No, Magic Johnson Didn't Donate Blood to the Red Cross
On Aug. 18, 2022, a Twitter user named @cocksources tweeted a picture that appeared to show former NBA superstar Magic Johnson giving blood. The caption in the tweet read, "Earlier today, NBA legend Magic Johnson donated some of his blood to the Red Cross to help underprivileged communities help fight COVID-19."  tweeted Why would this be news of interest? Johnson announced his retirement from the NBA in 1991 after testing positive for HIV. announced his retirement Despite the tweet, the truth was that @cocksources publishes satire, which meant that the news wasn't real. The Twitter account's bio said that part of its mission was "spreading narratives with misinformation (satire)." bio  Five days later, Johnson addressed the satirical news, tweeting, "Im aware of the false story circling the internet, and to be clear, I have never donated blood." addressed  According to the TinEye reverse image search website, the oldest posting of the picture was in an article from 2013 on 24ur.com. The story said that the photograph had already raised eyebrows on Twitter years before and that it simply showed Johnson "undergoing a medical examination" in the 2012 documentary, "Endgame: AIDS in Black America." TinEye reverse image search website article Twitter Johnson  We previously reported on this photo back in 2015, when a different misleading rumor said it showed Johnson donating blood for leukemia and lymphoma patients. reported In sum, no, Johnson wasn't donating blood to the Red Cross to help underprivileged communities help fight COVID-19, nor did the picture show him donating blood at all. Red Cross Dvignil Prah: HIV Pozitiven Magic Johnson Daroval Kri? 24ur.com, 26 Mar. 2013, https://www.24ur.com/ekskluziv/tuja-scena/dvignil-prah-hiv-pozitiven-magic-johnson-daroval-kri.html. Nadel, John. AP Was There: Magic Announces He Has HIV, Retires from NBA. AP News, 23 Feb. 2022, https://apnews.com/article/los-angeles-lakers-nba-entertainment-sports-health-d51716031d2641c7e58957e9ef9da718. TinEye. https://tineye.com/.
During the Republican presidential debate in North Charleston, S.C., Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, took aim at the nations economic record under President Barack Obama. The millionaires and billionaires are doing great under Obama, Cruz said. But we have the lowest percentage of Americans working today of any year since 1977. Median wages have stagnated. And the Obama-Clinton economy has left behind the working men and women of this country. We decided to fact-check Cruzs statement that we have the lowest percentage of Americans working today since 1977. Cruz is on to something. One key employment statistic known as the civilian labor force participation rate is at its lowest level since the 1970s. This statistic takes the number of Americans in the labor force -- basically, those who are either employed or who are seeking employment and divides it by the total civilian population. Heres a chart going back to the mid 1970s. When the civilian labor force participation rate is low, its a concern, because it means there are fewer working Americans to support non-working Americans. But well offer two asterisks for Cruzs statement. First, as wevenoted before, a notable factor in the decline of the labor-force participation rate is the aging of the Baby Boom generation. As more adults begin moving into retirement age, the percentage of Americans who work is bound to decline. When we last looked at this question in 2013, Gary Burtless, a Brookings Institution economist, told us he had estimated that the labor-force participation rate would have fallen in recent years on the basis of aging alone. That said, Cruz has a point that the recession exacerbated that decline. In a weak job market, some people who might otherwise want a job may return to school, become full-time parents or retire early. Second, theres another way to read Cruzs words. He said the lowest percentage of Americans working since 1977, which could also refer to a different statistic, the employment-population ratio. This statistic takes the number of people who are employed and divides it by the civilian population age 16 and above. The difference in this case is that using the employment-population ratio, Cruzs statement is incorrect. Unlike the labor-force participation rate, the employment-population ratio has actually been improving in recent years, although its below its pre-recession highs. Heres a chart showing this statistic over the same time frame:  If you exclude the Great Recession, the employment-population ratio was last at its current rate in 1984, not 1977. So by that measurement, hes close. Our ruling Cruz said, We have the lowest percentage of Americans working today of any year since 1977. Hes put his finger on a trend that worries economists of all stripes, but his wording was sloppy. In addition, its worth remembering that this particular trend is being driven at least to a degree by demographic trends beyond the control of any president. We rate the claim Mostly True. State schools superintendent Tony Evers, the Democratic challenger facing Gov. Scott Walker, has pledged to seek$606.1 million increasein funding for special education programs, which would bring funding for such services to $900 million by 2021. School districts have a legal obligation to kids with disabilities, and they are required to provide those services, Evers said when he made the announcement. That, in turn, puts pressure on the rest of the school budget. Its time to change that momentum. States use different methods to allocate special education funds. Wisconsin is one of five that reimburse schools for the costs incurred for educating special-needs students. It is considered categorical aid -- that is, based on a category outside of the regular funding formula. According to areport from the state Department of Public Instruction: This categorical aid is the states primary direct fund source to recognize the additional costs of educating pupils with disabilities. This critical aid program has widespread statewide impact providing funding for all pupils with disabilities, approximately 14 percent of Wisconsin pupils, providing equal benefit across all school districts. Evers request would more than double the state reimbursement rate for school districts special education costs, from 27 percent to 60 percent by 2019. Were going to add $600 million to special education categorical aid; it hasnt been raised in over a decade, Evers said at a primary election forum broadcast Aug. 16, 2018, byWRRD Resistance RadioDevils Advocates. Is Evers right? The evidence When asked about special education funding, a spokesman for the state Department of Public Instruction directed PolitiFact Wisconsin to theWisconsin Legislative Fiscal Bureau, a nonpartisan entity considered the gold standard on state budget matters. According to the fiscal bureau, in the 2006-2007 budget, the number was just over $350 million. In every year since then, the total has been just under $369 million -- $368,939,100, to be exact. Abdur Chowdhury, Marquette University Department of Economics Professor Emeritus, said inflation in the U.S. from 2007-18 averaged between 1 percent and 2 percent. Thus, he said, in later years, you need to provide more nominal aid in order to be equal to real aid in the early years. So, to keep up with inflation, the$368,939,100in fiscal year 2007 aid would have to have amounted to this much in subsequent years: 2008-09 -- $381,741,700 2009-10 -- $388,003,320 2010-11-- $400,250,755 2011-12 -- $408,533,744 2012-13 -- $414,517,781 2013-14 -- $421,242,038 2014-15 -- $421,742,043 2015-16 -- $427,062,373 2016-17 -- $436,160,315 At the same time, the report notes that while costs have increased, Wisconsin has experienced adecrease in special education enrollmentsince fiscal year 2007: 2007-2008 -- 124,520 2008-2009 -- 123,734 2009-2010 -- 123,412 2010-2011 -- 122,763 2011-2012 -- 121,881 2012-2013 -- 121,378 2013-2014 -- 120,698 2014-2015 -- 118,601 2015-2016 -- 118,923 2016 -2017 -- 118,209 That represents an enrollment drop of 5.07 percent from 2007-08 to 2016-17. The enrollment counts for 2018-19 are not final, but they are expected to again decrease. So, all this raises a question about what has happened with the per-student average -- and whether that has kept up with inflation. According to the Department of Public Instruction, special education costs per pupil in 2008-09 was $10,388, with the state on average paying $2,981, or nearly 29 percent per pupil. In 2018, the