Is 'Antifa' Planning a Civil War?
In August 2017, rumors began to spread on social media that anti-fascists (a name often shortened to "antifa", which has become shorthand for a subset of protestors, usually clad in black and accessorized with bandannas and who are evidently unnerving bloggers and vloggers enough to be the pet topic of many an angry online rant) were planning extended unrest, riots, killing random citizens, or outright civil war beginning on 4 November 2017: August 2017 rumors began civil war   Depending on the source, "antifa" (always treated as though it is one homogenous, unified group) is purportedly planning extended riots, joint violence alongside Black Lives Matter and the Black Panthers, or a coup of the American government. The rumors seem to have originated from a video originally published on 30 August 2017 by an individual named Jordan Peltz. Peltz was widely (and incorrectly) identified as a "U.S. Marshal" in the video, which shows him wearing what looked like an official badge that is actually simply printed on his shirt. However, he is not actually law enforcement or military  Peltz instead evidently works as some combination of bail bondsman and bounty hunter. published (Claiming to be a United States marshal is very popular among the sovereign citizen set; those involved claim to answer only to their interpretation of common law and maintain they are not subject to other legal conventions, including getting driver's licenses and paying taxes. Local, state, and federal governments tend to disagree.) popular involved driver's licenses taxes On Instagram, Peltz describes his work as "#fugitiverecovery" and "#warrantservice": Instagram   Peltz published a video to "clear the air" on 27 September 2017 after reporter JJ MacNab, whose beat includes anti-government and sovereign citizen groups, wrote a thread on Twitter about how militia groups are being goaded into taking up arms against anti-fascists: JJ MacNab thread   Peltz responded by stating that his video, which gave an impression he was either predicting or calling for a November 2017 civil war, had been edited  although he didn't specify when, by whom, or why, despite millions of views and thousands of comments, he had remained unaware it had been altered until he saw reports: stating Finding out my video meant for me and few friends had been taken and edited. Only site I thought had it. @jjmacnab should have just msg me pic.twitter.com/G9EGfGjHkf @jjmacnab pic.twitter.com/G9EGfGjHkf  Veritas'AequitasUSA (@TacticalPoet84) September 24, 2017 September 24, 2017  https://t.co/JNR3co0QwhFollow-up from my Viral Video and clearing the air. Please, view my IG to see what else was falsely claimed https://t.co/JNR3co0Qwh  Veritas'AequitasUSA (@TacticalPoet84) September 28, 2017 September 28, 2017 On 29 September 2017, InfoWars published an article using Peltz's "civil war" wording: published Antifa is planning a new round of nationwide riots on November 4 as part of a plot to start a civil war that will lead to the overthrow of the Trump administration. Far-left militants plan to gather in the streets and public squares of cities and towns across this country in the hope of building momentum for civil unrest that leads to nothing less than domestic regime change. Our protest must grow day after day and night after nightthousands becoming hundreds of thousands, and then millionsdetermined to act to put a stop to the grave danger that the Trump/Pence Regime poses to the world by demanding that this whole regime be removed from power, states a call to action on the RefuseFascism website. A longer screed posted on the Revolutionary Communist website makes it clear that Antifa is not prepared to wait for electoral change from Democrats, and will engage in a ferocious struggle, based on plans outlined in a book written by Bob Avakian, the Chairman of the Revolutionary Communist Party, which is called The Coming Civil War. The page also cited "antifa" web sites, neither of which threatened violence. One provided a list of Facebook events, and the other read in its entirety: provided list read entirety ON NOVEMBER 4, 2017: We will gather in the streets and public squares of cities and towns across this country, at first many thousands declaring that this whole regime is illegitimate and that we will not stop until our single demand is met: This Nightmare Must End: the Trump/Pence Regime Must Go! Our protest must grow day after day and night after nightthousands becoming hundreds of thousands, and then millionsdetermined to act to put a stop to the grave danger that the Trump/Pence Regime poses to the world by demanding that this whole regime be removed from power. Our actions will reflect the values of respect for all of humanity and the world we wantin stark contrast to the hate and bigotry of the Trump/Pence fascist regime. Our determination to persist and not back down will compel the whole world to take note. Every force and faction in the power structure would be forced to respond to our demand. The cracks and divisions among the powers already evident today will sharpen and widen. As we draw more and more people forward to stand up, all of this could lead to a situation where this illegitimate regime is removed from power. Spread the word and organize now. Be a part of making history. Dont let it be said that you stood aside when there was still a chance to stop a regime that imperils humanity and the Earth itself. Join in taking to the streets and the public squares day after day and night after night demonstrating that In the Name of Humanity, We REFUSE to Accept a Fascist America. On November 4, 2017, we will stand together with conviction and courage, overcoming fear and uncertainty, to insist that: This Nightmare Must End: The Trump/Pence Regime Must GO! @AntifaChecker, a Twitter feed devoted to sniffing out phony "antifa" accounts, said it was not even aware of the call to action: yeah, we haven't heard anything about november 4  Antifa Checker (@AntifaChecker) October 1, 2017 October 1, 2017  An article in L.A. Weekly reported on both the freeway protest and upcoming events: article Their placards bore letters that spelled out "NOV 4 IT BEGINS." But they couldn't get enough volunteers to hold all 12 letters, so the tallest among them, the ones with the broadest wingspans, held up two letters each. The eight people weren't enough to block the on-ramp, so some motorists were able to swerve around. [Organizer and USC film professor Perry] Hoberman says the protest was conceived in part to get the word out about a Nov. 4 demonstration the group is planning. He says it's being modeled on the Women's March held in January at Pershing Square and that organizers hope the action will include an encampment in a public place,  la Occupy Wall Street, or at least a prolonged series