Vern Buchanan. His old business was caught illegally funneling over $60,000 in campaign donations to Buchanan to influence his election.
When it comes to illegal campaign cash, the wheels of justice move slowly. So when a May 2011 court filing brought fresh attention to old claims involving illegal campaign contributions to U.S. Rep. Vern Buchanan, Democrats jumped, airinga radio adin his Florida district. Congressman Vern Buchanan. His old business was caught illegally funneling over $60,000 in campaign donations to Buchanan to influence his election, the narrator of the ad says. Tell Buchanan to come clean.The ad ran from June 13-17 and was paid for by the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee. It relied onnews articlesabouta lawsuit filedby theFederal Election Commissionagainst a business Buchanan once owned, the DCCC said.The 'old business' Buchanan, 60, is awealthy Republicanfrom Longboat Key serving his third term in Congress representing Florida's13th Congressional District. He built his wealth founding a chain of print shop franchises in Michigan, leaving for Florida in the 1980sas the chain struggledand investing in a range of new businesses, including Florida auto dealerships.One of those dealerships is at the heart of this claim.Buchanan had owned a majority interest in Hyundai of North Jacksonville,the FEC says, when his business partner Sam Kazran arranged for dealership employees and relatives to donate to the Vern Buchanan for Congress committee, then be reimbursed by the business. This went on during the 2006 and 2008 campaigns, the FEC says. (We should note that the date Buchanan legally parted ways with the dealership is a matter of disagreement.The FEC saysBuchanan owned 51 percent of the dealership until Kazran completed his purchase of Buchanan's stake to become the sole owner in 2008  after the suspect contributions were made. Buchanan spokeswoman Sally Tibbetts says Buchanan sold the dealership to Kazran in 2005, putting more distance between the congressman and the illegal contributions. )What's the big deal with reimbursing contributions? It violates federal election law, which says (n)o person shall make a contribution in the name of another person. The Federal Election Campaign Act also limits how much a single contributor may give to candidates' campaign committees. Funneling cash through employees would have made it possible for the dealership to bust through that limit.The Buchanan campaign said they brought the questionable contributions to the attention of the FEC, which then launched the investigation. We can't independently confirm if that's the case, because the FEC does not comment on open cases. However, we found no evidence to the contrary. The commission combined the complaint withone filed in 2008 by a Washington groupand two employees of a Venice dealership, which you canread more about here. The FEC investigated,finding probable causeto believe that the Hyundai dealership and Kazran had illegally reimbursed $67,900 in campaign contributions, but it didn't go after Buchanan.Instead, it's now seeking $67,900 in fines from Kazran.Kazran, for his part,admits reimbursingcampaign contributions, but told theBradenton Heraldhe did it at Buchanan's direction. I've been caught in this political nightmare that I have nothing to do with, he told PolitiFact Florida. But he failed to reach an agreement with the Federal Election Commission  andfailed to respond to the complainton behalf of Hyundai North Jacksonville, which is no longer in business. That means facts in the case stand uncontested. So the commission voted to sue him to collect the fines, asking a judge for a default judgement.The FEC told the U.S. District Court that the dealership illegally spent $67,900 in an attempt to influence an election for Congress, presumably believing this to be a worthwhile investment. And that's the May suit that prompted stories in aWSJ.com blog, theSarasota Herald-Tribuneand theBradenton Heraldthat the DCCC cited as it released the script for its Florida radio ad. Jesse Ferguson, speaking on behalf of the committee, theofficial campaign armof the Democrats in the U.S. House, used partial quotes from the lawsuit when he said, The FEC is seeking fines from a business that Vern Buchanan owned at the time for an 'extensive and ongoing scheme' of 'secret illegal contributions' to help his campaign and were going to make sure his constituents know about it.Buchanan's responseWhat does Buchanan's team say? That the FEC has cleared Buchanan himself  so the ad linking the behavior of Kazran and his dealership to the congressman is misleading and dishonest.It creates the false impression that Vern Buchanan has done something wrong when in fact he has been fully exonerated by the FEC, said Sally Tibbetts, his spokeswoman.Arelated news releasethat says Buchanan has been completely exonerated is the subject of its own fact-check, andwe found the claim to be Barely True. But we'll summarize here by saying that what little information is available