Was Barack Obama the First Ex-President to 'Publicly Speak Against' His Successor?
In the lead-up to the 2018 U.S. midterm elections, an old meme re-emerged on social media which claimed that former president Barack Obama had displayed an unprecedented level of partisanship and opportunism in his criticisms of President Donald Trump, in that Obama was "the first ex president to publicly speak against a successor" re-emerged social media   The meme was actually an edited form of an earlier version which first emerged on social media in 2017. The original included only the phrase "First Ex President to Publicly Speak Against a Successor": 2017 The claim, that no ex-president before Barack Obama ever publicly criticized his immediate successor is false. There is ample historical evidence of ex-presidents doing just that. Here are a few instances: Barack Obama The 44th president offered what were widely perceived as thinly-veiled criticisms of President Donald Trump when he spoke in Johannesburg, South Africa, in July 2018, railing against what he called "strongman politics," whereby "those in power seek to undermine every institution or norm that gives democracy meaning." He also criticized "far-right parties" with a platform of "protectionism and closed borders" as well as "barely-hidden racial nationalism." perceived Speaking at the University of Illinois in September, Obama criticized Trump by name, saying he was a "symptom, not a cause" of an effort by powerful elites to engender fear and division in the face of social change and progress: Obama had declined to openly attack Trump for the first 18 months of his presidency, following what, in his University of Illinois speech, he called the "wise American tradition of ex-presidents gracefully exiting the political stage." Obama said he had changed his mind because, in his view, the 2018 mid-term elections represented "one of those pivotal moments when every one of us, as citizens of the United States, need to determine just who it is that we are, just what it is that we stand for." speech Bill Clinton In July 2007, the 42nd president took aim at the administration of his successor, George W. Bush, in its handling of the Iraq war, telling Good Morning America's Diane Sawyer "There is no military victory here" and criticizing Bush for attempting to filibuster Congressional efforts to bring about a withdrawal of troops: took aim efforts George H.W. Bush Although George H.W. Bush had a general policy of not speaking publicly against his successor, the 41st president did just that more than once while campaigning for Republican candidates during the 1994 mid-term elections. The Daily Oklahoman newspaper reported that Bush Sr. had offered a stinging counter-attack against Clinton during a visit to the state capital on 4 November 1994: reported Saying he was breaking his policy against criticizing President Clinton, former President George Bush said Friday in Oklahoma City he was tired of his Democratic successor criticizing Republicans ... Bush told the crowd ... that Clinton was stumping about blaming Republicans in Congress "for his demise or things that weren't going right." "He blames us and he is wrong. I'm so tired of it," Bush told about 5,000 noisy GOP supporters at Oklahoma Christian University of Sciences and Arts. "I think America is a little tired of it." During a Republican rally in Omaha, Nebraska, the same week, Bush attacked Clinton for having "the nerve" to blame the GOP for "his own failures," the Pittsburgh Post-Gazettereported: reported Former President George Bush broke a self-imposed silence yesterday and attacked President Clinton for taking credit for the U.S. economic recovery. Bush has been stumping for Republican candidates in the Mid-west this week. "He has the nerve to blame Republicans for his own failures and the shortcomings of the Democratic Congress," the former president told a crowd of about 1,500 people in Omaha. In 1999, during the Monica Lewinsky scandal and Clinton's impeachment by the U.S. House of Representatives, Bush even appeared to accuse his successor of behaving in a way which demonstrated a lack of respect for the U.S. presidency, as the Associated Press reported: reported Former President Bush thinks Bill Clinton lacks respect for the presidency, but Bush predicts the country will bounce back after Clinton's impeachment trial ends. "I have tried to stay out of all the Washington mess," Bush said Saturday at the end of a keynote address to the Safari Club International's 27th annual hunters' convention. "But I must confess I have been deeply concerned by what appears to be a lack of respect for the office I was so very proud to hold." Jimmy Carter The 39th president more than once criticized Ronald Reagan, the man who defeated him in the 1980 presidential campaign, firmly defending his own record and offering relatively barbed comments about his successor. In September 1982, Carter responded to Reagan's earlier criticisms of the Democrat's legacy, accusing his rival of failing to "accept his responsibilities as president," the New York Times reported: New York Times Former President Jimmy Carter, responding to criticism from President Reagan, said tonight that while his Administration made mistakes, "we did not spend four years blaming our mistakes on our predecessors" ... Mr. Carter accused Mr. Reagan of not accepting his responsibilities. The former President said that after his defeat in 1980, he resolved to pledge Mr. Reagan "my help, my support when he was ready to accept the awesome responsibilities of the Presidency." "My offer still stands," Mr. Carter said at a Democratic National Committee fund-raising dinner. "When he is ready to accept those responsibilities, I'll be there to help him." At a press conference two months later, Carter continued that theme, saying Reagan's efforts to deflect criticism onto him were "irresponsible and ill-advised" and that his Republican successor had made "radical" and unwelcome changes to U.S. foreign policy, United Press International reported: reported Jimmy Carter criticized President Reagan for making 'radical' changes in U.S. foreign and domestic policy, and said Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin is responsible in part for failure of the Camp David accords. In a wide-ranging news conference, Carter also twitted Reagan for trying to lay the blame for the nation's problems on the previous administration. 'There is always the temptation for an incumbent politician to blame all his mistakes on his predecessor. Most are willing to withstand the temptation. Mr. Reagan, apparently, is not,' Carter said. 'The public sees through that and the results of the (midterm) election proves I'm right' ... Speaking typically with a soft voice but strong words, Carter said: "Most of the quite radical departures in foreign, domestic and economic policy have not been good for the country. We have an unprecedented number of people unemployed; bankruptcies are the highest in years; farm income is at the lowest level ever; the deficits have never been so high, and so forth" ... "It's true President Reagan inherited some serious problems from my administration. I inherited some from President Ford. But to try to forego blame and say all these problems are my predecessor's fault is patently irresponsible and ill-advised," he said. Carter called Reagan's nuclear policies 'ill-advised.' Gerald Ford Just as Carter publicly took aim at the man who replaced him in the White House, he was also the subject of repeated and sometimes very strong criticism by Republican Gerald Ford, whom Carter had defeated in the 1976 election. In April 1977, less than three months after Carter succeeded him, Ford ridiculed the Democrat's economic policies in a widely-syndicated interview with the Washington Post: interview "Mr. Carter's anti-inflation program came in like a lion," Ford said. "It's going out like a