of protests over several days. At one point on Tuesday they knelt on the freeway, which organizer Michelle Xai says was to acknowledge "black and Latino people who have been and continue to be murdered by police." A video of the protest uploaded to the group's Facebook page has more than 700,000 views. Many of the 24,000-plus commenters ask for more information about Nov. 4. Plenty of others object to the group's inconveniencing motorists, and some appear to endorse running them over. It is true that some groups linked to the antifa movement planned co-ordinated protests on 4 November 2017, but that had nothing to do with Peltz's video expressing disdain for the group in August 2017, nor did he appear to have any insider law enforcement knowledge, as he does not work as law enforcement himself. When a wave of rumors about 4 November anti-fascist protests began, his clip became part of the claim as "evidence" that a "federal officer" warned of coming violence. In reality, a list of apparently peaceful protests were paired with an older, unrelated video to create the impression of a looming threat. Peltz himself walked the claims far back after his video brought him unwanted attention and scrutiny. There was an uptick in the rumor's spread on 1 November 2017, when the groups advertised the 4 November 2017 demonstrations in the New York Times.  advertised Smith IV, Jack.  "The Far-Right Thinks A Violent Antifa Overthrow Is Coming Nov. 4, But The Truth Is Far Stranger."
  Mic.  2 November 2017. [Updated] 3 November 2017: Added information about advertisements for the planned protests which appeared on 1 November 2017 in the New York Times.
The RhodeMap RI long-term economic development plan continues to spark controversy throughout Rhode Island. This week, Republican legislators saidthey would submit legislationto free municipalities from having to incorporate it in their local planning. That follows comments House Speaker Nicholas Mattiellomade in December to radio station WPRO-AM. Mattiello said, the plan is never going to come before the House or the Senate in its totality and were never going to vote on it. The controversy started in mid-September with the release of a 200-page draft of the plan, which is meant to guide efforts to improve the states economy. During meetings that sometimes descended into shouting matches, critics said that if RhodeMap RI were implemented, local cities and towns would be relinquishing control to the federal government on affordable housing and land-use issues because the plan was paid for, in part, by a $1.9 million U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development grant. Supporters said there's nothing in the plan that would infringe on individual property rights or local control over zoning. Because the debate is likely to continue in the coming months, we decided to examine a statement made late last year by Kevin M. Flynn, associate director for planning for the state Division of Planning, who oversaw the plans development. Addressing concerns about ceding municipal control,Flynn told EcoRI News,theres nothing in the plan that takes away local government control and local zoning control. We asked Flynnhow he backed up his statement. While we waited for a response, we read through the RhodeMap RI plan, and found nothing to indicate a threat to local control, suggesting Flynns statement was accurate. But things got more complicated when we looked at other documents, including the Planning Divisions grant application, the grant agreement, and HUDs description of the Sustainable Regional Planning Grant Program, the source of the $1.9 million. According to HUD, the program is intended to support planning efforts that integrate land use, economic and workforce development, transportation and infrastructure investments. It also aims to enable local and state planners to consider such issues as energy use, climate change, public health and social equity in economic planning. Agencies that apply for such grants must agree to generate plans aimed at producing, among other objectives, equitable land use planning that furthers the federal Fair Housing Act and complies with other civil rights laws. And those agencies must agree to analyze and overcome barriers to housing discrimination -- in HUDs words, to  affirmatively further fair housing. Critics view those provisions with alarm, saying they essentially give the federal government license to override state and local government control. They point to a long-running legal dispute involving New Yorks Westchester County as Exhibit A. More on that in a moment. When Flynn got back to us, he referred us to Article XIII of the Rhode Island Constitution, which empowers cities and towns to adopt and amend their charters, and enact and amend local land use laws. He also cited state zoning enabling legislation, which delegates zoning authority to cities and towns. A plan is simply that. A plan, Flynn said. A plan has no power to modify constitutional or statutory law. The economic development plan could never supercede state law, he said. That is a basic tenet of our jurisprudence. Looking for more impartial views,we reached out to more than 10 national housing law experts. The four who responded agreed that communities do not cede zoning control when they accept HUD grants. But they had some caveats. For example, Brian Gilmore, an associate professor and director of the Housing Clinic at Michigan State University College of Law, said, I wouldnt say theyve ceded total control. I would say they have obligations. Robert G. Schwemm, a professor at the University of Kentucky College of Law, said much the same thing. Its illegal to use local zoning power to maintain segregation, Schwemm said. However, HUD has no direct power over local zoning authority, Schwemm said. HUD could deny the grant or take back money, but thats a remote possibility, he said. The idea of a fund cutoff is virtually unheard of, because historically, the Fair Housing Act has been enforced weakly. Theyre doing more than has been done in the past, he said of the Obama administration. HUDs Annual Report on Fair Housing 2012-2013 showed that the agency received 495 analyses by cities and towns examining fair housing choice. Of those, HUD took enforcement  action in five instances. Heres why Westchester County is important. In 2006, a housing advocacy group sued the county in federal court, arguing that it had defrauded taxpayers by accepting $50 million in HUD grant money while failing to remove barriers to fair housing as required by its agreement with HUD. HUD later became a plaintiff in the suit. A judge ultimately agreed with the plaintiffs, and a landmark settlement was reached requiring the county to spend $50 million to build or acquire 750 affordable-housing units in communities that were more than 