so far from the FEC doesn't fully clear Buchanan  though it does mean the commission won't take any further action against him in the case.Information's limited because the case isn't yet closed, soconfidentiality rulesapply.That means for the purposes of this fact-check, we'll rely on what's in the public record  information that the DCCC had access to when it scripted its ad.The rulingThat ad starts by naming the congressman, then says his old business was caught illegally funneling over $60,000 in campaign donations to Buchanan to influence his election.The FEC and Buchanan's team agree that he owned a significant stake until at least 2005, when suspect campaign contributions started. The FEC says the dealership reimbursed more than $60,000 in contributions. The money went to Buchanan's main campaign committee, and the FEC says the money was spent in an attempt to influence an election for Congress.What is contested is Buchanan's role in the scheme.The FEC has said it will take no further action against him, closing his file. But it didn't go further to declare it had no probable cause to believe he was involved  which would have better supported his team's claim that he's been cleared. Meanwhile, his former business partner still says Buchanan put him up to it, and says he plans another lawsuit to prove it.While we think the DCCC could have done a better job noting it was Buchanan who turned in the illegal contributions, we rate this ad Mostly True.
A reader forwarded anemailto us in which state Rep. Senfronia Thompson urged a boycott of Macys department stores on the day after Thanksgiving 2013. The fact that Macy's doesn't support equal pay for women should stop you from shopping there on Black Friday, the Houston Democrat wrote, saying that her equal-pay proposal cleared the Legislature earlier this year, but then Macy's sent a letter to Rick Perry urging him to veto the law, which he ultimately did. Thompsons House Bill950was among 24 bills PerryvetoedJune 14, 2013. It would have created state law similar to 2009s federal Lilly Ledbetter Act, which gave plaintiffs more time to sue over pay discrimination in federal courts. AnAug. 6, 2013,news storyin theHouston Chroniclereported that Texas Retailers Association members including Macys and Krogers had written Perry in May asking him to kill the legislation because, they said, it would lead to open-ended litigation and duplicate federal law. Thompson spokeswoman Milda Mora told us by phone that the representative learned of the letters from theHouston Chroniclereporter in August and checked with the governors office, which provided her with copies that Moraemailedto us. One written on Macys letterhead (clickhereor scroll down to view it) concluded, The federal requirements under Lilly Ledbetter are unnecessary and would be harmful to Texas employers. We urge you to veto this legislation. Macys spokeswoman Bethany Charlton confirmed that her company sent the May 31, 2013, letter, which was signed by a company vice president. By email, Charlton said the company absolutely supports equal pay for equal work among men and women but believes existing laws provide strong remedies for discrimination. Perrys logic was similar: House Bill 950 duplicates federal law, which already allows employees who feel they have been discriminated against through compensation to file a claim with the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, said his June 14, 2013,veto statement. Progress Texas, the pro-Democratic organization that distributed Thompsons email and is organizing theboycott,disputesPerrys statement that the bill would have duplicated federal law, saying that the Ledbetter protections need to be codified in state law for them to apply to cases in state courts. The groups executive director, Ed Espinoza, told us by email that his group launched a boycott of Macys and other retailers when the news broke in August. An Aug. 7, 2013,Chroniclenews blog postsaid Thompson took part in that boycott also, canceling a planned appearance at a Macys store to mark the states annual sales-tax holiday. Mora said that Thompson, who was quoted in an Aug. 9, 2013 Texas Public Radionews storyas saying she had previously been a card-packing member of Macys, but had not shopped there since the letters became public. Our ruling Thompson said Macy's sent a letter to Rick Perry urging him to veto her equal pay measure. As the Houston newspaper reported, Macys wrote the governor May 31, 2013, saying We urge you to veto this legislation. The claim is True. TRUE The statement is accurate and theres nothing significant missing. Click here formoreon the six PolitiFact ratings and how we select facts to check. In an opinionarticlehe wrote for the Wall Street Journal, U.S. Sen.Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., called for an end to corporate socialism and made a claim about wealth inequality. The wealthiest three families now own more wealth than the bottom half of the country, and they will do everything they can to block our agenda, wrote Sanders, who is seeking the Democratic nomination for president. The latest-available data back up his statement, and it appears the gap is widening. A note aboutwealth, before we dig in: Many Americans make a good income, have some savings and investments, and own a nice home. But they also have debt, typically from a mortgage, credit cards or other bills. The result is that even some people with relatively healthy incomes, as well as many poorer people, have a negative net worth   the more technical term for wealth. Sanders campaign told us his claim is based on a 2017 study from the left-leaning Institute for Policy Studies. It used Forbes list of the 400 richest Americans and data from agold-standardfederal government source on wealth. Those are 2016 figures, from the Federal Reserve Boards Survey of Consumer Finances, which are updated every three years. The study found that the three wealthiest individuals wereBill Gatesof Microsoft with $89 billion, Jeff Bezos of Amazon with $81.5 billion andWarren Buffettof Berkshire Hathaway with $78 billion. Their total wealth of $248.5 billion was higher than the wealth of the bottom 160 million Americans, at $245 billion. Despite Sanders suggestion that the three men would block his agenda, they have expressed centrist political views over the years, and Buffett was a well-known supporter of former PresidentBarack Obama, a Democrat. Whatever their views, Sanders is correct about their wealth, which is on the rise. Forbes latest annual rankingsfor 2018show Bezos, Gates and Buffett still ranked at Nos. 1, 2 and 3, respectively, and that their total wealth was $345 billion. New federal figures for the bottom 160 million Americans arent expected to be released until sometime later in 2019. For the 160 million people at the bottom of the scale, 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 said. University of Michigan sociology professorFabian Pfeffer, whose research specialties include wealth inequality, was among a number of economists and wealth inequality experts who told us the federal figures used in the study are the best for assessing wealth in the population. He told us that the wealth gap is much greater in the United States than in other Western industrialized nations. Pfeffer said the top 5% hold more than 70% of all net worth in the United States. Thats compared to 44% in Austria and Sweden, and lower figures in other comparable nations. Sanders said, The wealthiest three families now own more wealth than the bottom half of the country. The latest available figures indicate that the total wealth of Gates, Bezos and Buffett was $248.5 billion, exceeding the total wealth of $245 billion of the bottom half of Americans. We rate Sanders statement True. 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 A massive federal spending bill passed by United States Congress on Dec. 21, 2020, was almost 5,600 pages long, so there was plenty for everyone to debate. But social media was full of misleading outrage takes, framing the legislation as a COVID-19 stimulus package that doled out foreign aid unrelated to the pandemic. In fact, what Congress passed was a $2.3 trillion spending bill that funds the U.S. government through the 2021 fiscal year. The bill includes a $900 billion coronavirus relief package  not the other way around. But many framed the story in reverse, claiming that Congress had passed a coronavirus relief package and opportunistically included foreign aid and other unrelated items. For example, conservative bloggers Diamond and Silk tweeted, "what does 10M dollars going to Pakistan for gender programs have to do with [coronavirus] relief for Americans?" Many other social media users posted the following meme: tweeted   Claims that Congress jammed foreign aid and museum funding into coronavirus economic relief are misleading. It's more accurate to say Congress passed a $2.3 trillion omnibus spending bill funding the entirety of the U.S. government, including foreign aid programs, national museum funding, and also a coronavirus relief package. funding For example, the $10 million in aid to Pakistan for "gender programs" is slated under U.S. State Department funding in the omnibus bill, along with a number of other foreign aid programs,  The way the meme above presents the $600 stimulus payments is also misleading because it juxtaposes the sum total of aid for various countries and institutions included in the spending bill, alongside individual payments to Americans included in the coronavirus relief package. The coronavirus relief package includes $600 stimulus checks, which will be paid out to most Americans, but the total cost of these checks and other aid to Americans adds up to $900 billion. It's also misleading to state that the only benefit included in the bill for Americans is a check for $600. Although the amounts of financial assistance were less than what was provided in first stimulus package in March 2020, the coronavirus relief package includes expansion of