mouse" ... The former president, looking relaxed, voiced his criticism of Carter in a brief interview following a speech to a Republican group here [in Los Angeles, California.] Over the next three years, Ford also took aim at Carter's handling of negotiations over the Strategic Arms Limitation Treaty (SALT), his handling of the economic crisis, and in the summer of 1980 he launched a devastating attack on his successor's legacy at a Republican event in Indianapolis, as the Associated Press reported: negotiations crisis reported "The Carter economic policies have been a catastrophe. They've been disasters. We handed them the economy on a silver platter," Ford said, arguing that the rate of inflation was less than 5 percent when he left office and that unemployment was going down. "The president blew it." Ford predicted that Carter will go into the November election with a national unemployment rate of 9 percent, double-digit inflation and double-digit interest rates. "He'll be defending the worst economic policy of any president since the Depression of 1932. That's bad. And he's responsible." Conclusion The examples highlighted above are far from exhaustive but serve to illustrate that Barack Obama's recent criticisms of President Donald Trump are far from unique or unprecedented and, especially when compared to the pronouncements of Gerald Ford, could even be argued to have been relatively tame. As such, the claim in the 2017 meme which re-emerged in November 2018, that Obama is "the first ex-president to publicly speak against a successor" is false. Wintour, Patrick.  "Obama Criticises 'Strongman Politics' in Coded Attack on Trump." 
  The Guardian.  17 July 2018. Reuters.  "Bill Clinton Criticizes Bush on Iraq." 
  19 July 2007. Stolberg, Sheryl Gay and Jeff Zeleny.  "Clash Over Iraq Becomes Bitter Between Bush and Congress." 
  The New York Times.  12 July 2007. Zizzo, David.  "Bush Criticizes Clinton During Stop in City." 
  The Daily Oklahoman.  5 November 1994. The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette.  "Bush Criticizes Clinton." 
  5 November 1994. Associated Press.  "Bush Criticizes Clinton, But Says Scandal Will Fade." 
  The Atlanta Constitution   25 January 1999. Clymer, Adam.  "Carter Says Reagan Has Failed to Accept His Responsibilities." 
  The New York Times.  1 October 1982. Pippert, Wesley G.  "Jimmy Carter Criticized President Reagan Wednesday for Making 'Radical'..." 
  United Press International.  10 November 1982. Cannon, Lou.  "Ford Criticizes Carter Economics." 
  The Tampa Bay Times.  17 April 1977. Associated Press.  "Ford Criticizes Carter's Policy." 
  The [Uniontown] Evening Standard.  8 April 1977. Associated Press.  "Ford Criticizes Carter's Economic Policies." 
  The [Staunton] News Leader.  11 October 1979. Carrol, Jan.  "Former President Ford Criticizes Carter for 'Flip-Flopping' Policies." 
  The [Lousiville] Courier-Journal.  27 June 1980.
Claim:  Massachusetts is no longer mailing notifications for driver's license renewals. Status:  True.  Example:  [Collected via e-mail, November 2008] This is just a heads up to everyone.  Effective immediately the Registry of Motor Vehicles will no longer be mailing out License renewal applications or reminders to renew your driver's license.  It is now the drivers responsibility to know when their license is expiring and renew it on there own.  This may be a surprise to all of you and it should be, there has been no public information sent out about these changes. Fortunately enough we received the info in one of our trade publications. This idea could change in the future but as of right now it's a huge cost savings and they plan to run with it.  Below is a blurb from the publications. Mailings Eliminated The RMV will no longer mail out the following materials to customers:  License renewal noticesMass ID renewal noticesLicense reinstatement letters:  Letter sent to a licensed customer when his/her license is reinstated,provided that the license is still active  Letter sent to an unlicensed customer when his/her right to operate isreinstatedRegistration reinstatement letters:  Letter sent to a person or corporation whose suspended registration hasbeen reinstated  Letter sent to a person or corporation whose revoked registration has beenreinstatedVehicle Inspection reminder letters for vehicles that are overdue for inspectionInspector license renewal notices7D license renewal noticesDriver's Education CertificatesJunior Operator Brochures for parents (still available in branches)Change of address labels (customers can create their own)  I am just passing this along, my suggestion is to pull out your license and some how set suspense to yourself to make sure you renew it.  This is just a heads up so that no one gets pulled over and car impounded because they didn't realize they hadn't renewed their license. Origins:  We're  used to seeing certain types of notices arrive in our mailboxes regularly  aside from monthly credit card statements and water/gas/electricity bills, every year or two the mail brings us income tax forms, voter materials for upcoming elections, automobile registration renewals, etc.  One common type of mailing won't be arriving in mailboxes of Massachusetts residents any more, however: renewal notification for about-to-expire driver's licenses. As of 3 November 2008, the Massachusetts Registry of Motor Vehicles (RMV) will no longer be sending out notices to residents reminding them to renew their driver's licenses.  Statewide cuts and spending controls announced by Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick in October 2008 slashed $2 million from the RMV's budget, so the RMV has eliminated mailing license renewal reminders and other courtesy notices in an effort to save money (in this case an estimated $800,000): Governor Deval Patrick said that he will eliminate 1,000 jobs from state government and slash the budget by more than $1 billion, reacting to the national economic crisis with sweeping cuts that his administration called the worst single round of midyear budget rollbacks in state history. The reductions will be spread across almost all sectors of state government, biting deeply into state university campuses and community colleges, the state's health insurance programs, and dozens of social service programs  from assistance for at-risk teens to services for the mentally ill and the elderly. The cuts range from a hit of nearly $300 million on healthcare spending to the elimination of letters to residents simply reminding them to get their driver's licenses renewed. As noted in a "Message from Registrar Kaprielian on RMV Budget Cuts" displayed on the Massachusetts RMV web site: RMV Like many businesses across the Commonwealth, the RMV is working to squeeze every penny of savings from our budget in the wake of a drastic downturn in the state's economy. To weather this financial storm, the RMV is adopting operational changes that, we believe, will minimize the impact on customer service in our branches. RMV MAILINGSThe RMV will eliminate courtesy notices that are sent to customers for the following services: License and Mass ID renewal noticesVehicle Inspection reminder letters for vehicles that are overdue for inspectionInspector license renewal notices7D license renewal noticesDriver's Education CertificatesJunior Operator Brochures for parentsChange of address labels For now, at least, it's incumbent upon residents of that commonwealth to be aware when their licenses are due to expire and to initiate the renewal process on their own in a timely fashion. Last updated:  4 November 2008    Sources:   Viser, Matt.  "Patrick to Cut 1,000 Jobs from State Payroll."   The Boston Globe.  