estimated cost per pupil is at $12,084, with the state on average paying $3,140, or nearly 26 percent per pupil. So, had the per-pupil amount being paid by the state kept pace with inflation, it would be an estimated$3,489.18in 2018, not the projected $3,140. A DPI spokesman pointed out that the per pupil figures are just special education costs, and those ride on top of regular education costs. The Walker team When asked about Evers claim, Walker campaign spokesman Austin Altenburg pointed PolitiFact Wisconsin to Walker education initiatives that feature targeted aid in the form of grants and other avenues for special education students: Altenburg did not say whether he was arguing these programs more than make up for the lack of increase in the main aid program. In any case, Evers was talking about the main categorical state aid for education, and that is what we are focusing on here. Our rating Evers said special education categorical aid from the state hasnt been raised in over a decade. The Walker administration has launched several initiatives that feature targeted aid in the form of grants for special education students, but the special education categorical aid continues to be set at nearly $369 million. Data shows a per-pupil increase in raw dollars paid by the state, from $2,981, or 28.6 percent, per pupil in 2008 to an estimated $3,140, or 25.98 percent, paid per pupil in 2018. But that increase is more than eaten away byinflation. And the state is paying a lower share of the cost per pupil. We rate Evers statement Mostly True. As controversy raged over racially motivated violence and law enforcement policies in the United States, a persistent rumor regarding the origins of 21st-century policing appeared online. It showed up, as such things tend to do, in meme form:   But how accurate is this? And where did the concept of police as de facto executors of justice (rather than peacekeepers) originate? Law enforcement has always existed in one form or another. The first constables (from the Roman comes stabuli, or "head of the stables") with duties very similar to today's sheriffs, were around at least since the 9th century, and traveled to the Americas from Europe to supplant the systems that existed there at the time in the 1600s. The Encyclopedia of Police Science delves into the history of constables in the colonies:  history In the American colonies the constable was the first law enforcement officer. His duties varied from place to place according to the needs of the people he served. Usually, the constable sealed weights and measures, surveyed land, announced marriages, and executed all warrants. Additionally, he meted out physical punishments and kept the peace.  The informal and communal system known as "the Watch" worked (more or less efficiently) on a volunteer basis in the early colonies; there were also private policing systems for hire that functioned on a for-profit basis. As populations grew, so did demands for more functional system of policing towns and cities. Volunteers would often show up to their posts drunk or not at all, and the systems were disorganized or hopelessly corrupt.  posts According to Gary Potter, a crime historian at Eastern Kentucky University, a centralized, bureaucratic police system did not emerge until well into the 1800s, but was quickly adopted by cities around the country: Gary Potter It was not until the 1830s that the idea of a centralized municipal police department first emerged in the United States. In 1838, the city of Boston established the first American police force, followed by New York City in 1845, Albany, NY and Chicago in 1851, New Orleans and Cincinnati in 1853, Philadelphia in 1855, and Newark, NJ and Baltimore in 1857 (Harring 1983, Lundman 1980; Lynch 1984). By the 1880s all major U.S. cities had municipal police forces in place. These "modern police" organizations shared similar characteristics: (1) they were publicly supported and bureaucratic in form; (2) police officers were full-time employees, not community volunteers or case-by-case fee retainers; (3) departments had permanent and fixed rules and procedures, and employment as a police officers was continuous; (4) police departments were accountable to a central governmental authority (Lundman 1980). More than a hundred years earlier, in 1704, the colony of Carolina developed the fledgling United States' first slave patrol. The patrol consisted of roving bands of armed white citizens who would stop, question, and punish slaves caught without a permit to travel. They were civil organizations, controlled and maintained by county courts. The way the patrols were organized and maintained provided a later framework for preventive (rather than reactive) community policing, particularly in the South:  courts Policing had always been a reactive enterprise, occurring only in response to a specific criminal act. Centralized and bureaucratic police departments, focusing on the alleged crime-producing qualities of the "dangerous classes" began to emphasize preventative crime control. The presence of police, authorized to use force, could stop crime before it started by subjecting everyone to surveillance and observation. The concept of the police patrol as a preventative control mechanism routinized the insertion of police into the normal daily events of everyone's life, a previously unknown and highly feared concept in both England and the United States (Parks 1976). Patrols in the northern U.S. also became useful for breaking up labor strikes before they became too destructive (Marxist political historian Eric Hobsbawm referred to the mechanisms of violence and destruction of property to agitate for better working conditions as "collective bargaining by riot") and these services became increasingly utilized as the country became more populated and conditions simultaneously grew more difficult for the United States' restive economic underclasses.  labor strikes Eric Hobsbawm destruction In fact, police duties since the 1800s can be easily traced along the ebb and flow of political pressures as well as social issues:  issues In 1822, for example, Charleston, South Carolina, experienced a slave insurrection panic, caused by a supposed plot of slaves and free blacks to seize the city. In response, the State legislature passed the Negro Seamen's Act, requiring free black seamen to remain on board their vessels while in Carolina harbors. If they dared to leave their ships, the police were instructed to arrest them and sell them into slavery unless they were redeemed by the ship's master.  Similarly, patrols such as the Mounted Guards (forerunners to what eventually became the Border Patrol) were put in place to maintain minority quotas, among other things:  minority quotas Mounted watchmen of the U.S. Immigration Service patrolled the border in an effort to prevent illegal crossings as early as 1904, but their efforts were irregular and undertaken only when resources permitted. The inspectors, usually called Mounted Guards, operated out of El Paso, Texas. Though they never totaled more than seventy-five, they patrolled as far west as California trying to restrict the flow of illegal Chinese immigration. In March 1915, Congress authorized a separate group of Mounted Guards, often referred to as Mounted Inspectors. Most rode on horseback, but a few operated cars and even boats. Although these inspectors had broader arrest authority, they still largely pursued Chinese immigrants trying to avoid the Chinese exclusion laws. Modern law enforcement evolved out of complex brew of a larger population, shifting sociopolitical class boundaries, and other external issues (such as the labor pressures that created an unhappy underclass) and a shift in the way policing was regarded by business owners and the population at large: proactive rather than reactive.  However, it is important to note that "the police" do not consist of a homogenous block of the American population, and while the early days of modern-day police forces are undeniable and under-covered facets of its history, the focus and perspective of policing is a complicated and fraught subject. It would be a mistake to assume that police in 2016 are the same as police in the 1870s, and to conclude that the profile of law enforcement in the United States  and around the world  has not changed throughout its existence. It would also be a mistake to assume that law enforcement cannot or will not be changed again in response to popular pressure, given that its focus has varied dramatically since its inception.  Greene, Jack R. (ed.)