unemployment benefits, another round of small business loans, as well as rent, utilities, and food assistance along with $600 stimulus checks. includes Legislators complained they didn't have time to properly review the massive document before voting on it. Some legislators said the price tag for the legislative package was too big, while others said relief provided to Americans struggling with economic fallout from the pandemic didn't go far enough. complained On the evening of Dec. 22, 2020, the day after Congress passed the spending package, U.S. President Donald Trump made a statement echoing these internet claims, raising doubts that he would sign the legislation after the White House had already indicated he would. Among other statements, Trump said he wanted stimulus checks to be $2,000 instead of $600, which U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said she agreed with. statement agreed The bill comes nine months after the CARES Act stimulus package was signed in March 2020, as well as months of partisan haggling between Republicans, who wanted a more limited package, and Democrats, who had pushed for a bigger bill. It also comes amid a surge of reported COVID-19 cases amid the holiday season. More than 322,000 Americans have died from the pandemic as of this writing. nine months died In June 2019, the Chicago investment firm Chicago BDT Capital Partners acquired a majority stake in the Texas-based restaurant chain Whataburger. The news was unsettling to some Texans who feared that their beloved burger joint would undergo some unwanted changes: acquired Ok, I say we all chip in and buy Whataburger back. Make honey butter chicken biscuits available all day, add kolaches to the menu and change nothing else. Especially not the ketchup. https://t.co/HadutHXJ9l https://t.co/HadutHXJ9l  JJ Watt (@JJWatt) June 14, 2019 June 14, 2019  Shortly after this news broke, an image purportedly showing a screenshot of a message posted to Whataburger's Twitter account -- in which the restaurant chain announced that they were changing their colors from orange and white to blue, black, and white in honor of Chicago's baseball teams -- began to circulate on social media: circulate social media   This was not a genuine tweet from Whataburger: It does not appear anywhere on the company's Twitter timeline, and we were unable to locate any archived versions of this supposed message. timeline Furthermore, the Whataburger Twitter account has responded to several curious social media users to inform them that the above-displayed image is fake. In other words, Whataburger is not changing their signature orange color to blue, black, and white in honor of the Chicago Cubs and Chicago White Sox:   The social media post announcing that Whataburger was changing their colors was fake, but the following social media post from Whataburger assuring fans that they will continue to make Texas proud is real: social media post   Fernandez, Manny.  "Whataburger Got Sold to Chicago. Texas Is Flipping Out."
  The New York Times.  20 June 2019. In April 2023, a bit of footwear-based movie trivia reemerged on Reddit: that the 2006 movie "Idiocracy" had everyone in the movie wearing crocs because the costume designer had a limited budget and because they were too ugly to ever become popular in real life: on Reddit  This trivia is true. The story behind crocs in "Idiocracy" has been repeated by director and co-writer Mike Judge on multiple occasions. In October 2016, Judge explained their origin in an interview with Fast Company magazine: an interview The wardrobe had to be something that's not around now. It had to be created for a lot of extras, and so you know our wardrobe person was looking for ways to make the budget work. And Crocs were not out in the world yet. They were just a small startup at the time. We shot in 2004, so no one was wearing Crocs. And she showed me these things, and I thought, 'Oh those are great, just stupid plastic shoes.' And I said to her, 'But you actually bought these, you can order these. What if by the time the movie comes out, these things are everywhere, and it doesn't look like we're set in the future?' And she said, 'Oh no, that's never going to happen. And sure enough, by the time it comes out two years later, everyone is wearing Crocs. So it already started coming true even faster than we made the movie, really. The 2006 film "tells the story of an unexceptional man who finds himself put in deep-freeze and thawed out 500 years too late, in a future where the dumbest people alive have taken over the world  and he's suddenly the smartest man alive, if only by default." In June 2022, Judge told the same story on the Joe Rogan podcast: tells the story same story The wardrobe woman had a limited budget. [...] So we shot it in 2004. She goes, she tells me, okay, there's a startup. And it was Crocs. But they weren't out in the world yet [and] she goes, look at these horrible plastic shoes with holes. She said we could really save a lot of money. Just put everyone