16 October 2008. In late June 2021, social media users shared a meme misinforming viewers that Walmart and other large businesses were taking customers' point-of-sale charitable donations and writing them off on their taxes. Readers have been asking Snopes about this meme since at least August 2020. The meme addresses a phenomenon called "checkout charity," in which many large businesses ask customers to donate a small amount to a charitable cause upon checkout:   according to What happens to the money you donate at the cash register? This is where you round up your bill to give to a charity designated by the retailer, and the donation amount appears on your receipt. The store serves only as a collection agent for your gift. Assuming the business is following the law, it will not include your donation as part of its business receipts, or income, nor will it claim the charitable gift as an expense. In other words, your gift has zero impact on the stores income taxes. Keep in mind that the store chooses the receiving charity, so make sure it is one you can support. As a customer, the donation will appear on your receipt and you can claim it as a charitable deduction when you file your income tax return. But you probably wont. A whopping nine out of ten customers don't write those donations off, even with a receipt, according to the Tax Policy Center, which estimates only 9% of households claim deductions for charitable donations. according to The Tampa Bay Times reported that the practice is gaining in popularity because both charities and businesses benefit from it: reported "Checkout charity, as it's sometimes called, has become big business for nonprofits and retailers. Charities love it because it raises money from the masses at little cost. Companies love it because it makes them look caring and generous, even if it comes on the backs of customers." On 7 February 2019, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York and Rep. Edward Markey of Massachusetts, both Democrats, introduced a five-page nonbinding resolution to the U.S. House of Representatives for federal government to recognize its duty to establish a "Green New Deal." resolution The controversial proposal incorporated seven goals previously articulated by Ocasio-Cortez for the U.S. to realize within ten years: Dramatically expand existing renewable power sources and deploy new production capacity with the goal of meeting 100% of national power demand through renewable sources; building a national, energy-efficient, smart grid; upgrading every residential and industrial building for state-of-the-art energy efficiency, comfort and safety; eliminating greenhouse gas emissions from the manufacturing, agricultural and other industries, including by investing in local-scale agriculture in communities across the country; eliminating greenhouse gas emissions from, repairing and improving transportation and other infrastructure, and upgrading water infrastructure to ensure universal access to clean water; funding massive investment in the drawdown of greenhouse gases; making green technology, industry, expertise, products and services a major export of the United States, with the aim of becoming the undisputed international leader in helping other countries transition to completely greenhouse gas neutral economies and bringing about a global Green New Deal. The broader proposal also called for sweeping social measures such as "a job guarantee program to assure a living wage job to every person who wants one," "basic income programs" and "universal health care programs." proposal On 26 March 2019, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell forced a preemptive vote in the U.S. Senate on a procedural motion to take up a binding form of the resolution, deriding the Green New Deal as a plan for basically outlawing the only sources of energy that working-class and middle-class families can actually afford" that would kill off entire domestic industries and eliminate millions of jobs. Democrats criticized McConnell's move as a "sham" intended to "quash debate by blocking public hearings and expert testimony about the consequences of inaction on climate change" and to hasten a vote in order to force Senate Democrats to commit to either supporting or rejecting the proposal at a very early stage: criticized Republicans ... set up this vote to highlight potential splits in the Democratic caucus and force lawmakers to splinter from a high-profile, progressive idea. As the thinking goes, if only part of the Democratic caucus wound up backing the idea, Republicans could argue that it didnt actually have enough support from the party ... Additionally, the move was aimed at putting Democrats from more moderate states in a tough position, forcing them to choose between backing a popular liberal idea and potentially turning off some of their constituents. The Senate vote is a perfect example of that kind of superficial approach to government, Ocasio-Cortez said. What McConnells doing is that hes trying to rush this bill to the floor without a hearing, without any markups, without working through committee  because he doesnt want to save our planet. Because he thinks we can drink oil in 30 years when all our water is poisoned. In the event, most Democrats didn't bite. All 53 Republicans in the Senate voted against the plan, but they were joined by just three Democrats and independent Sen. Angus King of Maine (who caucuses with Democrats). The remaining 43 Democratic senators all declined to commit and merely voted present in protest of the GOPs action. The procedural motion was thus voted down by a 57-0 margin. voted down A meme circulated online afterwards offensively portrayed Rep. Ocasio-Cortez as a "100% retard" for failing to "even vote for [her] own bill":  The implications of that meme were wrong on two counts: 1) The Senate was not voting on whether to accept or reject Ocasio-Cortez's "Green New Deal" resolution. What the Senate voted on was a different form of the resolution, and what they voted against was not the resolution itself but a motion for cloture, the step of agreeing to end debate on a bill so that Senate consideration of it can move forward: not voting cloture This was not the non-binding Green New Deal resolution introduced by Sen. Edward Markey and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez on Feb. 7. Instead, this was a version that McConnell himself introduced, and it was a binding resolution. Instead of voting on whether "it is the sense of the Senate" that the government has a duty to create a Green New Deal, senators would have been skipping ahead to vote on whether the Green New Deal should become "the policy of the United States," without so much as a hearing. a version Under Senate rules, making it binding was the only way McConnell could hold a show vote without the usual process of assigning the legislation to the appropriate committees for discussion and debate. That would put a public spotlight on experts testifying and debate over climate solutions, something McConnell is seeking to avoid. Technically, the Senate voted on whether to end debate on McConnell's motion to proceed to consideration of his version of a Green New Deal resolution. This "cloture" vote wasn't on the substance of the Green New Deal. McConnell's aim was not to actually consider the Green New Deal, which he describes as a "socialist" plan that would "uproot life as we know it." He was hoping the vote would kill talk of a Green New Deal in its infancy, while putting Democrats on the spot. 2) Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is a member of the U.S. House of Representatives, not a member of the U.S. Senate, and thus she had no opportunity to vote on the cloture motion at all. In short, Rep. Ocasio-Cortez didn't "neglect" or "forget" to participate in the referenced Green New Deal vote: she wasn't eligible to take part in it because she isn't a member of the Senate. Nor was the vote that took place in the Senate one that directly addressed the merits or deficiencies of her Green New Deal resolution. Daly, Matthew.  "Senate Shuns Green New Deal Amid Claims of Bad Faith."