 The Encyclopedia of Police Science, Third Edition.   Routledge: New York. 2007. Harring, Sidney L., and McMullin, Lorraine M.  "TheBuffalo Police18721900: Labor Unrest, Political Power and the Creation of the Police Institution."
 Crime and Social Justice 4: 5-14. 1975. Kelling, George L. and Moore, Mark H.  "The Evolving Strategy of Policing."
 National Institute of Justice.  November 1988.
  Potter, Gary. "The History of Policing in the United States, Parts 1-6."
  Eastern Kentucky University, Police Studies Online.  July 2013. Williams, Hubert and Murphy, Patrick V.  "The Evolving Strategy of Police: A Minority View."  National Institute of Justice. January 1990. Voting in the 2020 U.S. Election may be over, but the misinformation keeps on ticking. Never stop fact-checking. Follow our post-election coverage here. here On Sept. 27, 2020, The New York Times published a report after obtaining several years of U.S. President Donald Trump's tax returns. published a report As news broke that Trump had paid just $750 in federal income tax in 2016 and 2017  no federal income taxes in 10 of the past 15 years  in addition to the fact that he took an approximate $70,000 deduction for hairstyling during "The Apprentice," and that he has more than $300 million worth of loans coming due, a rumor started to circulate on social media that White House senior adviser Jared Kushner had quietly deleted all of his tweets from his Twitter account: no federal income taxes   This rumor is false. Kushner didn't delete all of his tweets following the NYT article about Trump's taxes.  The above-displayed tweet contains a genuine screenshot of the @JaredKushner Twitter account. This account has been online since 2009, but it has been used sparingly by its owner. Archived pages show that this account posted three messages back in March 2011  none of which was related to taxes  but was then inactive for at least three years. The few messages that were posted to this account were deleted sometime between 2014 and 2016, and no new messages have been posted since then.  JaredKushner March 2011 at least three years In other words, Kushner didn't wipe his Twitter account clean on the evening of Sept. 27 after the NYT published a story about his father-in-law's taxes. This account rarely posts tweets, and the three tweets that were shared to the account in 2011 (again, none of which were related to taxes) were deleted years ago.  This isn't the first time that someone has stumbled across Kushner's Twitter account in the aftermath of a controversy, noticed that it was barren, and then incorrectly assumed that Kushner had recently scrubbed it clean. In October 2017, shortly after Special Counsel Robert S. Mueller III revealed charges against former Trump presidential campaign chair Paul Manafort and two other campaign officials, social media users noted then that Kushner's Twitter account was suspiciously void of content, and falsely claimed that he had recently deleted all of his tweets. falsely claimed A few months later, when it was reported that Mueller may have interviewed Kushner in the course of his investigation into Russia's meddling in the 2016 presidential election, this false rumor again was circulated on social media:  reported   The @JaredKushner account has been devoid of content since at least 2016. Claims that he recently deleted his tweets in the wake of breaking news stories are false.  Apuzzo, Matt.  "Muellers Prosecutors Are Said to Have Interviewed Jared Kushner on Russia Meeting."
  The New York Times.  29 November 2017. Buettner, Russ; Craig, Susanne; McIntire, Mike.  "Long-Concealed Records Show Trump's Chronic Losses and Years of Tax Avoidance."
