3, a Twitter account that regularly posts left-wing, anti-Trump content, wrote on Dec. 30: wrote "FOX NEWS: Trump vowed to pardon Ghislaine Maxwell if he wins in 2024."  The claim was that Fox News reported that Trump had said he would pardon Maxwell if he were elected as president again in 2024. In reality, Fox News had reported no such thing. Back in the summer of 2021, several outlets wrote about a snippet from Michael Wolff's book "Landslide" which alleged, based on unnamed sources, that Trump had mentioned Maxwell in the context of conversations about his presidential pardon power, before he left office in January 2021. Notably, Trump did not actually pardon Maxwell, even though the charges against her were well known by that time. We are issuing a rating of "false." wrote about well known By logical necessity, any "vow" by Trump to pardon Maxwell if he won election in 2024 would have to have taken place after President Joe Biden's election win in November 2020 (otherwise, Trump would have framed his intention in terms of a second term). We could find no such report on the website of Fox News during the period since Biden's victory. Nor did we find any similar reports from any other reputable news source. So the "2024" claim, in particular, was baseless. However, although unproven, the broader allegation that Trump has held an interest in pardoning Maxwell was at least based on some external source, namely Michael Wolff's 2021 book "Landslide." In it, Wolff describes the chaotic final days and weeks of Trump's presidency, and in one section, writes about Trump's approach to issuing pardons, as follows: Landslide Bored by the process and the details, Trump nevertheless, in the last week, would trawl for candidates, with sudden spurts of determination not to leave this power unused. Who do you think should be pardoned? Give me one personwhos your top pick? became a frequent conversational interruption. One "Oh, shit" moment involved his sudden interest in Ghislaine Maxwell, the former girlfriend of Jeffrey Epstein now facing years in prison over allegations of her role in the Epstein sex-abuse scandal. Trump had tried hard to downplay his own long relationship with Epstein Has she said anything about me? He openly wondered. Is she going to talk? Will she roll on anybody? But pardon talk almost immediately segued to the question of if he should pardon himself: They say I can. Unlimited pardon power. Wolff's putative sources are unnamed, so we cannot even begin to test the accuracy of that description. However, one thing we do know for certain is that Trump did not actually pardon Maxwell of anything while he was president, despite having the power and opportunity to do so.  did not Colson, Thomas. Trump Took a sudden Interest in Ghislaine Maxwell When Discussing Who to Pardon, According to a New Book. Business Insider, https://www.businessinsider.com/donald-trump-ghislaine-maxwell-case-pardons-michael-wolff-book-2021-7. Accessed 4 Jan. 2022. 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. The author of a Wisconsin income tax overhaul sees the flat tax in the Flatland to the south as a beacon for Republicans trying to ease the Badger States heavy tax burden on the middle class. We have a long ways to go in Wisconsin, state Rep. Dale Kooyenga, R-Brookfield,told reporters.Everyone in Illinois pays 5 percent. Illinois millionaires  pay less of a rate in taxes than Wisconsins lower income, middle-class families. Researchers deem Illinois personal income tax structure regressive because a uniform tax rate ultimately takes a bigger bite from lower incomes than higher ones. Wisconsin pioneered the opposite approach, a progressive system in which tax rates rise with earnings. Kooyenga argues change is long overdue. Wisconsin was the first state to enact an income tax in 1911, he  wrote in a May 27, 2013postingon the conservative Right Wisconsin website. The complexity of the Wisconsin tax code has exponentially grown as Madison politicians believed the tax code was their magic wand which could be used to accomplish political and social objectives. His conclusion: As a direct result, our tax code picks winners and losers and is one of the most progressive tax codes in the country. Kooyengas plan reduces rates and collapses several tax brackets. It comes on top of Gov. Scott Walkers tax-cut proposal. Combined they reduce taxes by nearly $790 million over two years. Top earners would likely receive the majority of the $444 million in tax savings under Kooyengas plan, and those with modest incomes would