  Associated Press.  26 March 2019. Nilsen, Ella and Li Zhou.  "Senate Democrats Broadly Shut Down Republican Trolling on the Green New Deal."
  Vox.  26 March 2019. Grandoni, Dino and Felicia Sonmez.  "Senate Defeats Green New Deal, As Democrats Call Vote a Sham."
  The Washington Post.  26 March 2019. Amadeo, Kimberly.  "The Green New Deal and Why It's Happening Now."
  The Balance.  2 April 2019. Lavelle, Marianne.  "Senate's Green New Deal Vote: 4 Things You Need to Know."
  Inside Climate News.  26 March 2019. Snopes is still fighting an infodemic of rumors and misinformation surrounding the COVID-19 pandemic, and you can help. Find out what we've learned and how to inoculate yourself against COVID-19 misinformation. Read the latest fact checks about the vaccines. Submit any questionable rumors and advice you encounter. Become a Founding Member to help us hire more fact-checkers. And, please, follow the CDC or WHO for guidance on protecting your community from the disease.  fighting Find out Read Submit Become a Founding Member CDC WHO In March 2020, U.S. President Donald Trump faced widespread scrutiny for various aspects of his administration's response to the economic and public health crisis triggered by the COVID-19 pandemic. Among other points of criticism was his repeated insistence on referring to the disease as the "Chinese virus," despite widely-accepted public health authority guidelines that warn against naming disease outbreaks after nations or regions of the world, due to the unfounded stigmatization such names can cause. scrutiny Chinese virus guidelines The president used that name again during a White House briefing on March 19. Afterwards, social media users shared a photograph purportedly taken at the event, which appeared to show that Trump was even ignoring the guidance of his aides in insisting on referring to COVID-19 as the "Chinese virus." Washington Post photographer Jabin Botsford tweeted the following: briefing tweeted   Those images were authentic. The original, official photograph was taken by Botsford himself and published by the Getty Images agency on March 19. The website described the image as follows: published "A close up of President Donald J. Trump's notes shows where Corona was crossed out 'Corona' and replaced with 'Chinese' Virus as he speaks with his coronavirus task force in response to the COVID-19 coronavirus pandemic during a briefing in the James S. Brady Press Briefing Room at the White House on Thursday, March 19, 2020 in Washington, DC."  Photo by Jabin Botsford/The Washington Post via Getty Images      Trump did call COVID-19 the "Chinese virus" in his March 19 remarks, although perhaps ironically, he referred to it simply as "the virus" in the place where "Corona" had been scratched out and replaced in handwriting by "Chinese" in his notes. As shown in the video below, he actually said at that point: "As you know, my administration is working every day to protect the American people and the American economy from the virus [...]":  It's not clear who made the handwritten edit in black marker on March 19, but the handwriting style certainly appeared consistent with that seen in notes which Trump famously held in his hand as he spoke to reporters in November 2019 at the height of Congressional hearings held in advance of his own impeachment trial: held  Left: Mark Wilson/Getty Images. Right: Jabin Botsford/The Washington Post via Getty Images  Lucey, Catherine. "Trump's Message on Virus Draws Scrutiny."
 The Wall Street Journal. 5 March 2020. Rogers, Katie; Jakes, Lara. "Trump Defends Calling the Coronavirus the 'Chinese Virus.'"
 The New York Times. 18 March 2020. World Health Organization. "WHO Issues Best Practices for Naming New Human Infectious Diseases."