  The New York Times.  27 September 2020. Having lost his early lead in the delegate count to Joe Biden, Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., has a lot riding on his appeal to blue-collar workers. Speaking days ahead of the Michigan primary on NBCs Meet the Press, Sanders said his opposition to major trade deals marked a sharp difference between him and Biden, the former Delaware senator and vice president. Trade agreements like NAFTA and permanent normal trade relations with China, which forced American workers to compete against people making pennies an hour, have resulted in the loss of 160,000 jobs here in Michigan, Sanderssaid from Grand Rapids on March 8. I helped lead the effort, as you may recall, against these disastrous trade agreements. I worked with the unions, not with the CEOs of large corporations. On the other hand, Joe Biden strongly supported these agreements. While he voiced some reservations at the time, Biden voted for both bills  the North American Free Trade Agreement in 1993, and normalization of trade with China in 2000. In this fact-check, we look at whether the two agreements cost Michigan 160,000 jobs. Teasing out the impact of trade deals can be difficult. Theres lots going on in the economy regardless of tariff agreements, including the 2008-09 financial crisis that plunged two of Detroits hometown auto companies into bankruptcy. But overall, studies back up Sanders claim. Sanders point hinges on trade with two countries, Mexico and China. But of the two, U.S. trade with China was much larger, and with that came a bigger impact. The studies Sanders relied on estimated Michigans job losses at nearly 44,000 (as of 2010)due to NAFTA, and about112,000 due to China(as of 2018). Well get to those estimates in just a bit, but add them together and you get 156,000, which is essentially Sanders number. But first, focusing just on China, thelatest research by a group of economists from four universitiesoffers a broad picture of what took place after 2000 when the United States gave it permanent normal trade status. The groups study doesnt put a number to Michigans losses, but it does highlight its struggles. Interestingly, the study found that the ultimate effect on jobs nationwide was neutral, neither a gain nor a loss. But among regions of the country, the upheaval was substantial. Both the type of jobs and the location of jobs shifted. Chinese competition reallocated employment from manufacturing to services, and from the U.S. heartland to the coasts, the report said. A Midwest state like Michigan was on the losing end of the deal. This research dug down to the level of individual companies and found that large multinational companies offshored manufacturing jobs and expanded service jobs, in areas such as research and management, in the U.S. The study also found that the China effect disappeared after 2007. We find strong employment impacts from 2000 to 2007, but nothing since from 2008 to 2015, the authors wrote. Sanders is correct that both NAFTA and permanent normal trade relations with China exposed Michigan to competition from factories that paid their workers much less and spent less on worker safety and environmental protection. But the manufacturing employment numbers reveal one of the challenges to drawing quick conclusions on the impact of the two trade deals. The job numbers show different paths after passage of each trade agreement. (Passage of trade bills is marked in red.) After NAFTA, the number of manufacturing jobs rose to 888,000. After the China deal, the number fell to 638,000 (as of 2006 and before the Great Recession), a decline of 250,000 jobs. The raw numbers support the idea that the China impact was great. For NAFTA, the analysis is more complicated. Economist Susan Houseman at the Upjohn Institute for Employment Research in Kalamazoo, Mich., said those rising manufacturing job numbers after NAFTA passed dont tell the whole story. She said the studies Sanders used are valid. The country was experiencing record job growth in the 1990s, so you wouldnt necessarily expect the number of manufacturing jobs to fall, Houseman said. Rather you might expect for them to grow more slowly. The fraction of all jobs that were in manufacturing did fall by one percentage point between 1993 and 2000, suggesting that NAFTA did more for sectors other than manufacturing. Houseman also said that the NAFTA impacts would play out over time, as companies built new plants in Mexico, something that could not happen overnight. The analysis Sanders relied on came from economist Robert Scott at the Economic Policy Institute, a left-leaning think tank. For NAFTA, Scott took the rising U.S.-Mexico trade deficit and teased out how that translated into job effects at the state level. Between 1993 and 2010, and accounting for the Great Recession, Scott found a loss of 43,600 jobs in Michigan. Houseman said that is a conservative figure. The types of calculations in this, if anything, may understate job losses, she said. I dont believe there is any basis for calling the Sanders claim of job losses for Michigan wrong. The primary caveat for Scotts estimate is that its for 2010, which is a decade ago. Michigans manufacturing sector has recovered a bit since then. However, for workers who lost their jobs during the first decade of the 2000s, the disruption was real. And even after rebounding, manufacturing remains well short of where it stood before NAFTA. Multiplestudies also lend weight to Scotts overall findings of the impact on the Midwest from trade with China. Research by economistsJustin Pierce at the Federal Reserve and Peter Schott at YaleUniversity, suggests over 1 million jobs nationwide have been lost due to trade with China. Some economists argue that productivity gains played a major role in displacing manufacturing jobs, but recent work casts doubt on how productivity has been calculated. Studies of the impact of automation find that it has been significant, but muchless than competition from China. The latest studies go to great lengths to filter out the various factors that have shaped jobs in states like Michigan, and the trade deals emerge as a potent force. Sanders said that NAFTA and normalized trade with China cost Michigan 160,000 jobs. The studies he cited produced nearly that result. While precision is challenging, one economist said if anything, those studies underestimate the job loss due to trade. We found four studies that concluded that both trade agreements hurt the manufacturing sector in Midwest states like Michigan. We rate this claim Mostly True. On 27 October 2018, a Facebook account bearing the face of controversial 19th-century Canadian Prime Minister John H. Macdonald shared a post that alleged two facts about Cesar Sayoc, the accused perpetrator of several attempted mail bombings: that he used to work as a stripper, and that he was long known to support Obama during that time: controversial post   It is unclear what the author of this post meant to imply by combining the fact that Sayoc worked in strip clubs with the false assertion that he was an Obama supporter, but of the two claims raised, there is only support for the first. In the days following Sayocs arrest, several media outlets attempted to profile the man who had covered his live-in van with Trump memes and sent what appeared to be pipe bombs to Trumps political and media opponents. These profiles describe a directionless individual who worked at strip clubs in various capacities throughout his life, but who only found a political awakening in the run-up to the 2016 presidential election, when he became a supporter of President Trump. several media outlets Was Cesar Sayoc a Stripper? Several individuals have stated that Cesar Sayoc has not only been employed at strip clubs, but worked as a stripper himself. Ohio event promoter Tony Valentine told the Washington Examiner that he hired Cesar Sayoc to strip on multiple occasions during the 1990s and that Sayoc, now 56, traveled the country for similar appearances. told "He really couldn't find his niche in life, and I guess he found it now," Valentine told the Washington Examiner. "Back in the '90s, he