in these things. I said, well, but what if by the time the movie comes out [...] these become popular and people are wearing them? She said, oh, these are never going to become popular [...], these things are horrible. [...] Then it took two years for the movie to come out. By then people are going like, oh, that's pretty funny that you put everyone in Crocs. Crocs has=d been around on a limited scalesince 2002, but they gained mainstream success and popularity around 2006. Idiocracy finished filming in 2004, but Fox Studios sat on it for two years before releasing it in 2006. since 2002 around 2006 two years Because the story about Crocs in the movie Idiocracy came from the movies' writer and director, and has been told many times consistently, the claim is True. Crocs: A Long-Term Trend or Short-Term Fad? - Aug. 9, 2006. https://money.cnn.com/2006/08/09/smbusiness/crocs/index.htm. Accessed 14 Sept. 2023. "Funky Crocs Gain Toehold Among Fans of Comfort." Omaha World-Herald, 13 Nov. 2003, p. 39. newspapers.com, https://www.newspapers.com/article/omaha-world-herald-funky-crocs-gain-toeh/131810738/. "Joe Rogan Experience #1835 - Mike Judge." Ogjre, https://ogjre.com. Accessed 14 Sept. 2023. "Mike Judge On The 10th Anniversary Of 'Idiocracy' And Predicting The (Near) Future." Fast Company, Oct. 2016, https://www.fastcompany.com/3064328/mike-judge-on-the-10th-anniversary-of-idiocracy-and-predicting-the-near-future. "Was_Idiocracy_treated_idiotically_Contd." Austin American-Statesman, 1 Sept. 2006, p. 51. newspapers.com, https://www.newspapers.com/article/austin-american-statesman-wasidiocracy/30934775/. One of the lines of defense in the current Internal Revenue Service controversy is that the agency stumbled under a heavy workload of applications from groups seeking tax-exempt status. Steven Miller, the former acting IRS commissioner, made this point in a piece he wrote forUSA Today,describing a sharp increase in applications. The day after an audit critical of the agency went public on May 14, 2013, the IRS posted on aquestion-and-answer pagethat the number of applications has more than doubled in recent years. The agency connected that directly to the singling out of tea party groups, writing this inappropriate criterion was used as a shortcut to centralize similar cases. Rep. Tim Griffin, R-Ark., took issue with that argument. At a House Ways and Means Committee hearing on Tuesday, he spoke about myths being thrown around. There was no surge in 501(c)(4) applications in 2010, Griffin said. Its possible to check whether a flood of paperwork was a contributing factor in the IRS missteps and we can see if Griffin is on solid ground. The IRS keeps track of its workload and according to the inspector generals audit, IRS staff was on the lookout for tea party-type groups at least six months before we see a jump in the number of applications. In fact, the data tell us that the volume of applications had dropped a bit from the year before the screening began. Heres how the activity breaks down for 501(c)(4) applications, the sort of tax-exempt group where political activity is allowed: 2009:    1,751 2010:    1,735 2011:    2,265 2012:    3,357 The inspector generals report saidthese figurescame from the IRS Exempt Organizations office and were for the fiscal year. As a reminder, the governments fiscal year starts in October, so FY 2010 begins on Oct. 1, 2009, and runs through the end of September 2010. The inspector generals report also providesa detailed timelinethat tracks when the tea party screening began. On about March 1, 2010, a manager asked a staffer to tally the number of tea party-related applications. According to the report, the staffer used Tea Party, Patriots, and 9/12 as part of the criteria for these searches. The earliest that there might have been a jump in applications would have been in October 2010. That is well after the IRS began its effort to give selective treatment to tea party groups. The IRS is correct in saying that the number of applications doubled, but that happened later -- from 2011 to 2012. We contacted the IRS and nothing we learned changes the numbers or the sequence of events. Reporters for theChronicle of Philanthropyand theWashington Posthave sifted the facts, too, and reached the same conclusion: The rise in applications for 501(c)(4) status came after the IRS began treating tea party-type groups differently. Our ruling Griffin said there was no surge in 501(c)(4) applications in 2010, and the numbers from the IRS back him up. The timeline in the Inspector Generals audit shows that the selective treatment of groups based on their ties to the tea party movement began before any rise in the IRS workload. We rate the statement True. In May 2021, news articles and widely-shared social media posts reported that an Ohio State Senator had been caught driving during an official Zoom video conference, and even used a fake "office" background. Ohio On May 6, Brody Logan, a reporter at the NBC affiliate KSEE in Fresno, California, posted a short video to Twitter, along with the following text: text "This Ohio State Senator thought he was slick, using a Zoom background of his home office while driving... debating a bill for harsher penalties for distracted driving..."      