 8 May 2015. Palma, Bethania. "Did Trump Use Notes to Self in Sharpie Pen That Said 'I Want Nothing.'"
 Snopes. 22 November 2019. The issue doesn't generate many headlines, but proposed changes in trucking's Hours-of-Service regulations have stirred hot controversy in the industry.When the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform held a hearing on the economic impact of the changes, the title alone hinted at some of the issues involved: The Price of Uncertainty: How Much Could DOT's Proposed Billion Dollar Service Rule Cost Consumers This Holiday Season?The Hours-of-Service regulations set limits for when and how long commercial motor vehicle operators may drive. The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration, which developed the rules, says they were based on an exhaustive review of research on the science on driver alertness and working hours, and strike the crucial balance between safety and economic vitality.The committee chairman, Rep. Jim Jordan of Ohio's 4th District, stressed how widely the regulations would be felt: The vast majority of all retailers, and 80 percent of all U.S. communities, depend solely on trucks to deliver and supply the products sold in stores or ordered on-line, he said.That caught the interest of PolitiFact Ohio. We asked Jordan's office for more information.Jordans press secretary, Meghan Snyder, said the 80 percent figure came from the American Trucking Associations, which cited the Rand McNally Commercial Atlas & Marketing Guide.Darrin Roth, director of highway operations for the American Trucking Associations, confirmed that. He said his group had found the number of communities served by railroads -- 18.3 percent -- and did the inverse.He sent us the spreadsheet from atlas publisher Rand McNally showing state-by-state figures for rail service.It had the 18.3 percent figure. It also showed a slightly smaller percentage for Ohio, where 627 communities of a total 3,516 (or 17.8 percent) were shown having rail service.We found that puzzling for another reason. Census data on the website of Ohio Secretary of State Jon Husted show Ohio with 247 cities, 691 villages and 1,308 townships, for a total of 2,246 divisions.That's 1,270 fewer than the number of communities cited by Rand McNally. Where did they get their figure?Rand McNally's media relations department told us that they have not produced the Commercial Atlas & Marketing Guide in many years, so we can't query the database any longer to specifically explain the difference in Ohio.In fact, the spreadsheet the American Trucking Associations provided lists its data source as from May 2000.The atlas makers mapping specialists provided this explanation about the communities: Rand McNally included unincorporated places into the count which would make our number higher. Rand McNally had its own criteria for smaller populated places that would differ from the Census. Over the last decade that we produced the Commercial Atlas, Rand McNally continually analyzed and removed some of these smaller populated places year after year as population decreased from these older places or they went out of existence. These sometimes included rail yards, postal facilities, parks, etc., with small populations around them. In some portions of the country, this could result in significant differences between the Census reporting of 'community' and ours.In other words, city neighborhoods and rural crossings that are not distinct governmental entities might have been counted as communities. And while an area like Greater Cleveland most definitely has rail service, not all of the area's hundreds of neighborhoods and suburbs do.Jordan's statement originates with a credible source -- Rand McNally. And the cited data backs his claim that 80 percent of all U.S. communities depend solely on trucks to deliver and supply the products sold in stores or ordered online.But it also should be noted that Rand McNally hasnt produced the Commercial Atlas & Marketing Guide in many years, and it is that data that the American Trucking Associations used to generate the figure of 80 percent. Thats a piece of information that provides clarification.On the Truth-O-Meter, Jordans claim rates as Mostly True. One online scam that never seems to come to an end is the lie that the cast of the TV show "Shark Tank" endorsed, invested in, or provided reviews for either CBD gummies or keto gummies for weight loss. For years, scammers have used the "Shark Tank" name to push the false idea that the cast of the show invested in CBD gummies and keto gummies, even though no such episode of the show ever aired. No one on the "Shark Tank" show has anything to do with CBD gummies or keto gummies. In this story, we'll spell out everything we know about these scams. We'll also provide ways to fight back. Some readers may have seen scam ads about "Shark Tank" and keto gummies online, perhaps in Google search results or on Facebook or Instagram.Such ads also appeared in email messages, like the one shown below. These ads led to scammy articles branded with the logos of major publishers. However, those articles were written by scammers and hosted on scam websites. Here's how the seemingly legitimate-looking articles were created. Scammers copied the designs of various news websites in order to fool potential victims into thinking they were reading from the publisher's official page. In the past, scammers copied and used article layouts from ABC News, Fox News, Us Weekly, "Today," People magazine, Time magazine, and others. The articles usually claim that various celebrities including Oprah Winfrey, Ree Drummond, Kelly Clarkson, Tom Selleck, Kaley Cuoco, Melissa McCarthy, Wayne Gretzky, the cast of "Shark Tank," or others all endorsed either CBD gummies or keto gummies, even though they had no involvement with the products whatsoever. In reality, the image and likeness of each celebrity was being used without permission. Oprah Winfrey Ree Drummond Kelly Clarkson Tom Selleck Aside from the scammy ads, we often see numerous fake CBD and keto gummies reviews that use the "Shark Tank" name. These articles aren't really reviews, however. They're paid-for product pitches that appear as sponsored content. Outlook India, Tribune India, Mid-Day.com, and others all appeared to be accepting money in exchange for sponsored content articles that named "Shark Tank" alongside many different CBD and keto gummies product names. In recent months, our reporters received word from some users who said they received bags (not boxes) of CBD or keto gummies products at their doorstep, despite having no recollection of ordering the products. Some also said there was no charge on their credit card. It's unclear why people who hadn't ordered or been charged for the products were receiving them in the mail. Many of these users said that the return addresson the package was for a nameless "fulfillment center" with a P.O. box in Smyrna, Tennessee, Tampa, Florida, or Las Vegas, Nevada. Typing "fulfillment center" into Google (without quotes) displayed the first search suggestion as "fulfillment center smyrna tn," which perhaps showed just how many people were looking for help after being scammed. Unfortunately, more details about these "fulfillment center" addresses were not yet available at the time this article was published. It's unclear if anyone associated with these mailboxes or locations had any knowledge of or involvement with the scams. In the past, our reporters noticed that brand new CBD gummies and keto gummies product names popped up regularly, with no sign of a parent company or any other branding, as