was running around from Minnesota to the Carolinas to Florida. He was like a gypsy." For two months in 2004, according to a profile in the New York Times, Sayoc was married to a woman who was also a stripper. That womans mother told the Times that the two went on the circuit together as dancers: profile He had a short-lived marriage to a woman identified in court papers as Roberta Altieri that ended in divorce in Oklahoma City in 2004, according to court records. Billie Mode, the mother of his ex-wife, said the couple worked in strip clubs and were married just two months. They were dancers, Ms. Mode said. They went on the circuit together. According to Valentine (the event promoter who had worked with Sayoc in the 1990s), he had heard that, as of about five years ago, Sayoc was working as an employee at a female strip club while performing on the side at an all-male strip club in Florida. More recently, he has appeared in posts on the Facebook page "Chippen Fellas," apparently run by Sayoc himself to promote his Hard Rock International Entertainment brand. This page advertised all-male shows and in one instance included a dated picture of someone who appears to be Sayoc alongside more recent photos of younger men. It is unclear whether he ever performed with this group or merely served as a manager: appeared   According to the Times, Sayoc showed up to work as a DJ at a West Palm Beach strip club named Ultra the day before he was arrested. work Did Sayoc Support Obama and Other Democrats In The Past? There is no evidence to support the claim that Sayoc, who sent a pipe bomb to the Obama family, ever supported President Obama. Sayoc registered to vote as a Republican in Florida on 4 March 2016, just ahead of the March 2016 Republican primary, according to the Associated Press. Some have attempted to use doctored images from a MyLife.com background check to assert he was a registered Democrat, but this claim is not rooted in reality. A check of the official Florida voter registry indicates he is currently registered as a Republican. according doctored images voter registry By all accounts, Sayoc lived a fairly apolitical life leading up to the 2016 presidential election. Ronald Lowy, a lawyer for the Sayoc family who represented Cesar during a 2002 case in which he threatened to bomb an electric company over a bill he disputed, told the Times that although Sayocs family members were Democrats, Cesar himself seemed to have no outspoken partisan views during the 2002 case. told Lowys recollection jibes with what a different lawyer, Daniel Lurvey (who represented Sayoc against theft charges in 2013 and 2014), remembers of the mans political leanings. He told the Washington Examiner that he could not recall Sayoc ever discussing politics. Instead, it appears that Sayocs chief interests during this time were bodybuilding and wrestling: told When they first met [over the 2002 bomb threat case], Mr. Lowy said, Mr. Sayoc brought in a scrapbook filled with notes and photographs he had collected from wrestlers, bodybuilders and strippers, table scraps from a world that he idolized. He comes across like a 15-year-old, Mr. Lowy said. He has a total lack of maturity. [...] He said that Mr. Trumps angry rhetoric and his appeals to the forgotten man and woman during the 2016 campaign seemed to strike a deep chord with Mr. Sayoc, whose father had abandoned the family when he was a child. By 2015, it became clear that Sayoc was an outspoken and enthusiastic Trump supporter. That year, In what may have been an effort to make a false insurance claim, he reported to police that $45,000 worth of suits and costumes he needed for his business were stolen from his van. According to the Times, that police report noted that of the 139 pieces he said were taken, 11 were the presidents clothing brand. According Sayoc also attended a Brevard College alumni event with members of his college soccer team that year, during which he quickly made clear he was a fanatical supporter of Mr. Trump, and bombarded them with racist and misogynist conspiracy theories. Two managers at a pizza shop where Sayoc worked in 2017 recall the man making racist remarks while explicitly attacking President Obama and praising President Trump: He loved Adolf Hitler; he talked about Adolf Hitler a lot, said Debra Gureghian, 56, a manager at the Fort Lauderdale pizza shop where Mr. Sayoc worked for about a year in 2017. He would say, I like his politics, we should have more people like him. Mr. Sayoc went on paranoid, racist screeds, saying that blacks and Hispanics were taking over the world. He referred to Mr. Obama with a racist slur and said he was not a citizen. ... Teresa Palmer, 48, another manager, said that she also recalled [his pro-Trump-stickered white] van, and that Mr. Sayoc would say nasty things about minorities. She remembered him mentioning Mr. Trump, but only recalled him saying that Mr. Trump made a great president. During this time, Sayoc was an outspoken proponent of conservative conspiracy theories and pro-Trump memes, which he shared both on social media and the windows of his sticker-covered white van. There is no such support for the notion that he was pro-Obama, pro-Democrat, or even political at all prior to 2015. proponent Hopper, Tristin.  "Here is What Sir John A. Macdonald Did to Indigenous People."
  National Post.  28 August 2018. Nelson, Steven.  "Mail Bomb Suspect Cesar Sayoc Was a 'Big Muscle Head' Stripper, Says Former Boss."
  Washington Examiner.  26 October 2018. Healy, Jack, et al.  "Cesar Sayoc, Mail Bombing Suspect, Found an Identity in Political Rage and Resentment."
  New York Times.  27 October 2018. Balsamo, Michael, et al.  "Florida Trump Supporter Charged in Chilling Mail-Bomb Plot."
  Associated Press.  26 October 2018. Lopez, German.  "The Pipe Bomb Suspect Made Vitriolic, Threatening Posts Against Democrats on Social Media." As a new year and a new legislative session begin, Wisconsin Republicans are looking to place limits on government benefits to residents. That issue will appear on the ballot for the April election, as lawmakersvoted last monthto include an advisory referendum asking voters whether people should be required to look for work to receive welfare benefits. It also arose on the Assembly floor Jan. 19, in a speech from Speaker Robin Vos, R-Rochester, about BadgerCare,the states health care coverage programfor low-income people and people with disabilities. Heres his full quote: Wisconsin has been a national leader in so many ways. Preliminary data shows that we have more people on BadgerCare today than we did before the pandemic. Why? Because we dont even ask people what their income level is to qualify for free health insurance from the government. So, on Day One, you qualify. On Day Two, you win the lottery. Youre a multimillionaire. You still get the benefits from the state. How is that right? Its not. There are a couple of claims in there  one being that Wisconsin has more people on BadgerCare today than before the pandemic, which we noted ina prior fact-check is correct. But what about his other claim  that you could be a multimillionaire and still get BadgerCare benefits? Is he right about that, too? Lets take a look. One important point that Vos statement doesnt quite make clear: There is always an initial check of peoples incomes to make sure they fit within the programs requirements before they can enroll in BadgerCare. Proof of income has always been required, Elizabeth Goodsitt, a state Department of Health Services spokesperson, said in an email. A spokesperson for Vos said the speakers phrasing, Day One, you qualify, referred to that first check. Fair enough. So what if the next day, a person gets a large influx of money and moves above the programs income limits? What happens next changed as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic. Before the pandemic, people were required to report an income change that could disqualify them from receiving benefits, and there were other external checks to ensure their incomes remained below that threshold. When the COVID-19 pandemic began, federal lawmakers passed theFamilies First Coronavirus Response