land in the same tax bracket as very high earners, theJournal Sentinel reported.Kooyenga acknowledges that, but says everyone deserves tax relief and that the top 10 percent right now pay over 50 percent of the tax revenue in Wisconsin. But Kooyengas claim wasnt about the impact of his plan. Rather it was about the tax system as it stands today. Does Wisconsin have one of the most progressive tax codes in the country? The rankings Kooyengas plan focuses on the personal income tax, so well confine our analysis to that rather than all taxes in the code. We found two 50-state studies comparing income tax burdens by income level, and Kooyenga cited the same research when we asked him for backup. AMarch 2013 studyof 2010 tax data by the non-partisanMinnesota Center for Fiscal Excellence, a research organization, concluded that: -- Among 42 states with an income tax (and the District of Columbia), Wisconsin is the 9th most-progressive when comparing married couples with $10,000 of gross income to those with incomes of $150,000, $250,000, $500,000 and $1 million. -- Wisconsins ranking drops lower, in a range from 11th to 15th most progressive, when comparing a couple earning $35,000 to each of those four higher levels. The ranks were 11, 12, 15 and 15. Minnesota came in number 2. The second study cited by Kooyenga is aJanuary 2013 examinationby the nonpartisan, liberalInstitute on Taxation and Economic Policy(ITEP) in Washington, D.C. (The group is a partner organization to Citizens for Tax Justice, which hascriticized the Walker and Kooyenga tax cutsas costly and regressive. Also, on May 30, 2013, ITEP released areview of Kooyengas plan, concluding that the top 20 percent of earners, a group with an average income of $183,000, would receive more than two-thirds of the benefit.) In any event, the groups earlier 50-state study -- the one cited by Kooyenga to back up his claim -- found that Wisconsins income tax was the 12th most progressive in the nation. That ranking is not revealed in the report, which deals with a broader variety of state and local taxes, but the group made it available to us from its unpublished database. So, the two studies rank the income tax here in a range from 9th to 15th most progressive. That puts Wisconsin among the top 21 to 36 percent of most progressive income tax states, depending on the comparison point and the study. Of course, thats just among the states that levy a personal income tax -- the tax that is the main way to add a progressive element to a tax system. Four states that dont levy a personal income tax are on the ITEPs top-10 most regressive list for their overall tax systems, so its safe to say Wisconsins income tax approach is more progressive than in those additional states that dont even use this progressive tool. Of the two studies, the ITEP research is more up to date, but is limited to non-elderly taxpayers. It, unlike the Minnesota study, accounted for the effect of reductions that Walker initiated in 2011 in the earned income tax credit for low-income workers, a cut of 19 percent, or $56 million over two years. That change made the income tax less progressive, but we dont know how it affected Wisconsins ranking vs. other states, some of whom made similar changes. Digging deeper From the ITEP study, Kooyenga highlighted tables showing that Wisconsins top 20 percent of earners pay an effective income tax rate considerably higher than the national average. Similarly, for the lowest 20 percent, Wisconsins burden is lower than the 50-state average. Thats true, and it demonstrates the progressive nature of the Wisconsin system. The progressive income tax offsets the regressive effect, for example, of the sales tax. Aside from the graduated rate structure that rises with income, the states sliding standard deduction is powerfully progressive, as is the itemized deduction credit, notes Wisconsin Taxpayers Alliance president Todd Berry. But the ITEP study also shows that by the time earnings reach an average of $28,000, Wisconsins personal income tax bite is already over the national average for the second 20 percent. PolitiFact Wisconsin in November 2012 reviewed a claim by state Rep. Robin Vos that on income taxes, Wisconsin is one of the best places in the country to be poor but top 4 or 5 worst for middle-income earners. We rated itMostly True. Wisconsin, in the 2013 ITEP study, is not singled out as at the very highest end as either progressive or regressive. Unlike most states, Wisconsin allows a large capital gains tax break, ITEP executive director Matthew