Similarly, Newsweek published an article with the headline "Ohio Senator Uses Zoom Office Background While Driving During Hearing on Distracted Driving Bill." The report went on: Newsweek An Ohio state Republican senator participated in a virtual Zoom meeting regarding distracted driving legislation while using an office background as he drove his vehicle this week. During the 13-minute meeting of the Ohio Controlling Board on Monday, State Senator Andrew Brenner could be seen fiddling with his phone, while also turning his camera on and off as he drove with the office background displayed. Andrew Brenner did drive during the Zoom call, and he did use a fake "office" background. However, the meeting had nothing to do with distracting driving, which was an important component of much of the commentary surrounding the incident, since it provided a significant element of irony. As a result, we're issuing a rating of "Mixture." The incident in question took place during the May 3, 2021 meeting of the Ohio Controlling Board, a body that provides legislative oversight of statewide spending, procurement and investment in Ohio.  body The video can be watched in full on the Ohio Channel website, here.  here When Brenner first appears, he is clearly sitting in a parked car, not wearing a seatbelt:   He disappears from view for a short while, then reappears, this time with his camera zoomed in on his face. Around the 3:30 mark, his background abruptly shifts from his car, to a fake "office":   Brenner then disappears from view again, and when he becomes visible again around one minute later, he can clearly be seen driving the car, with his seatbelt on, and the "office" backdrop still in place:   In an interview with the Columbus Dispatch, Brenner admitted he was driving during the meeting, but denied being distracted: Columbus Dispatch "I wasn't distracted. I was paying attention to the driving and listening to it (the meeting,)" Brenner said. "I had two meetings that were back to back that were in separate locations. And I've actually been on other calls, numerous calls, while driving. Phone calls for the most part but on video calls, I'm not paying attention to the video. To me, it's like a phone call." On the same day as the Ohio Controlling Board meeting took place, May 3, Republicans in the state house introduced House Bill 283, which would enhance and expand Ohio's existing prohibition against distracted driving and using electronic devices while driving. House Bill 283 However, after watching the full Ohio Controlling Board meeting from that day, as well as checking its agenda, it's clear that none of the participants even mentioned House Bill 283, specifically, or distracted driving more broadly. That particular claim, as made by Newsweek and Logan, was inaccurate.  agenda 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 April 2020, millions of Americans who lost income due to circumstances related to the COVID-19 pandemic were waiting on promised relief payments from the United States government. So when news broke that U.S. President Donald Trump was making the "unprecedented" move of having his name added to these stimulus checks, a decision that could potentially delay the arrival of these checks by several days, many citizens took to social media to voice their displeasure, as in the example below: millions of Americans social media   Trump's name is truly being added to the COVID-19 stimulus checks, otherwise known as Economic Impact Payments. As of this writing, however, officials at the U.S. Treasury Department insist this will not result in any delays.  The Washington Post first reported on Trump's decision on April 14, 2020. According to the news outlet, Trump's name is expected to appear in the memo line of the check, not as the payment's official signatory, and that this will be the "first time that a president's name appears on an IRS disbursement": reported The Treasury Department has ordered President Trumps name printed on stimulus checks the Internal Revenue Service is rushing to send to tens of millions of Americans, a process that could slow their delivery by a few days, senior IRS officials said. The unprecedented decision, finalized late Monday, means that when recipients open the $1,200 paper checks the IRS is scheduled to begin sending to 70 million Americans in coming days, President Donald J. Trump will appear on the left side of the payment. It will be the first time a presidents name appears on an IRS disbursement, whether a routine refund or one of the handful of checks the government has issued to taxpayers in recent decades either to stimulate a down economy or share the dividends of a strong one. Treasury officials disputed that the checks would be delayed. While Trump's name will appear on these stimulus checks, we can't predict whether these payments will be delayed or go out on time. A Treasury Department official said in a statement that "absolutely no delay whatsoever" would occur:  statement "Economic Impact Payment checks are scheduled to go out on time and exactly as planned  there is absolutely no delay whatsoever ... In fact, we expect the first checks to be in the mail early next week which is well in advance of when the first checks went out in 2008 and well in advance of initial estimates." It should also be noted that many Americans will be receiving their stimulus payments via a direct deposit. It's unclear how many people will receive hard paper checks bearing Trump's name and how many will receive a digital payment.  