90 percent white. Now, the county and HUD are fighting over whether the county has complied with the settlement and whether it must amend its zoning ordinances to do so. The county has lost at least $20 million in HUD grants so far. We contacted the county for its take on HUD grants and local control. The experience in Westchester has been caveat emptor, said Ned McCormack, Westchester  communications director and senior adviser to County Executive Robert P. Astorino, using the Latin phrase for buyer beware. Once you take any money from HUD, your interpretation of what is expected in return and their interpretation vary widely. Our ruling Kevin M. Flynn said nothing in the RhodeMap RI plan takes away local government control and local zoning control. Technically, there is nothing in the plans language that appears to compromise local zoning law or control. But his statement doesnt acknowledge the strings attached to the HUD grant. In accepting the $1.9 million from HUD to develop the plan, the state agreed to, among other things, expand housing opportunities for underserved populations on the basis of race, ethnicity, or economic status and, thus, is obligated to do so. In fact, HUD has taken legal action against grant recipients such as Westchester County that, in its view, failed to live up to its agreement. Its rare, but it has happened. For the record, in December, 26 Rhode Island cities and towns were awarded nearly $5.3 million in HUD grants through the Community Development Block Grant program On balance, we rate Flynns claim is partially accurate but leaves out important details or takes things out of context, our definition of Half True. (Correction: Article XIII of the Rhode Island Constitution spells out home rule for cities and towns. The article number was incorrect in the original version of this item.) Warnings about dog-snatchers tagging homes with colored stickers to facilitate the stealing of canines for use in dogfighting events were originally circulated in the suburbs of Perth, Australia, in February 2013 before being relocated to a UK setting the following month: Any dog owners beware, leaflet droppers or anyone walking around housing estates.Keep your eye out for small coloured STICKERS on gates or doors, gangs are marking how many dogs live there to steal and they are using them for DOG BAIT FOR FIGHTING.Ring the police immediately if you see any and inform the home owners.Remove the stickers immediately!Red stickers are for big dogsYellow for medium andPink for small breedsPlease re-share and keep your dog safe!This is already happening in the Goole Yorkshire area, UK and could be spreading across the country. This is disgusting The same rumor has also been spread involving plastic bags in trees: I've seen on Facebook that people's homes are being marked by plastic bags tied in trees indicating they have a dog. This is a sign for criminals to abduct the dog for it be used as bait in dog fighting rings. This just doesn't seem feasible.  Officials in the former area quickly got out the word that this warning was a hoax: The internet has been flooded with chilling tales of an organised underground dog fighting ring operating out of Perth's suburbs. Family pets have been systematically stolen from their yards to be trained as fighting dogs, according to reports appearing on social media and online classified websites. While many in Perth claim to know somebody who knows somebody whose pet has fallen prey to a kidnapping, authorities and social media experts have dismissed the warnings as a viral hoax. Animal welfare authorities in Perth, who have been inundated with phone calls since the messages started to appear, said the warnings were "completely unfounded." "It's a viral hoax," RSPCA spokesman Tim Mayne told Fairfax Media. "Police and the RSPCA have no solid evidence on this at all. "We've been monitoring this situation and still, to the best of our knowledge, it's a viral hoax." Curtin University internet studies lecturer and social media expert Tama Leaver said the lack of specific details in the messages was a dead giveaway for a viral hoax. "If people were really trying to stop something there would be specific details about it and who they could contact," he said. He said the messages were so vague they had managed to cover "the entire spectrum of Perth". "If something like that is appearing for two weeks and there's no official information released whatsoever  there's no police follow up  and there's no evidence of an actual fight, you'd have to question it," he said. Similarly, in March 2013 UK officials in Yorkshire issued a denial that area dognappers were placing stickers or other markings on vehicle tires to identify the homes of dog owners (a variant of a similar rumor that such a method was being used to target gun owners): denial rumor Police in Whitby and other areas of the county want to reassure residents that there are no gangs of dog thieves operating in the area and placing stickers on vehicles. A local officer who was called by concerned residents, has enlisted the advice of a local tyre fitter to prove that marks left on vehicle tyres are not the work of dog-nappers. Rumours have been circulating on social media sites that dog thieves have been placing stickers on vehicle tyres to mark the homes of dog owners, ready for them to go back and steal the dogs. This is not the case. The red and yellow dots seen on tyres are placed there by tyre manufacturers. The red dot denotes the heaviest part of the tyre and a yellow dot denotes the lightest. They are not the work of dog thieves. The rumor traveled to the U.S. in early 2015, when it emerged in the form of a warning involving plastic bags tied to trees as a harbinger of dognappers. According to the rumor (which spread widely on Facebook), criminals marked dog-owning homes by tying grocery bags to trees so pets could later be kidnapped for dogfighting rings. There was no explanation of how those who became wise to the purported ruse managed to differentiate bags purposefully tied to trees for signaling from discarded grocery bags that coincidentally came to rest among the branches after being blown about by wind. And as with prior variations, no instances in which pets were abducted were linked to plastic bags mysteriously found in trees prior to the canines' disappearances. As noted in our article about a similar putative home-marking scheme, there's no practical reason for persons seeking to perpetrate crimes against property to surreptitiously mark the homes of their intended victims rather than simply recording the addresses of those homes. A related warning was originally circulated in March 2012 (and again in March 2013) about a man named Michael Anthony Burdis who was reportedly attempting to obtain dogs from animal shelters to "use as bait in dog