Gardner wrote in an email. Since the benefits of this tax break go primarily to the best-off taxpayers, the capital gains tax break makes Wisconsins income tax much less progressive than you would think from just looking at the tax rates. Gardner said it would be reasonable to say that Wisconsin is in the upper tier of least regressive states based on its #12 ranking. But, in his view, its hard to describe the Wisconsin income tax -- or the tax system as a whole -- as among the most progressive in the US. In the Minnesota study, the rankings drop quite a bit when the comparison income is set at $35,000 instead of $10,000. The reason for that is related to the tax credits for very low earners that we mentioned earlier. Wisconsin has a prominent credit, helping to account for its progressive ranking. Such credits phase out as income rises, however, so those people would have a tax liability, unlike lower earners whose bill is wiped out by the credit, said Aaron Twait, research director at the Minnesota center. A few other states keep the credits in place at higher incomes, bumping up their progressive rating. Kooyenga could have balanced off some of the regressive effect of his plan by increasing tax credits for very low-income earners. But he notes that many workers in that category receive the credit even though they did not earn enough wages to have Wisconsin taxes withheld. Its a wage supplement in the form of a refund. That, in Kooyengas view, is one of the inappropriate social objectives in the tax code, his office told us. Our rating PItching his plan to begin flattening the Wisconsin state income tax code, Kooyenga said Wisconsin has one of the most progressive tax codes in the country. Kooyenga was talking about income taxes, and its clear from two national studies that Wisconsins tax is more progressive than two-thirds to four-fifths of the states that levy such a tax, depending on the study. So Wisconsin is clearly in the upper tier, but not in elite of the elite. We rate the claim Mostly True. In February 2021, the U.S. Postal Service announced that they had awarded a multi-billion dollar contract to Oshkosh Defense to manufacture the next generation of mail trucks. As reports started circulating about these more fuel-efficient vehicles, much of the chatter on social media was focused on the somewhat cartoonish appearance of USPS' new mail trucks: announced The Postal Service is truly modernizing its fleet of mail trucks. The above-displayed image originated with the Postal Service and it truly shows what their new mail trucks are expected to look like when they hit the streets in 2023.   This is not, however, a genuine photograph of a physical truck. This is a concept image of what the trucks would look like in the future.  In a press release from the Postal Service about their new trucks, they noted that Oshkosh Defense "will finalize" the design before it goes into production.  will finalize Under the contracts initial $482 million investment, Oshkosh Defense will finalize the production design of the Next Generation Delivery Vehicle (NGDV)  a purpose-built, right-hand-drive vehicle for mail and package delivery  and will assemble 50,000 to 165,000 of them over 10 years. The vehicles will be equipped with either fuel-efficient internal combustion engines or battery electric powertrains and can be retrofitted to keep pace with advances in electric vehicle technologies. The initial investment includes plant tooling and build-out for the U.S. manufacturing facility where final vehicle assembly will occur. Kim Frum, senior public relations representative of corporate communications for USPS, confirmed to us that the "NGDV is not a ready-made vehicle" and that the image going around social media is a "concept image."  If any more proof is needed, here's a look at the Shutterstock image (left) that was used as a base to create the image of the new Postal Service mail truck (right):   While the first NGDV should look pretty close to what is shown in this viral image when it finally hits the street in 2023, this is not a genuine photograph of a physical vehicle. This is a concept illustration of USPS' new mail trucks. The name New York has been borne by at least seven different U.S. military ships, most recently the nuclear submarine USS New York City, commissioned in 1979 and retired in 1997.  