Act. Among other things, it increased the number of federal dollars that states could be reimbursed for their Medicaid programs. To get that increase, though, states had toagree to keep people continuously enrolledin Medicaid coverage until the end of the public health emergency. The idea was to promote stable health care coverage during the pandemic. In other words, if people enrolled in BadgerCare in 2020, theyd have had coverage for the last almost three years without needing to renew it, even if their income changed. In a spending plan passed late last year, Congressset an end date for the continuous enrollment provision: March 31, 2023. After that date, Wisconsin and other states can start disenrolling people who no longer meet the requirements for that coverage. The law allows states a full year to complete that step and process renewals for those who will keep their coverage. This will surely take a while, with anestimated increase of almost 20 million people enrolledin Medicaid nationwide since the start of the pandemic, according to data from the Kaiser Family Foundation. Goodsitt said all members of BadgerCare will have their eligibility rechecked between June of this year and May 2024. Vos sidestepped that in his claim, suggesting its been a longstanding preferred practice of state policy. Still, since those eligibility checks are at least a few months away, a situation like Vos laid out is plausible at the moment. Vos argued that even a multimillionaire could receive BadgerCare benefits in Wisconsin, because, We dont even ask people what their income level is to qualify for free health care. But there is an initial income check to qualify for coverage. After that, starting on Day Two, a federal law passed during the pandemic prevents states from rechecking eligibility based on income  though that will end this spring. So, the overnight millionaire scenario Vos describes could theoretically happen  and individuals, because of a new job or other more modest income gains, could rise above the threshold. But Vos skirts past this not being something the state initiated, nor something the state can avoid. And it will end soon. We rate a statement Mostly True if it is accurate, but needs clarification or additional information. That fits here. Claim:  Letter from Judge David Kithil provides accurate line item criticisms of "Obamacare" health care reform legislation.  Examples:  [Collected via e-mail, November 2009] I have reviewed selected sections of the bill and find it unbelievable that our Congress, led by Speaker Nancy Pelosi, could come up with a bill loaded with so many wrong-headed elements. We do need to reform the health insurance system in America in order to make coverage affordable and available to everyone. But, how many of us believe our federal government can manage a new program any better than the bankrupt Medicare program or the underfunded Social Security program? Both Republicans and Democrats are equally responsible for the financial mess of those two programs. I am opposed to HB 3200 for a number of reasons. To start with, it is estimated that a federal bureaucracy of more than 150,000 new employees will be required to administer HB3200. That is an unacceptable expansion of a government that is already too intrusive in our lives. If we are going to hire 150,000 new employees, let's put them to work protecting our borders, fighting the massive drug problem and putting more law enforcement/firefighters out there." Other problems I have with this bill include: Page 50/section 152: The bill will provide insurance to all non-U.S. residents, even if they are here illegally. Page 58 and 59: The government will have real-time access to an individual's bank account and will have the authority to make electronic fund transfers from those accounts. Page 65/section 164: The plan will be subsidized (by the government) for all union members, union retirees and for community organizations (such as the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now - ACORN). Page 203/line 14-15: The tax imposed under this section will not be treated as a tax. (How could anybody in their right mind come up with that?) Page 241 and 253: Doctors will all be paid the same regardless of specialty, and the government will set all doctors' fees. Page 272. section 1145: Cancer hospital will ration care according to the patient's age. Page 317 and 321: The government will impose a prohibition on hospital expansion; however, communities may petition for an exception. Page 425, line 4-12: The government mandates advance-care planning consultations. Those on Social Security will be required to attend an "end-of-life planning" seminar every five years. Page 429, line 13-25: The government will specify which doctors can write an end-of-life order. Finally, it is specifically stated this bill will not apply to members of Congress. Members of Congress are already exempt from the Social Security system and have a well-funded private plan that covers their retirement needs. If they were on our Social Security plan, I believe they would find a very quick "fix" to make the plan financially sound for the future." Honorable David Kithil Marble Falls, Texas.  Origins:  A number of similar pieces presenting lists of line item criticisms of a pending health care reform bill (H.R. 3200) began circulating on the Internet in mid-2009, and they continue to circulate widely three years later as arguments to oppose the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA), commonly known as "Obamacare." The versions of this item that continue to be spread via e-mail forwards and online postings are wrong in nearly every particular, however:  Although this list is commonly attributed as originating with a letter sent to Senator Evan Bayh of Indiana by Dr. Stephen E. Fraser, an Indianapolis anesthesiologist, or as a letter sent to the River Cities Tribune by David Kithil, a former county judge in Marble Falls, Texas, it is actually the work of Peter Fleckenstein, who issued Peter Fleckenstein the list as a series of Tweets and posted it to his blog in July 2009.  The bill referenced in this list, America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 (H.R. 3200), was never passed by Congress.  A   completely different bill, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (H.R. 3590), became the basis for what is now known as "Obamacare."  Many of the entries in the list are therefore irrelevant and outdated, as they address aspects of health care reform legislation that were never enacted by Congress (particularly the "public option" for a government insurance plan). H.R. 3200 H.R. 3590  Virtually every statement included in this list is exaggerated, misleading, inaccurate, or outright erroneous, as detailed below:    The bill will provide insurance to all non-U.S. residents, even if they are here illegally. This is false.  The PPACA, as enacted, doesn't "provide insurance" to anyone  it institutes some regulations on the insurance industry to make medical insurance more broadly available and affordable to Americans, and it requires that Americans enroll in PPACA-qualified medical plans or pay a penalty, but everyone is still responsible for obtaining (and paying for) their own insurance coverage.   Moreover, the section of the unpassed HB 3200 bill referenced in the above statement is 152. PROHIBITING DISCRIMINATION IN HEALTH CARE, which simply states that "[e]xcept as otherwise explicitly permitted by this Act and by subsequent regulations consistent with this Act, all health care and related services (including insurance coverage and public health activities) covered by this Act shall be provided without regard to personal characteristics extraneous to the provision of high quality health care or related services."  It doesn't explicity grant or authorize government funds for providing illegal immigrants with health care or health insurance, and another section of the bill specifically states that  "Nothing in this subtitle shall allow Federal payments for affordability credits on behalf of individuals who are not lawfully present in the United States."  