fighting": article This is Michael Anthony Burdis  watch out for him in all rescue centres as he's trying to get his hands on a dog to use as bait in dog fighting! Please share this far and wide  we have to stop this evil man! This warning was apparently based on information originating with the UK-based Scruples Whippet Rescue, who posted on their Facebook page back in March 2012 that: Facebook There is currently a statement being posted all over facebook about a Michael Burdis. It is claimed that the statement was written by Scruples Whippet Rescue and is badly written and reads like Michael is a volunteer for us. The statement was NOT written by any member of the Scruples team. Michael Burdis is NOT in any way a Volunteer for Scruples or in any way associated with our Rescue. He wrote on our Facebook page last week enquiring about young dogs and was REFUSED a dog and was BLOCKED from our page due to his dog fighting links. This man is currently under investigation by the RSPCA . All our Volunteers are very strictly vetted and home checked and Scruples Whippet Rescue will not have, and never have had anything to do with anyone involved in the barbaric illegal activity that is dog fighting. We are very concerned that this badly worded statement that has been written by someone unknown to Scruples is making people believe that we are involved with Michael and his activities and we are asking all Facebook groups to delete the incorrect post and post and share this statement instead. However, we found no evidence that someone named Michael Burdis is (or was) being investigated by the RSPCA in connection with dogfighting activities, and the Scruples Whippet Rescue notice states only that someone using that name inquired of them about some dogs via Facebook. The photograph circulated with this warning (not reproduced here) appears to be a picture of someone by the same name from the U.S. who has no connection to any of the claims. A similar unconfirmed warning was circulated in April 2013 naming Dell Schanze as the person going to animal shelters to obtain dogs for use as bait in dog fights. And in May 2017, the "bags in trees" version of the rumor re-emerged on Facebook, purportedly confirmed by a police department in Pennsylvania: re-emerged Facebook SHARING!!!!I usually don't post much on Facebook however, I just wanted to spread the word/ make people aware of this. So I came home yesterday and noticed a bag hanging from a tree that had not been there when I left my house for about an hour, if that. The bag immediately caught my attention for some reason and it's placement looked like it had been put there on purpose rather than trash that blew into the tree. It was positioned right at the corner of my fence. For some reason, I thought I remembered hearing someone tell me that there had been other cases of this and that it was related to marking houses for people who apparently steal dogs. When I walked out and looked at the tree and the bag, I noticed that the bag was tied in 3 different places to the tree meaning someone clearly put it there for a reason, so that alone was strange to me. Even though I thought they would tell me I was psycho for calling, I called 911 and explained the situation to them and asked if I should contact SPCA or something with this problem. I was surprised to hear that this was a concerning problem and that I was correct for calling/ report it to the police. I was even more alarmed when the 911 dispatcher asked me if I had any dogs and if so if they were inside to which I replied that my dog was inside. He then asked me if I was aware of the several recent cases of dogs being stolen/ going missing while in their own backyards. I was instructed to lock my doors, keep myself and my dog inside, not to touch the bag or any evidence at the scene and that they were sending out a police officer right away. I was told that this "tagging" or "marking" is thought to be used for people who are scoping out neighborhoods/ homes in which people have dogs that go outside or are left outside alone even for brief periods of time. They mark the house with a plastic bag tied to a tree at the home to leave a mark for people who will then come later and apparently lure dogs out of their yard and steal them. Although not absolutely certain why they are stealing them, they are apparently being used for dog fighting. Smaller breeds, larger breeds, or medium breeds. As I knew many of my friends here on Facebook have dogs or many of us have dogs of course, I wanted to spread the word. I was told by the police officer as well as the 911 dispatcher that even if letting the dog out for 5 minutes to go with them.   please read this especially if you have a dog or dogs!!!! pic.twitter.com/Gh0sYVtD2l pic.twitter.com/Gh0sYVtD2l  Bella (@b3llaconigliaro) May 19, 2017 May 19, 2017  Yet again, the warning to dog owners was shared tens of thousands of times. We contacted the Dallastown Police Department in Dallastown, Pennsylvania in an attempt to confirm that police validated the user's concerns about bags in trees and dog theft. An employee with whom we spoke denied they received any reports of dog kidnapping overall, including the sort connected to bags in trees. Sitting in front of a mock pharmacy and flanked by people in white lab coats, U.S. President Donald Trump signed a series of executive orders on July 24, 2020, that he framed as end-all solutions for Americans who struggle to pay high premium prices for prescription drugs. Of one of the directives, specifically, Trump told a crowd of supporters and reporters at the ceremony: told Under this order, the price of insulin for affected patients will come down to just pennies a day  pennies a day from numbers that you werent even able to think about. Its a massive cost savings. News outlets such as The New York Times and Washington Post described the signing event like it was largely symbolic, since the executive orders are unlikely to take effect this year, if at all (we explain more below). The New York Times Washington Post Meanwhile, at least two conservative media sources, Ben Shapiro's Daily Wire and CNSNews  which claims to balance "liberal bias" in mainstream news with its coverage  reported on the president's pledge to slash prescription prices at face value, and highlighted the above-mentioned quote by Trump regarding insulin. Daily Wire CNSNews published the story, "Trump Says Executive Order Will Drop the Price of Insulin Down to Pennies a Day," which mainly quoted the president verbatim, and numerous Snopes readers reached out to us to investigate the claim's accuracy. Namely, diabetic patients wondered whether they would indeed pay less for insulin syringes or insulin cartridges for their pens or pumps because of the president. story pens   According to a Congressional analysis in September 