Construction on another ship bearing that name, the 684-foot amphibious transport dock ship USS New York, began at a shipyard in Avondale, Louisiana. On 1 March 2008 the new vessel was christened there, and it was commissioned in November 2009: commissioned  Artist's Rendering of the USS New York  With a year to go before it even touches the water, the Navy's amphibious assault ship, USS New York, has already made history. It was built with 24 tons of scrap steel from the World Trade Center. It is the fifth in a new class of warship  designed for missions that include special operations against terrorists. It will carry a crew of 360 sailors and 700 combat-ready Marines to be   delivered ashore by helicopters and assault craft. Steel from the World Trade Center was melted down in a foundry in Amite, La., to cast the ship's bow section.  When it was poured into the molds on Sept. 9, 2003, "those big rough steelworkers treated it with total reverence," recalled Navy Capt. Kevin Wensing, who was there.  "It was a spiritual moment for everybody there." Junior Chavers, foundry operations manager, said that when the trade center steel first arrived, he touched it with his hand and the "hair on my neck stood up." "It had a big meaning to it for all of us," he said. "They knocked us down. They can't keep us down. We're going to be back."  The ship's motto?  'Never Forget' The vessel was of interest because its bow stem was said to incorporate 7.5 tons of scrap steel from the World Trade Center which was melted down at a foundry in Amite, Louisiana. (A photograph of employees pouring the molten scrap steel at the Amite Foundry can be viewed here.) The name New York was reportedly revived for the warship (which was already under construction) at the request of New York governor George Pataki to commemorate the September 11 terrorist attacks on the U.S., creating an exception to current U.S. Navy policy of using state names only for nuclear submarines. here According to the Associated Press, the USS New York would be the fifth ship of its class, at least two more of which will also be named for locations associated with the 9/11 attacks: USS New York USS New York is the fifth in a new class of warship designed for missions that include special operations against terrorists. It will carry a crew of 360 sailors and 700 combat-ready Marines to be delivered ashore by helicopters and assault craft. Later ships in the class will include USS Arlington, the location of the Pentagon, also struck by a hijacked jetliner on Sept. 11, and USS Somerset, named for the Pennsylvania county where United Flight 93 crashed after its passengers fought off hijackers apparently planning to attack another Washington target. The quotes from Navy personnel and shipyard workers included in the e-mailed version reproduced above were taken from an Associated Press article about the ship. article In December 2006, the following image began to circulate with this e-mail in place of the artist's rendition displayed above, although it is not a photograph of the USS New York but rather the then-recently commissioned USS San Antonio: USS San Antonio  The following set of photographs was taken at the christening of LPD 21 with the name USS New York at Northrop Grumman's Avondale, Louisiana, shipyard on 1 March 2008: christening     On 13 October 2009. the USS New York left the Louisiana shipyard for New York, where it was scheduled to be formally commissioned on 7 November 2009: A Navy assault ship built with tons of steel salvaged from the World Trade Center towers began its journey to New York [on October 13], sailing down the Mississippi River in a pea-soup fog as watchers along the levee strained for a glimpse. The USS New York, named to commemorate the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, left the Northrop Grumman shipyard where it was built for the trip to its namesake city. The $1 billion ship will be formally commissioned in New York in early November. The New York is 684 feet long and can carry up to 800 Marines. It has a flight deck that can handle helicopters and the MV-22 Osprey tilt-rotor aircraft. Four tugboats performed an intricate set of maneuvers to pull the warship from the dock at the New Orleans-area shipyard and turn it 180 degrees toward the waters of Gulf of Mexico. An armed Coast Guard speedboat and a helicopter flying overhead guarded the vessel. The ship will sail through the Gulf and around Florida before turning north and continuing to New York. Bohrer, Becky.  "Ship Built with WTC Steel Christened."
  Associated Press.  1 March 2008. Sayre, Alan.  "Ship Built with WTC Steel Sails for Namesake City."
  Associated Press.  13 October 2009. Associated Press.  "New Navy Ship Being Built with WTC Steel."