if such details had been omitted on purpose. It's possible that many of these products were the same and had simply been rebranded after previous product names received negative feedback. We also noticed that phone numbers on some product order pages for CBD and keto gummies are often missing or disconnected. Placing a call to any working number goes to a generic, nameless customer service phone line. When calling these lines, the person on the other end of the call declined to say the name of thecompany they worked for, nor would they give any information regarding the name of the apparent call center. One additional aspect of the "Shark Tank" CBD gummies and keto gummies scams, plus the scams that used the image and likeness of other celebrities, was that many users told us they believed they would be charged around $40 for their order, but were ultimately charged close to $200. From what we could tell, this information may have appeared in the fine print of the terms and conditions, but was not mentioned at all on product checkout pages. After having difficulties getting in touch with the phone line for the product they ordered, users consistently told us that they were offered a refund of 50%, something that apparently was a part of the call center's script. In 2022, "Shark Tank" cast member Mark Cuban tweeted about the seemingly never-ending keto gummies scams, where he railed against tech platforms that continue to accept money from scammers to allow ads to run that promote the scams. "Does anyone really think keto pills work?," Cuban asked. "Why would anyone take an ad for them with or without the fake endorsement? Where is the content filtering that we hear so much? If a platform can't detect fake keto or CBD gummy ads, can they really detect anything? Or do they not care that mostly seniors are getting ripped off!"  The official "Shark Tank" website on ABC.com also once published a page about scammers that use the show's name without authorization. page "The internet has become overrun with advertisements featuring products allegedly endorsed by 'Shark Tank' or the Sharks," the page read. "Many merchants are using the names and images of the show and the Sharks in an attempt to sell their products. Unfortunately, with every new episode comes the opportunity for imposters to use false information to exploit the unwary. While many products claim to have been on 'Shark Tank,' that is not always the case." On the subject of gummy scams, this story would not be complete without the inclusion of two past court cases. In 2021, famed film actor and director Clint Eastwood won $6.1 million in a lawsuit after alleging that a Lithuanian company had used his image and likeness without permission to promote CBD products. won In the following year, Eastwood won another lawsuit, also pertaining to a CBD promotion. That time, he won $2 million. Cannabis Law Report said that the lawsuit had been filed against "Los Angeles-based Norok Innovation Inc. and its CEO Eric Popowicz." won Cannabis Law Report If you believe you've been a victim of fraud, the U.S. Federal Trade Commission (FTC) allows users to file a report. file a report Also, if any readers find one of the scammy articles that claims "Shark Tank" or other big-name celebrities endorsed keto gummies, or find a product order page that is believed to be involved in the scam, the domain URL can be reported to its registrar. Simply visit godaddy.com/whois and type in the website address. This form will display domain registration information for the website. Look for the "Registrar Abuse Contact Email" and"Registrar Abuse Contact Phone" in order to report the website to the company that allowed it to be registered. godaddy.com/whois In recent years, we've oftenreported about these scams involving the "Shark Tank" name. We will continue to bring our readers further reporting about this subject in the future. reported about If any readers were scammed, we recommend bookmarking this page or emailing it to yourself so that you can revisit it in the future to view further updates, as we do plan on adding additional information as it becomes available. "Appeared on Shark Tank | Shark Tank." ABC, https://abc.com/shows/shark-tank/news/updates/appeared-on-shark-tank. Dillon, Nancy. "Clint Eastwood Wins $6.1 Million From 'Online Scammers' in CBD Lawsuit." Rolling Stone, 4 Oct. 2021, https://www.rollingstone.com/culture/culture-news/clint-eastwood-cbd-lawsuit-1236437/. "Eastwood Files Third Lawsuit against Los Angeles-Based Norok Innovation Inc. and Its CEO Eric Popowicz." Cannabis Law Report, 18 Jan. 2021, https://cannabislaw.report/eastwood-files-third-lawsuit-against-los-angeles-based-norok-innovation-inc-and-its-ceo-eric-popowicz/. Liles, Jordan. "Don't Bite on 'Shark Tank' Weight Loss Scam Promising '50lbs in 61 Days.'" Snopes, 30 June 2021, https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/shark-tank-weight-loss-scam/. ---. "'Shark Tank' CBD Gummies 'Reviews' on Google Are Fake." Snopes, 19 Apr. 2022, https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/shark-tank-cbd-gummies/. "WHOIS Domain Lookup - Find out Who Owns a Website." GoDaddy.Com, https://www.godaddy.com/whois/. Snopes is still fighting an infodemic of rumors and misinformation surrounding the COVID-19 pandemic, and you can help. Find out what we've learned and how to inoculate yourself against COVID-19 misinformation. Read the latest fact checks about the vaccines. Submit any questionable rumors and advice you encounter. Become a Founding Member to help us hire more fact-checkers. And, please, follow the CDC or WHO for guidance on protecting your community from the disease.  fighting Find out Read Submit Become a Founding Member CDC WHO In May 2020, a video supposedly showing Vice President Mike Pence delivering empty boxes that were supposed to be filled with personal protective equipment (PPE) to the Woodbine Rehabilitation and Healthcare Center in Alexandria, Virginia, was featured on the show "Jimmy Kimmel Live." A clip of this segment was later shared on social media along with the caption: "Mike Pence caught on hot mic delivering empty boxes of PPE for a PR stunt."  This is genuine footage of Pence. However, it does not show him "caught on hot mic" admitting that he just delivered a bunch of empty boxes to a health care facility. This video actually shows Pence making a humorous quip after delivering boxes that were truly filled with PPE.  The full video from C-Span shows Pence transporting several boxes from a truck to the door of the health care center. After unloading the boxes from his dolly, Pence returns to the truck to grab another round of boxes but is informed by someone that the remaining boxes are empty. Pence then jokes that he should carry one of the empty boxes for the cameras. The man replies with a quip of his own, saying that the empty ones are much easier to carry than the full ones, which draws laughter from the crowd. Pence then closes the van door. You can see this exchange around the 9-minute mark of the following video from C-Span: https://www.c-span.org/video/?471876-1/vice-president-pence-delivers-ppe-woodbine-rehabilitation-center We reached out to the Woodbine Rehabilitation Center to confirm that it had received PPE from the vice president. While we have yet to receive a response, the facility did post a message on Facebook to thank Pence and his team: Facebook   Jon Thompson, a spokesperson for the vice president, called the claim that Pence was delivering empty boxes "absolute garbage" in a tweet: tweet     Coleman, Justine.  "Pence Delivers PPE to Alexandria Nursing Home."