2019, insulin averaged $34.75 per dose in the U.S.  a total that's almost 2.5 times higher than the average price in other countries. First, we'll lay out what was unequivocally true: Trump issued Executive Order on Access to Affordable Life-saving Medications during the July 24, 2020, signing event, and that directive authorized the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to make certain changes regarding the cost of EpiPens for Americans with severe allergies and the cost of insulin for those who suffer from diabetes, specifically. It stated: Executive Order on Access to Affordable Life-saving Medications Department of Health and Human Services EpiPens The price of insulin in the United States has risen dramatically over the past decade. ... While Americans with diabetes and severe allergic reactions may have access to affordable insulin and injectable epinephrine through commercial insurance or Federal programs such as Medicare and Medicaid, many Americans still struggle to purchase these products. Medicare Medicaid Here's some more context: Medicare, the federal program that covers the majority of Americans over age 65 and those with disabilities, offers plans that help diabetic patients cover the cost of some insulin products. Meanwhile, policies for Medicaid, the government-run health insurance system for low-income people, vary state by state  variances that include whether or not the program covers the cost of diabetic enrollees' insulin, or to what extent. state by state Trump's directive pertained to "federally qualified health centers" (FQHC), which are about 1,400 community health care clinics nationwide that treat low-income patients on sliding fee scales and purchase discounted drugs from pharmaceutical companies under an existing federal program, known as 340B. The July 2020 executive order was worded like this: federally qualified health centers 1,400 340B   In other words, the president's order requires participants of the 340B Program to offer insulin at greatly reduced prices to patients with no or little insurance coverage, without providing specifics on how or when the change would take effect. Advisory Board, a news site for health care providers, said in a statement: "Only patients with low incomes; those with high cost-sharing requirements for insulin or epinephrine; those with high, unmet deductibles; and/or those without health insurance would be eligible for the discount." A news release from the HHS said: statement news release This will increase access to life-saving insulin and epinephrine for the patients who face especially high costs among the 28 million patients who visit FQHCs every year, over six million of whom are uninsured. For perspective, about 34.2 million Americans had diabetes as of 2018, which represented about 10.5 percent of the population, according to the American Diabetes Association. So, hypothetically, if the same proportion of people had diabetes within the FQHC population of 28 million patients (a total reported by the HHS), then Trump's executive order could help about 2.9 million people, depending on whether their insurance already covers the treatment. American Diabetes Association So to recap, in regard to the claim in question, it was true to state Trump signed an executive order in July 2020 that aimed to make it easier for low-income diabetic patients to pay for insulin. But nowhere in the federal document did the presidential administration explain its plan for implementing the change, nor the level to which insulin prices would drop. There was no proof that the order would allow any American to someday pay "pennies a day" on the protein hormone. We should note here: In addition to that previously explained executive order, a separate directive signed by Trump on July 24, 2020, touched on a yet-to-be-finalized initiative by the White House to relax international drug importation rules and added insulin to a list of prescription medications that can be imported from Canada. The president characterized that directive, too, as a positive step for people who want lower insulin costs. separate directive yet-to-be-finalized And that brings us to our final point: Much of what Trump celebrated in the July 2020 executive orders had been proposed by his administration prior to the signing ceremony but stalled amid opposition from pharmaceutical companies and political barriers. "[None] of these ideas put forth are new, or in fact any more implementable than before, especially without congressional action, an investor told FeircePharma, a trade publication for the pharmaceutical industry. FeircePharma For instance, in May 2020, Trump unveiled a plan to cap the cost of insulin for Medicare recipients at $35 per month beginning in 2021 (even that initiative would cost patients more than "pennies a day"). But as of this writing, it was unclear exactly how that directive would roll out, and when or if qualifying seniors with diabetes would notice a price difference. The Washington Post reported on July 24, 2020: May 2020 Washington Post The moves [by Trump] are largely symbolic because the orders are unlikely to take effect anytime soon, if they do so at all, because the power to implement drug pricing policy through executive order is limited. Voters will not see an impact before the November elections, and the drug industry is sure to challenge them in court. A couple days after the July signing ceremony, for example, Politico reported that representatives of major drug lobbies refused to meet with the president to discuss one of the four executive orders: a non-specific and controversial proposal to link Medicare payments for certain medicines to lower costs that people pay in other countries. After that refusal on industry leaders' part, investors told MarketWatch that the executive orders were "largely campaign fodder" and "come without the necessary force to meaningfully change prices in the U.S."  Politico reported meet controversial MarketWatch In sum, while it was truthful to claim Trump issued an executive order in July 2020 that was intended to lower the price of insulin for some Americans, it was misleading to claim that all diabetic patients would save money as a result of the directive  the directive only targeted low-income patients who are uninsured or underinsured and seek help from certain federal community health providers. Additionally, it was unclear as of this report when, if at all, that group would actually reap the benefit of the cost savings, and the estimated amount of such was unknown. It would be wrong to state based on available evidence that the executive order alone would drive down prices to "pennies a day." For those reasons, we rate this claim a "Mixture" of truth and falsehoods. White House. "Executive Order On Access To Affordable Life-saving Medications".