  ABC News.  3 April 2006. On 18 June 2018, the front page of the Drudge Report news aggregator blog put up a link to a story accompanied by a photograph of a group of children, two of which appeared to be holding guns, and the headline "Border Battle: USA Taking in 250 Kids Per Day": Drudge Report   Even though the Drudge Report linked to a 2018 article about how the Trump administration "could be holding 30,000 border kids by August" published by the Washington Examiner, the featured photograph was not taken in 2018, was not taken anywhere near either Mexico or the United States, and it has nothing at all to do with immigration. Washington Examiner The Drudge Report apparently deliberately chose to feature the misleading photograph (and phrase "border battle") amidst increasing outrage surrounding a Trump administration policy to separate children from families at the Mexico-United States border while failing to offer a description, note that the children in the image are holding toys, not actual weapons, or even credit the photographer, Christiaan Triebert, who took the picture in Azaz, Syria in 2012: policy photographer Four young Syrian boys with toy guns are posing in front of my camera during my visit to Azaz, Syria. Most people I met were giving the peace sign. This little city was taken by the Free Syrian Army in the summer of 2012 during the Battle of Azaz. The web site eventually removed the image of Syrian children and replaced it with a slightly more relevant photograph, but this second attempt was still misleading and still failed to offer proper context or even attribution:   This photograph was not taken on the border of Mexico and the United States, and it was not taken in 2018. The image, which is from Associated Press photographer Eduardo Verdugo, was taken in 2013 in the southern Mexico city of Juchitn. It shows immigrants atop the infamous "Tren de la Muerte" ("Train of Death"), also known as La Bestia or The Beast, trying to make their way north to safety:  Associated Press Migrants ride on top of a northern bound train toward the US-Mexico border in Juchitan, southern Mexico, Monday, April 29, 2013. Migrants crossing Mexico to get to the U.S. have increasingly become targets of criminal gangs who kidnap them to obtain ransom money. (AP Photo/Eduardo Verdugo)  La Bestia has that name because it is an exceptionally dangerous method of travel that is only used by the most desperate, and few survive the ride unscathed: unscathed The cargo trains, which run along multiple lines, carry products north for export. As there are no passenger railcars, migrants must ride atop the moving trains, facing physical dangers that range from amputation to death if they fall or are pushed. Beyond the dangers of the trains themselves, Central American migrants are subject to extortion and violence at the hands of the gangs and organized-crime groups that control the routes north.   Giaritelli, Anna.  "Trump Administration Could be Holding 30,000 Border Kids by August, Officials Say."
  Washington Examiner.  18 June 2018. Drudge Report.  "Border Battle: USA Taking in 250 Kids Per Day."
  18 June 2018. With the state facing a multibillion-dollar budget shortfall, Democratic gubernatorial nominee Bill White recently aired advice to GOP Gov. Rick Perry on how to save the state some money:Move.In fall 2007, the state rented a home for the governor and his wife, Anita, about 11 miles southwest of downtown Austin so the Governor's Mansion could be renovated. In an April 13 press release, White, who faces Perry in November, calls the monthly rent an extravagant, unwarranted use of taxpayer dollars, adding that by the end of his current term, Perry will have drained Texas taxpayers ... of more than $360,000 to pay for the rental mansion he has been living in while the historic Governor's Mansion is repaired and renovated.White then calls on Perry to set a budget-cutting example for other state employees and move out.We wondered whether White's right about how much Perry's rented pad will cost taxpayers.Katy Bacon, a spokeswoman for White, pointed us to a column in the Houston Chronicle that mentioned the monthly rent of the 4,600-square-foot home and to an earlier PolitiFact Texas item, in which we rated as Mostly True astatementby U.S. Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison, R-Texas, that Perry lives in a luxury house that costs taxpayers $10,000 a month.The lease for the house at 8113 Hickory Creek Drive, which last year was appraised by the Travis Central Appraisal District at $1.1 million, was initially for one year starting Oct. 1, 2007. The rent was set at $9,900.Less than a year after the Perrys moved into the rental home in a gated community near Barton Creek, the Governor's Mansion, just southwest of the Capitol, was heavily damaged in an arson fire for which no one has been arrested. Work has stopped on the mansion pending a decision on options for rebuilding the historical structure.In fall 2008, the lease on the rental home was renewed through October 2011 with the rent lowered to $9,000. Through this April, the state has paid $290,700 in rent. Toss in the eight months left in Perry's current term -- as White does -- and the total rental payments come to $362,700.So, does White get the tab for Perry's rented digs right? Yes -- and that's not counting other housing-related expenses.The state has not responded to requests for information on the costs of security at the governor's home-away-from-mansion.However, $197,000 has been spent on utilities and other items, such as preparing the rental residence for the governor, according to the Texas Facilities Commission and State Preservation Board. While we don't have an exact comparison of the ancillary costs of living at the Governor's Mansion, we know that in 2007 -- the last year that Perry lived there -- those bills, including for grounds work and utilities, totaled more than $330,000. (Kay Molina, assistant executive director of the Facilities Commission, said high maintenance costs that year reflected the fact that the mansion needed to be renovated. )Regardless, White nails the expected rent costs for the Perrys to reside in suburban Austin. We rate White's statement as True.