  The Hill.  7 May 2020. C-Span.  "Vice President Pence Delivers PPE to Woodbine Rehabilitation Center."
  7 May 2020. A child's kidnapping in Nigeria in late 2016 was erroneously said to have occurred in Houston, Texas, in posts that began circulating online in May 2017. online The post featured a picture of a child identified as five-year-old Anibe Alexandra Odoma and stated: She was kidnapped last night by unknown persons.She's from Houston TexasPls [sic] help me forward to / share with as many people as you can. Forwarded as received This happened last night.Pls help anyway you canAt least spread the picturePls let's be carefulShe went to open the door bell inher home yesterday and she wastakenHer family hasn't slept, they arewaiting for a phone callNone has come in yetHer mother has to be sedated this morning, she still isn't sleepingKindly spread   Neither the Houston Police Department nor the National Center for Missing & Exploited Children have a record matching Anibe's description. However, the same picture also circulated in December 2016 attached to a story about an abduction in the Nigerian city of Abuja on 11 December 2016, which also included two phone numbers for people to call if they had information:   Two days later the news web site CKN Nigeria reported that the girl had been rescued. We called one of the phone numbers seen in the original post concerning her disappearance and a man identifying himself as her father told us that she was safe. reported CKN Nigeria. "Kidnapped Girl Rescued In Abuja."
13 December 2016. Claim:  Protest against federal spending encourages Americans to mail tea bags to the White House.  Example:  [Collected via e-mail, March 2009] Mailing Tea Bags to Washington, DC What a wonderful idea, I just wish it had been mine. I have a feeling that USPS is going to have a hell of a lot of tea to contend with, after all it only costs 42 cents to send a message, hopefully heard round the world!!! So please mark your Calendars There's a storm abrewin'. What happens when good, responsible people keep quiet? Washington has forgotten they work for us. We don't work for them. Throwing good money after bad is NOT the answer. I am sick of the midnight, closed door sessions to come up with a plan. I am sick of Congress raking CEO's over the coals while they, themselves, have defaulted on their taxes. I am sick of the bailed out companies having lavish vacations and retreats on my dollar. I am sick of being told it is MY responsibility to rescue people that, knowingly, bought more house than they could afford. I am sick of being made to feel it is my patriotic duty to pay MORE taxes. I, like all of you, am a responsible citizen. I pay my taxes. I live on a budget and I don't ask someone else to carry the burden for poor decisions I may make. I have emailed my congressmen and senators asking them to NOT vote for the stimulus package as it was written without reading it first. No one listened. They voted for it, pork and all. O.K. folks, here it is. You may think you are just one voice and what you think won't make a difference. Well, yes it will and YES, WE CAN!! If you are disgusted and angry with the way Washington is handling our taxes. If you are fearful of the fallout from the reckless spending of BILLIONS to bailout and "stimulate" without accountability and responsibility then we need to become ONE, LOUD VOICE THAT CAN BE HEARD FROM EVERY CITY, TOWN, SUBURB AND HOME IN AMERICA. There is a growing protest to demand that Congress, the President and his cabinet LISTEN to us, the American Citizens. What is being done in Washington is NOT the way to handle the economic free fall. So, here's the plan. On April 1, 2009, all Americans are asked to send a TEABAG to Washington, D.C. You do not have to enclose a note or any other information unless you so desire. Just a TEABAG. Many cities are organizing protests. If you simply search, "New American Tea Party", several sites will come up. If you aren't the 'protester' type, simply make your one voice heard with a TEABAG. Your one voice will become a roar when joined with millions of others that feel the same way. Yes, something needs to be done but the lack of confidence as shown by the steady decline in the stock market speaks volumes. This was not my idea. I visited the sites of the 'New American Tea Party' and an online survey showed over 90% of thousands said they would send the teabag on April 1. Why, April 1?? We want them to reach Washington by April 15. Will you do it? I will. Send it to; 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. Washington, D.C. 20500. Forward this to everyone in your address book. Visit the website for more information about the 'New American Tea Party'. I would encourage everyone to go ahead and get the envelope ready to mail, then just drop it in the mail April 1. Can't guarantee what the postage will be by then, it is going up as we speak, but have your envelope ready. What will this cost you? A little time and a 40 something cent stamp.. What could you receive in benefits? Maybe, just maybe, our elected officials will start to listen to the people. Take out the Pork. Tell us how the money is being spent. We want TRANSPARENCY AND ACCOUNTABILITY. Remember, the money will be spent over the next 4-5 years. It is not too late. Of course, if you agree with the way things are being done now, just delete!!!!! Origins:   On the evening of 16 December 1773, a group of American colonists who called themselves "The Sons of Liberty" furtively boarded the ship Dartmouth, which was docked in Boston harbor with a load of East India Company tea.  Working  through the night, the colonists dumped over 45 tons of tea into the waters of the harbor as a protest against the Tea Act passed by the British government.  The event, which came to be known as "The Boston Tea Party," was one of the seminal events of the American Revolution and remains one of the most iconic moments in all of U.S. history. In 2009, the iconic status of that event was referenced in the name of the New American Tea Party, described as a "coalition of citizens and organizations concerned about the recent trend of fiscal recklessness in government" who have begun coordinating events around the U.S. with the announced goal of protesting largesse in federal spending.   The item quoted above seeks to take up the "Tea Party" spirit by encouraging Americans to mail tea bags to the White House on 1 April 2009 (in order to arrive by 15 April, the day on which income tax filings are due) as a form of symbolic protest against "the way Washington is handling our taxes."  (The concept is vaguely reminiscent of a 1955 campaign that had citizens mailing small bags of wheat to President Eisenhower to encourage the U.S. to provide surplus food to flood victims in China.) New American Tea Party events wheat Of course, everyone is free to choose whether or not to participate in symbolic protests, so such actions don't have much in the way of verifiable "true" or "false" aspects  the only issue is how effective the chosen form of protest is likely to be.  