 24 July 2020. White House. "Executive Order On Lowering Prices For Patients by Eliminating Kickbacks To Middlemen".
 24 July 2020. White House. "Executive Order On Increasing Drug Importation To Lower Prices For American Patients".
 24 July 2020. White House. "Remarks By President Trump At Signing Of Executive Orders On Lowering Drug Prices".
 24 July 2020. Sanger-Katz, Margot. "As He Woos Drugmakers On Virus, Trump Demands Drug Price Controls".
 New York Times. 24 July 2020. Arter, Melanie. "Trump Says Executive Order Will Drop the Price of Insulin Down to Pennies a Day".
 CNSNews. 24 July 2020. National Conference of State Legislatures. "Diabetes Health Coverage: State Laws And Programs".
 10 January 2016. HHS.gov. "Trump Administration Announces Historic Action To Lower Drug Prices For Americans".
 24 July 2020. American Diabetes Association. "Statistics About Diabetes".
 Accessed 30 July 2020. White House. "Executive Order On Increasing Drug Importation To Lower Prices For American Patients".
 24 July 2020. Luhby, Tami. "Trump Administration Proposes Allowing Imports Of Certain Drugs From Canada".
 CNN. 18 December 2019. O'Donnell, Carl. "Explainer: Trump's Plan To Cut Drug Prices".
 Reuters. 27 July 2020. Abutaleb, Yasmeen and Josh Dawsey. "Trump Signs Executive Orders Aimed At Lowering Drug Prices In Largely Symbolic Move".
 Washington Post. 24 July 2020. Cohen, Joshua. "Trump's Executive Orders On Drug Pricing Contain Caveats And Limitations".
 Forbes. 25 July 2020. Ways And Means Committee Staff. "A Painful Pill To Swallow: U.S. Vs. International Prescription Drug Prices".
 September 2019. Reklaitis, Victor. "Trump's Meeting With Pharma Execs Called Off, As Analysts Say His Moves On Drug Prices Lack Bite". Prestigiacomo, Amanda. "Trump Issues Executive Orders To Slash Insulin, EpiPen Prices; End 'Global Freeloading'.
 The Daily Wire. 27 July 2020. Some Republican critics have scoffed at President Barack Obama's pronouncements that the economy seems to be improving, pointing to the unemployment rate, which keeps going up. But Obama has consistently tempered his hopeful words about positive economic indicators with warnings that unemployment rates are likely to continue to rise for a while, even as the economy improves. History tells us that job growth always lags behind economic growth, Obama said Nov. 6, 2009, in remarks in the White House Rose Garden. He's right about that, said William Beach, director of the conservative Heritage Foundation's center for data analysis. In the post-World War II era, there have been 10 recessions and after most of them, employment lagged a few months behind other improving economic indicators. But after the last two, in 1991 and 2001, unemployment rates continued to climb for more than a year. Interestingly, Democrats criticized President George W. Bush regarding the 2001 jobless recovery, much as some Republicans now criticize Obama for the current one. The latest jobless recovery came as little surprise to economists who study such trends. Employers are hesitant to hire people back to the work force (after a recession) because they don't know if the economy is going to continue to grow, which is understandable, Beach said. But more importantly, he said, the American economy has become increasingly reliant on service jobs, such as information and financial jobs. Those jobs come back very slowly, Beach said. The recession this time is even more severe, so Beach predicts this jobless recovery will last even longer than past recessions. I don't think we'll see jobs coming back for a long time, Beach said. But even without government meddling, Beach believes employment was destined to lag. TheSan Francisco Chronicle, relying on numbers from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, in August charted the lag between recessions' end and the peak of unemployment rates. In the eight recessions between 1949 and 1991, unemployment rates lagged by an average of about three months. After the last two, however, it took 15 months and 19 months, respectively, before unemployment rates peaked. Bottom line, President Obama is right when he cautions that employment has lagged behind economic recovery in the past. And so we rate his statement True. On Feb. 3, 2024, a photograph circulated on social media allegedly showing a view of Russia from Alaska. "Russia is 2 miles away from Alaska," one post on Reddit captioned the image, while another post on X (formerly Twitter) claimed that "Russia is 55 miles away from Alaska." post post Russia is 2 miles away from Alaskabyu/NicoleN_Pillow1899 inBeAmazed Russia is 2 miles away from Alaska u/NicoleN_Pillow1899 BeAmazed  "Is it real?" one Reddit user asked. We found that the image was also shared on Instagram and featured in a BuzzFeed article. asked Instagram article In short, the photograph is authentic, but it does not show Russian territory visible from Alaska. The photo was featured in a 2018 BBC article with the title "American lone sailor held in far east Russia near Alaska" and an article by TASS, a Russian press agency, with the credit of " ," which translates to "Yuri Smityuk." We found the photograph was captured by Russian photographer Yuri Smityuk. The caption to the image shared by IMAGO, a German photo agency, read (emphasis ours): article article read CHUKOTKA, RUSSIA  JUNE 24, 2018: Mechigmen Spit near the Lorino whaling settlement. There are 1200 people living in the village which is the centre of Russia s subsistence whaling and walrus hunting. Lorino maritime hunters have an annual catch limit of 60 gray whales and 1 bowhead whale. Therefore, the photograph was not captured in Alaska, contrary to what some social media users claimed. However, it is true that Russia's Big Diomede Island and Alaska's Little Diomede Island are about 2.5 miles apart. (The Russian and Alaskan mainlands are approximately 55 miles apart at their closest points.) 