The government will have real-time access to an individual's bank account and will have the authority to make electronic fund transfers from those accounts. This is false. The section of HB 3200 referenced here does nothing more than attempt to provide a framework for simplifying the use of electronic payments for health services, emulating the way that many consumers currently use to make a variety of other payments (e.g., utilities, mortgages, credit card balances).   The bill simply calls for the secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS) to set standards for electronic administrative transactions that would "enable electronic funds transfers, in order to allow automated reconciliation with the related health care payment and remittance advice."  Nothing in this section grants the government "real-time access to an individual's bank account" or the "authority to make electronic fund transfers from those accounts."  The bill doesn't even require that consumers use an electronic payment system  it simply seeks to make that an option for those who want to use it.   The plan will be subsidized (by the government) for all union members, union retirees and for community organizations (such as the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now - ACORN). This statement is misleading, as the section of HB 3200 referenced here is SEC. 164. REINSURANCE PROGRAM FOR RETIREES, which addresses "retirees and ... spouses, surviving spouses and dependents of such retirees" who are covered by "employment-based [health benefit] plans."  It does not specifically provide for subsidizing health insurance for "all union members, union retirees and community organizations"; it sets up a new federal reinsurance plan for any retirees and their spouses who are covered by any employer plan, not just those who are covered under plans run by unions or community groups.  The reinsurance would be available to any "group health benefits plan that ... is maintained by one or more employers, former employers or employee associations."  The tax imposed under this section will not be treated as a tax. (How could anybody in their right mind come up with that?) This statement misleadingly tries to make HB 3200 sound ridiculous by deliberately eliding the end of the statement it quotes.  What the bill actually says is that"The tax imposed under this section shall not be treated as tax imposed by this chapter for purposes of determining the amount of any credit under this chapter or for purposes of section 55."  Section 55 is a reference to the Alternative Minimum Tax, and the purpose of this portion of the bill is to mitigate the effects that new health care-related taxes would have on persons making over $350,000 a year.   Doctors will all be paid the same regardless of specialty, and the government will set all doctors' fees. This is false. The section of the bill referenced here is an updating of the physician fee schedule for Medicare services, which neither states that "all doctors will be paid the same regardless of specialty" nor that the "government will set all doctors' fees."  All this section does is slightly revise the formula used for determining how much doctors are reimbursed for providing Medicare services, depending upon which of two categories those services fall under.   Cancer hospital will ration care according to the patient's age. This is false. The section referenced here is one which does nothing more than call for a study to determine whether certain classes of hospitals incur higher costs than other hospitals for the cancer-related care they deliver, with the aim of providing "an appropriate adjustment [in payments] "to reflect those higher costs." This section in no way "rations care" provided by "cancer hospitals" based on a patient's age (or any other factor); it simply seeks to pay some hospitals more to compensate for their higher costs in treating cancer patients.  The government will impose a prohibition on hospital expansion; however, communities may petition for an exception. This is false. As noted by FactCheck, forbids hospital expansion "only for rural, doctor-owned hospitals that have been given a waiver from the general prohibition on self-referral. It does not apply to hospitals in general. The bill provides for exceptions to even this limited expansion ban."   The government mandates advance-care planning consultations. Those on Social Security will be required to attend an "end-of-life planning" seminar every five years. This is false. This statement references a much-distorted portion of the bill that would allow for Medicare to cover voluntary counseling sessions for seniors with their doctors to discuss aspects of end-of-life care such as hospice care, DNR orders, life-sustaining treatments, living wills, and the like (a form of counseling not previously covered by Medicare).  Nothing about such counseling sessions would be mandatory, for Social Security recipients or anyone else.   The government will specify which doctors can write an end-of-life order. This is false. The bill does not "specify which doctors can write an end-of-life order."  It merely defines an "end-of-life order" (i.e., an order for life-sustaining treatment) as a document "signed and dated by a physician [that] effectively communicates the individual's preferences regarding life sustaining treatment."  It is specifically stated this bill will not apply to members of Congress. This is false. HB 3200 did not contain a provision stating that it would "not apply to members of Congress."  The bill likely would have had little or no effect on members of Congress because they belong to a class of federal worker who have the benefit of choosing from a variety of subsidized insurance plans offered through the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program, but the same requirements for obtaining and having health insurance would have applied to them just as much to other citizens.  The version of the PPACA that was actually passed did indeed require lawmakers to give up the insurance coverage previously provided to them through the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program and instead purchase health insurance through the online exchanges that the law created.  Variations:  A later version of this piece was prefaced with the false claim that the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act limits the amount of Medicare coverage provided to those over the age of 75 or 76.  This claim is covered in a separate article on this site: separate PLEASE PASS THIS OUTRAGE TO EVERYONE ON YOUR LIST!!! THIS should be readby everyone, especially important to those over 75.......If you areyounger, then it applies to your parents. Your hospital Medicare admittance has just change under Obama Care. Youmust be admitted by your primary Physician in order for Medicare to payfor it! If you are admitted by an emergency room doctor it is treated asoutpatient care where hospital costs are not covered. This is only the tipof the iceberg for Obama Care. Just wait to see what happens in 2013 &2014! Age 76 Today, I went to the Dr. for my monthly B12 shot that I have beengetting for a number of years. The nurse came and got me, got out theneedle filled and ready to go then looked at the computer and got veryquiet and asked if I was prepared to pay for it. I said no that myinsurance takes care of it. She said, that Medicare had turned it down and went to talk to my Dr.about it. 15 minutes later she came back and said, she was sorry but theyhad tried everything they could but Medicare is beginning to turn manythings away for seniors because of the projected Obama Care coming in. Shewas brushing at tears and said, "Someday they too will get old", I am sovery sorry!! Please for the sake of many good people ... be informed please.YOU ARE NOT GOING TO LIKE THIS. Last updated:  11 March 2014 In April 2017, an advertisement for a diet product called "Refresh Garcinia Cambogia" or "Garicinia Slim" was disguised as a genuine news report and published on web sites such as Running Evolutions.com and The Platinum Beard:  Running Evolutions.com The Platinum Beard   Student from Cornell University Cuts 31lbs On University