An IRS official told Fox News that the number of people who will receive paper checks was subject to a "number of variables, including how much info the IRS obtains through the Non-Filers Enter Payment Info web portal and the Get My Payment portal launching [April 15] at IRS.gov. Fox News These Economic Impact Payments were included in the $2.2 trillion stimulus package that Trump signed in late March 2020. According to the IRS, direct-deposit payments had already started going out as of the second week in April. Those waiting on a paper check, however, may not see their payments for several weeks. (If you're waiting on a payment, you can check the status of your check on a recently launched web app from the IRS.) several weeks web app To sum up: It is true that in April 2020, the U.S. government made the unprecedented move of adding the president's name to stimulus checks issued by the IRS in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Although an IRS official said this could slow the process and delay the delivery of checks, Treasury officials insisted that the checks would still go out on schedule.  Paine, Neil.  "More Than 16 Million Americans Have Lost Their Jobs In The Past Three Weeks."
  Five Thirty Eight.  9 April 2020. Raju, Manu; Fox, Lauren; Klein, Betsy.  "Some Americans Could Wait 20 Weeks to Receive Stimulus Checks, IRS Tells House Democrats."
  CNN.  2 April 2020. Olson, Tyler and John Roberts.  "Trump's Name Will be Added to Stimulus Checks."
  Fox News.  15 April 2020. Acosta, Jim and Caroline Kelly.  "Trump's Name Will be Added to Stimulus Checks."
  CNN.  15 April 2020. Acosta, Jim and Caroline Kelly.  "Trump's Name Will be Added to Stimulus Checks."
  CNN.  15 April 2020. Lederman, Josh Phil Helsel.  "Trump's Name Will Appear on Coronavirus Relief Checks."
  NBC News.  14 April 2020. Since at least 2021, internet users have been admiring an impressive, but fake image purporting to show the core of the Milky Way galaxy framed by Karnak, an ancient Egyptian temple complex, northeast of the city of Luxor.  Here is one example, posted to Twitter, with the user's name cropped out for privacy:  The image above is not a real representation of the view into the heavens from Karnak in Egypt. It was debunked in 2021 by Juan Carlos Muoz-Mateos, media officer for the European Southern Observatory, a research facility based in Germany. The moon in the image is too large and is transparent, and the core of the Milky Way isn't visible from Karnak's location, Munoz wrote in a Twitter thread explaining how he could tell the image was faked. debunked transparent   We were unable to locate the original version of the image or its creator, but the earliest instances we found of the picture online was 2017. It's been shared in various forums like a Reddit channel dedicated to "shamelessly stolen" images. shamelessly stolen In an email sent to Snopes, Munoz said that such fake but visually appealing space/science images often crop up on content-scraping social media feeds, which can be identified by features like generic but easily searchable names like "curiosity" or "black hole." The images shared are most often uncredited. "Their bios say things like 'DM for credit/removal' or 'credit goes to the respective owner,' Munoz observed. "Another common question is why this matters, whats the harm with these accounts," Munoz wrote. "Besides the obvious problem of sharing wrong information, these accounts often link to fishy websites riddled with ads, or they're follower farms that are later sold and renamed." It may take time, but it's worthwhile to report them and get them removed from social media platforms, Munoz added. Criticizing a poke at his not releasing millions of dollars to support public schools, Texas Land Commissioner Jerry Patterson said that doing so might cut into double-digit returns on investments managed by the General Land Office.In aletterhe made public Aug. 22, 2012, Patterson, a Republican, said that those who want him to transfer $300 million in investment earnings to the State Board of Education for school needs do not understand the value of keeping such money invested so the states education endowment, the Permanent School Fund, continues to gain value.A pro-Democratic group, Progress Texas, accuses Patterson