With that in mind, we offer a few caveats for those inclined to participate:  An entry in the New American Tea Party blog states that they don't endorse the effort: entry We have received hundreds of questions about an email circulating that urges folks to send tea to Washington on April 1st or April 15th.  This effort is not endorsed by the New American Tea Party, so we can't answer any questions about it.  Given the more stringent security procedures for mail handling enacted after 9/11, there are no guarantees envelopes containing mailed teabags will get through to the White House without being discarded or significantly delayed, something also noted in the New American Tea Party blog: It is a neat idea, but things like that will likely either be held up getting scanned or end up getting thrown away due to security precautions. (A subsequent New American Tea Party blog entry suggested that just mailing the labels from tea bags might be a way of avoiding this potential pitfall.) entry  Envelopes that cannot be run through USPS sorting machines are subject to an additional 20 postage surcharge. A mailed item is considered  nonmachinable if: nonmachinable  It is a square letter (the minimum size for a square envelope is 5 x 5 inches) It is too rigid  does not bend easily It has clasps, string, buttons, or similar closure devices It has an address parallel to the shorter dimension of the letter It contains items that cause the surface to be uneven The length divided by height is less than 1.3 or more than 2.5  The specific aims of the tea bag protest are not clearly articulated in the e-mail quoted above, so senders might wish to include explanatory notes with their envelopes stating the desired outcome, such as: "I enclose this teabag as a protest against the passage of any further economic stimulus packages that provide money to businesses without provisions for strict transparency and accountability in how that money is to be spent" or  "I enclose this teabag as a protest against the passage of any further economic stimulus packages that include earmarks." Last updated:  12 March 2009    Idaho Statesman.  "Local Group Stages 'Reckless Federal Spending' Protest."   27 February 2009.    WJXT-TV [Jacksonville, FL].  "'Tea Party' Protests Wasteful Spending."   MSNBC.  2 March 2009. Do three Americans really have more wealth than half the country? Its a claim made by the runner-up for the 2016 Democratic nomination for president,Bernie Sanders. Campaigningon July 14, 2018 for U.S. Sen.Tammy Baldwin, D-Wis., Sanderstold a crowdin Eau Claire: The three wealthiest people own more wealth than the bottom half of the American people. The U.S. senator, an independent from Vermont, previously made the claimon Facebookand repeated it three days after his Wisconsin appearance in a column inUSA Today. What we found is the wealth lead enjoyed by the three billionaires is even larger than what Sanders said. Like us on Facebook. Follow us on Twitter:@PolitiFactWisc. A study Before we dig in, an important note about the nations wealth gap: Many Americans make a good income, have some savings and investments, and own a nice home; they also have debt, for a mortgage, credit cards and other bills. The result is, even some people with relatively healthy incomes, as well as many poorer people, have a negative net worth. To back Sanders claim, his campaign pointed us to a November 2017news articlein Forbes. The business magazine reported ona studypublished that month by the Institute for Policy Studies, which the article described as a left-leaning think tank in Washington, D.C. The study, which advocates for reducing wealth inequality, also gained news coverage fromUSA TodayandThe Guardian. And its authors wrote opinion articles about it forNewsweekand theLos Angeles Times. The numbers The study used data from Forbes 2017 ranking of the 400 richest Americans; and data for the rest of the country from the 2016 Federal Reserve Survey of Consumer Finances, which the study says has become widely accepted as the most comprehensive government dataset documenting household wealth. PolitiFact has alsoreliedonthisFed survey in our wealth fact checks. The first finding the study reported was this: The three wealthiest people in the United States now own more wealth than the entire bottom half of the American population combined, a total of 160 million people. Those individuals and their source of wealth are, according to the study: 1.Bill Gates, Microsoft: $89 billion 2. Jeff Bezos, Amazon: $81.5 billion 3.Warren Buffett, Berkshire Hathaway: $78 billion Thats a total of $248.5 billion. The wealth of the bottom 160 million was $245 billion, the Institute for Policy Studies'Josh Hoxietold us. Thats a gap of $3.5 billion. Hoxie, a former a aide to Sanders, also pointed out that the wealth of the three billionaires has ballooned to $330 billion, according to Forbeslatest estimate. We dont have an updated estimate for the bottom 160 million American, as the Fed survey is done only once every three years. But Hoxie said its nearly impossible that the wealth of Americans at the bottom has grown nearly as much as that of the three billionaires. For the 160 million people at the bottom of the scale, by the way, the study used the net worth figure reported by the Fed and then subtracted automobiles and other durable goods such as electronics, furniture, and household appliances, from that figure. Subtracting durable goods from net worth offers us a more accurate depiction of household wealth as these items are not easily sellable and neither appreciate nor hold constant their value, the study says. Other viewpoints More fact checks on wealth inequality Michael Moore, in 2011: Just 400 Americans -- 400 -- have more wealth than half of all Americans combined.True. One Wisconsin Now, in 2013: The Walton family, which owns Wal-Mart, controls a fortune equal to the wealth of the bottom 42 percent of Americans combined.True. Starbucks, in 2015: White people control almost 90 percent of the nation's wealth.True. The studys methodology is sound and its conclusion cited by Sanders is accurate, according toAbdur Chowdhury, an emeritus economics professor at Marquette University in Milwaukee, and economics professorEmmanuel Saez, director of the Center for Equitable Growth at the University of California, Berkeley. As an aside, well note that Saez also said Sanders claim is somewhat meaningless. The meaningful thing to say, Saez told us, is the bottom half of the U.S. families owns essentially no wealth on net, because debts cancel out whatever small assets they may have, on average. Our rating Sanders says: The three wealthiest people own more wealth than the bottom half of the American people. The wealth of Gates, Bezos and Buffett exceeded that of the 160 million at the bottom of the scale, according to a 2017 study. And more recent estimates indicate the wealth of the three has since grown dramatically, widening the gap even more. We rate Sanders statement True.