Budget! Amanda Haughman, a student at Cornell University, was able to drop 31lbs off her waist in 1 month without ever using a dime of her own money. Amanda is studying nutrition sciences at Cornell, and for a required research project Amanda thought it would be perfect to use university funds to find out how to 'hack' her weight loss. According to Amanda, "the most expensive piece of it all was actually finding what worked. But the actual solution only cost about $5." "I had struggled with my weight my whole life. I tried things like Weight Watchers and Jenny Craig, which just didn't work as good as they promised. I am a single Mom with a kid at home and I am also working towards my degree, so I don't have any time to be at the gym. When I was assigned this big research project, I saw it as a perfect opportunity to get a deeper look at the natural weight loss opportunities that are out there, and that is when I found out about combining Refresh Garcinia Cambogia and apple cider vinegar. The best part of it all, I can tell that my daughter is proud of me." - Amanda Haughman These reports included a number of false and misleading claims. For instance, the lead photograph purportedly showing Amanda Haughman's tremendous weight loss is actually Rachel Graham, who lost nearly 100 pounds in a year. Graham told Today in 2016 that she credited her weight loss to exercise and a healthy diet. Graham did not mention the alleged magic formula of apple cider vinegar and garcinia cambogia: Rachel Graham Today Ask Rachel Graham how shes managed to lose almost 100 pounds in one year and the formula is simple: Healthy food and exercise. No secrets. No gimmicks. No quick fixes. Shes also honest about the impact of going from 235 pounds to 144 pounds, especially the loose skin on her stomach, thighs and arms.  [...] I want people to know that it is 110 percent possible, Graham told TODAY. I used to feel as though it wasn't. That I didn't have what it takes, and that it was just too far out of reach... If you want to make changes, it is completely possible with healthy food and exercise. This weight loss advertisement also fabricated an interview with CNN and claimed that the network ran a segment on this Cornell student's "amazing discovery":   We sat down with Amanda to ask her more about how she found out about Refresh Garcinia Cambogia and whether or not that is all that she used to lose 31lbs so quickly. CNN: Tell us, how did you know where to start? Amanda: To be honest, I really didn't. I was given a budget for the project by the university, and I spent nearly all of it researching everything under the sun. I looked into other previous research, case studies, and even successful weight loss stories of others.   This story never appeared on CNN.  Not surprisingly the Platinum Beard post links to a site selling Garcinia Cambogia. The Running Evolutions article links instead to what is apparently borrowed content from Barry's Boot Camp, a personal training program. We reached out to Barry's Boot Camp for comment, but have not yet received a reply.  Although we can't speak to the effectiveness of drinking apple cider vinegar with Refresh Garcinia Cambogia, we can say that this text did not originate in a genuine news article. This is an advertisement that used a fabricated interview, falsified claims, and an unrelated photograph to sell a diet product. Pawlowski, A.  "Mom gets real about weight loss: Here's how she shed 90 pounds in a year."
  Today  3 October 2016. On 18 September 2017, Facebook user Mike Abreu posted what he presented as a photograph of a restaurant check receipt from his recent visit to a Cheesecake Factory outlet in Valencia, California, that appeared to offer some misleading and exaggerated tip amount suggestions: posted When the bill finally returned I noted it it was $33.76 total. Right above where you fill in the tip and total was the tipping guide which prefigures your percentage based on your total bill. I personally am a fan of this feature as I don't like figuring percentages on and odd amount so I normally just go with what they put for 20%. So I began to write in $14.71 as it stated was 20 percent of my bill.  My wife then asked how much was the bill and I replied almost $50 with the tip. She then said that's pretty expensive for two iced teas and two apps. I looked at the bill again and saw $33.76 which was correct but then I realized that 20 percent of that should be $6.75 and not $14.71 (more than double) that was printed on my bill.   The credit card receipt is authentic. Abreu (who goes by "Frank") brandished an identical-looking slip during an interview with Los Angeles television station KCAL, along with an itemized receipt showing the same total cost ($33.76 including sales tax) but accurate tip suggestions (20% of the bill as $6.75, for example). Thedate and server's name on that receipt were both the same as the credit card slip featured in Abreu's Facebook post. interview A spokesperson for the Cheesecake Factory told us that the discrepancy was caused by an error resulting from a staff member's mistakenly processing the Abreus' order along with someone else's, yielding a larger total that was then used as the basis for the tip suggestions presented in each check: The receipt does not accurately reflect the transaction. The suggested gratuity calculation resulted from inadvertently combining two unrelated parties checks. We deeply apologize for the mistake. It would appear that the staff member corrected the error in the itemized receipt, leaving accurate tip suggestions there, but processed the credit card payment as if it were part of the erroneous "split bill," creating the inaccurate tip suggestions there. (If the combined cost of the two bills were $73.55, for example, then $14.71 would have been an accurate suggested amount for a 20% tip.) The practice of presenting tip suggestions based a whole table's order, in each separate receipt after a bill is split, is controversial. The Cheesecake Factory is currently being sued in Los Angeles Superior Court for allegedly presenting tip suggestions misleadingly based on percentages of a whole table's bill, in instances where diners split checks: sued The Cheesecake Factory ... [when a table] uses two or more credit or debit cards to pay for the charges, the combined bill is divided between the credit/debit cards and Defendant presents each diner/consumer with a separate sales draft for a portion of the bill (a split bill). On each of the sales drafts, Defendant includes suggested gratuity amounts to facilitate customers in calculating and leaving a gratuity for service. Defendant represents the suggested gratuity to be 15%, 18%, 20% or 22% of the check amount reflected on the sales draft, but, in reality, it calculates the suggested gratuity on the combined bill and the suggested gratuity amounts are actually 30%, 36%, 40%, or 44% of the amounts shown on the separate sales drafts. When customers use credit or debit cards to settle their dining bill, Defendant provides them with sales drafts that contain suggested gratuity amounts, and when Defendant divides the total bill between two or more credit/debit cards, the sales drafts contain suggested gratuity amounts which do not accurately represent the total of each sales draft. Plaintiff estimates that over 80% of restaurant charges are paid by credit or debit cards and that approximately 10% or more of those charges (which represents many thousands of consumers) are divided between two or more credit/debit cards and are affected by The Cheesecake Factorys wrongful suggested gratuity practices. The case has the potential to become a class action lawsuit. An initial status conference is scheduled for 18 October 2017.  KCAL-TV [Los Angeles].  "'Borderline Theft': Tipping Suggestions on Man's Cheesecake Factory Receipt Don't Add Up."
  18 September 2017. Kieler, Ashlee.  "Cheesecake Factory Customers Say They Were Duped Into Leaving Big Tips."
  Consumerist.  11 August 2017. Goldman, Marcel.  "Class Action Complaint  Marcel Goldman vs the Cheesecake Factory Incorporated."
  Superior Court for the State of California, County of Los Angeles.  12 July 2017.