of inappropriately hoarding the millions. Patterson counters that the School Land Board, which he chairs, has discretion over whether to transfer the money and, he told us by telephone, it has until September 2013 to decide. His spokesman, Jim Suydam, also told us by email that the board approved a resolution in early 2011 to release $250 million of earnings in both 2012 and 2013 to the State Board of Education.In his letter, Patterson said that draining off additional earnings as Progress Texas says he must is a bad choice... because last year the GLO-managed PSF earned 22 percent and, due to statutory liquidity requirements, the rainy day fund earned just 1 percent. He was comparing the portion of the Permanent School Fund managed by the land office to earnings on the states savings account, otherwise known as the Economic Stabilization Fund. If your family needed a quick infusion of cash, Patterson wrote, would you withdraw cash from the investment account earning 22 percent or the account earning 1 percent?Were not venturing that question, but wondered if Patterson made an accurate earnings comparison.Starting in 2005, the land office was given the authority to invest in real estate using proceeds received from selling lands or drawing on revenue from Permanent School Fund mineral leases and royalties, the agency notes on aweb page. Professional fund management firms oversee the investments, the agency says, while theland board, consisting of the commissioner and two citizen appointees, manages the sale of Permanent School Fund land and mineral leases.To our inquiry, Suydam provided an agency report to the Legislature stating that through March 2012, the market value of the agencys investments made from the Permanent School Fund was $3.077 billion, about half of that reflecting externally managed direct real estate investments and nearly $1.2 billion attributable to short-term investments in the states treasury, which Suydam later said means money set aside so its on call for the agencys real estate investments.The report, dated Sept. 1, 2012, says that gross time-weighted returns on the portfolio in the 12 months through March amounted to nearly 22.9 percent, though that is without considering the short-term investments. Counting the cash-on-call portion, the report says, the time-weighted returns on the portfolio were 13.03 percent.Time-weighted returns?By email, Suydam told us the term describes a complex calculation that uses values for every day in the period being measured which, he said, explains why the 23 percent return shown for the real estate investments does not align with the 30 percent return that we calculated by comparing the market value of those investments at the end of March 2012 to the comparable figure at the end of March 2011.Asked how the earnings on real estate through March 2012 compare to recent 12-month periods, Suydam said such investments generated nearly 14 percent in market value in the 12 months through March 2011, but lost about 15 percent in the 12 months through March 2010.We checked on the rainy day funds earnings with Lauren Willis, spokeswoman for State Comptroller Susan Combs, who oversees state finances.Willis said by email that money in the reserve fund, created in 1988, is invested like other funds in the states treasury in stable, high-quality investments. In 2011, Willis said, the average yield on all those funds was 0.74 percent -- generating nearly $194 million in interest income including $51.9 million added to the rainy day fund. R.J. DeSilva, another Combs spokesman, said by email the rate of return might or might not have been about the same through the 12 months running through March 2012.In a telephone interview, we asked Patterson about why his letter mentions the higher returns on the real estate investments alone rather than also taking into account the lower returns influenced by the agencys cash-on-call funds.I dont count the cash, Patterson replied, because its not part of our investment portfolio.The land office, Patterson noted, is limited by law to managing just part of the overall education endowment. Suydam later said by email that as of the end of March, the market value of the agencys portion of the PSF, not including the value of minerals or state-owned land, was nearly $3.1 billion. He said the State Board of Education oversaw the funds remaining $25.6 billion.Our rulingPattersons reference to 22 percent in earnings over the 12 months running through March 2012 does not account for reduced earnings from nearly $1.2 billion in cash-on-call money supporting the agencys real estate investments. That clarification would be helpful, though it still seems reasonable, overall, to focus on the portion of the portfolio that would be expected to reap sizable gains. Separately, the claim seems to reflect the annual earnings on the rainy day fund, though the commissioners March-to-March time period does not match the calendar-year approach used by the state comptroller.We rate the statement as Mostly True.