2.5 miles mainlands   (Google Maps) Given that the so-called Yesterday and Tomorrow Islands are so close to each other, it is possible to see Russian territory from Alaska, as can be seen in the Getty Images photograph below: photograph   (Getty Images) For reference, here's what the Diomede Islands look like from from above:   (Getty Images) In January 2011, we investigated whether vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin said, "I can see Russia from my house," during the 2008 presidential campaign. investigated Anchorage, Mailing Address: 605 West 4th Avenue Suite 105, and AK 99501 Phone: 907 644-3661 Contact Us. How Close Is Alaska to Russia? - Alaska Public Lands (U.S. National Park Service). https://www.nps.gov/anch/learn/historyculture/how-close-is-alaska-to-russia.htm. Accessed 7 Feb. 2024.
Diomede Islands | Bering Strait, Russia, & Alaska | Britannica. 18 Dec. 2023, https://www.britannica.com/place/Diomede-Islands.
Mikkelson, David. "Did Sarah Palin Say: 'I Can See Russia from My House'?" Snopes, 29 Jan. 2011, https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/sarah-palin-russia-house/.
Yesterday and Tomorrow Islands. 27 Jan. 2018, https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/images/91638/yesterday-and-tomorrow-islands. A new political mailer from the Committee to Protect Florida attacks State House District 45 candidate Kathryn Starkey of New Port Richey for her record on taxes, citing her role on a water district board and her support of the Penny for Pasco, a 2004 increase in the county sales tax.The committee is headed up by Rockie Pennington, a political consultant for Richard Corcoran, one of Starkeys two opponents in the Aug. 24 Republican primary. (Fabian Calvo is also on the ballot. )Taxin Kathryn, says the mailer sent in early August 2010. With Kathryn Starkeys record on taxes here at home, how can we trust her -- or afford her -- in Tallahassee?We wondered, can you trust the mailers claims? We looked at three claims, and this Truth-O-Meter item tackles her attendance at meetings. Other items arehereon her voting record for river board tax rates, andhereon her actions involving the Pasco sales tax.We looked at the claim that As a member of the Pinellas-Anclote River Basin Board, Kathryn Starkey had the opportunity to fight for lower taxes in 14 separate budget meetings between 2002 and 2008. But ... She only attended half of those meetings!Pennington said he based that claim on minutes from the basin boards meetings. We took a look, too.We looked at two budget meetings each year: June, when the basin board typically sets its preliminary tax rate, and August, when it takes a final vote. (In 2007, the final vote was taken in July. )Starkey served on the board from June 2002 through April 2008, so we looked only at the 12 budget-related meetings that fell within that period. (Pennington, who put together his mailer a month ago, said he wasnt sure why we came up with different counts for the meetings. )Of 12 budget meetings she could have attended, Starkey attended seven (five of those seven were the final votes). That attendance record is more than half  by a hair.We rate this claim Mostly True. Claim:  For John Kerry's Labor Day 'front porch' stop in Canonsburg, Pennsylvania, neighborhood streets were closed and residents told to take down their Bush/Cheney signs. Status:  Multiple  see below.  Neighborhood streets were closed:  True. Residents were ordered to remove their Bush/Cheney signage:  False.  Example:  [Collected on the Internet, 2004] Good Tuesday morning! John Kerry brought his "front porch meeting" to our Canonsburg, PA neighborhood on Labor Day morning. Since you will never hear the truth from the TV or print media I thought that you should know from someone who was 'almost' there. The residents who live on the street where the event took place were not allowed to attend. Kerry shipped in approximately 90 invitation only VIPs. In addition, there was a hard luck case who was about to lose her job at USAIR and another was an elderly woman who was having health careproblems. Neither one was from this neighborhood. The street was closed to all traffic the night before and all residents on the street were REQUIRED to remove their Bush/Cheney signs. The sympathetic police officers on duty told us that Kerry used imminentdomain to claim the street for his purposes. Residents who have homes within the perimeter (approximately 1 full block) were kept behind a line away from the partisan crowd. The rest of us were not allowed within the 1 block cordon. A neighbor from across the street came to the line where we were being kept and asked us to come onto his property. The police told us that we could stand on this mans FORMERLY private property! This was set up so that Kerry's views could be heard - but not the neighbors. About 30 peoples (mostly neighbors) shouts echoed down the street "Let the neighbors in". We could barely hear Kerry speaking with his microphone because press buses were used to block us off from view! This mornings papers are reporting how hecklers tried to interrupt Kerry as he spoke to the neighborhood gathering, but he turned our chants to his favor by calling us rude. Even though most of the media was there to record our stories of not being included in the neighborhood forum, not one of them printed or aired the truth. This is what America will look like if Kerry becomes president. Get registered and get all of your friends registered to vote if they have not already. Kerry thinks that he is better than the rest of us and he has the media on his side to make him out to be what he is not! Finally, last night as I drove down the street where the rally was, I was shocked to see Bush/Cheney signs in almost every yard on the street! Please send this e-mail on to as many people as you can. LET FREEDOM RING! Origins:  On Monday, the 6th of September 2004, John Kerry took his campaign to Canonsburg, Pennsylvania, a working class neighborhood near Pittsburgh. That day's schedule began with a front-porch question and answer session with supporters on West College Street at the home of Dale and Jody  Rhome.  It is that session of politicking which is the subject of the e-mail quoted above. Although not every claim made in the report can be substantiated or dismissed, some can. Statements made in two articles that appeared in the Observer-Reporter, the newspaper from the nearby town of Washington, Pennsylvania, after the 'front porch' meeting support the e-mail's claim of the street's being closed all night to traffic: "The 200 block of West College was shut down for the visit" and "On Sunday morning, the Rhomes and Kerry campaign workers went door-to-door on the street, alerting neighbors of Kerry's upcoming visit. [Said Jody Rhome] 'We also told them they had to get their cars off the street because the street was being shut down.'"  However, its next assertion, that "all residents on the street were REQUIRED to remove their Bush/Cheney signs," appears to contradict a line from an Observer-Reporter article two days after the event: "In an effort to block out the few dozen Bush supporters on one end of the street, Kerry officials provided volunteers with various Kerry signs in key positions to block Bush signage." Had neighbors been made to take  From left, Karen Fortney, Beth Soucie and Traci Fortney hold up  signs supporting President George Bush during a visit by Democraticcandidate Sen. John Kerry to Canonsburg yesterday. down their Bush/Cheney signs, nothing would have remained that required screening from sight. Yet the Observer-Reporter's statement might have referred to placards brandished by demonstrators rather than signs erected on people's lawns. However, a Pittsburgh Post-Gazette account of the day makes it clear that fixed signs were not removed, saying: "Beth Soucie, who stood in a yard filled with Bush signs, said she will stick with the Republican incumbent." The description of the Soucie yard stands at odds with the claim of removed signs, as does the photo on this page of Mrs. Soucie and two other women standing in the Bush/Cheney-festooned Soucie yard. According to a blogger called ilja who posts on the RightNation.us forums, his conversation with Stan Soucie, the husband of the Beth Soucie interviewed and photographed by the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, further argued against the 'sign removal' aspect of the account. In his 18 September 2004 post to the "Kerry Campaign Stop AngersPennsylvania Neighborhood" thread, he reported: RightNation.us Angers He said that I could cite him [Stan Soucie] and that they were not told they had to take their Bush/Cheney signs down because there was a yard down the street from where they were standing with a whole lot of Bush signs in the yard. He did state that whenever the TV cameras would move to where a Bush sign was that the Democratic organization would hold their signs in front of the Bush signs to block out the view. However, since they were standing on a porch, the Democrat signs were not tall enough to block them. The   e-mailed narrative states, "The sympathetic police officers on duty told us that Kerry used imminent domain to claim the street for his purposes." If members of the police force said that, they were in error, because Senator Kerry could not have invoked "eminent domain." One block of West College was cordoned off by the Secret Service, who are charged with protecting the nominee. The Senator would not have had much, if any, say in this. eminent domain John Kerry was heckled during his remarks that morning and did dialogue back and forth with his detractors, which means the e-mail's "This was set up so that Kerry's views could be heard - but not the neighbors" should be viewed with skepticism. Also, that the Senator was heckled shows that  the assembled crowd couldn't have been composed of only hand-picked VIPs, else there wouldn't have been that sort of sparring. This is the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette's account of some of those exchanges: With a friendly crowd in Canonsburg lobbing softball questions yesterday, Democratic presidential nominee John F. Kerry could have ignored a pocket of hecklers that tried to disrupt his campaign. Instead, Kerry pulled the detractors into his Labor Day speech, part of the "front-porch discussions" he's been holding across the country. He told them their shouts and taunts couldn't cover up facts  namely, that America has had a net loss of 1.6 million jobs under President Bush. Gasoline prices are up 31 percent since Bush took office, and college tuition has grown more expensive by the year, he said.  At the same time, he said, wages are down by $1,500 for "the average family." One heckler then shouted, "Yeah, Kerry, you're really average." Kerry pounced on the comment, replying: "No, I'm privileged, and my tax burden went down. I don't think that's right." Kerry said Bush, also a man of money and privilege, has worked hard to lessen tax payments for the wealthiest Americans. Otherwise, Kerry said, Bush has presided over an economy that is in disarray. Income for all Americans fell 9.2 percent in 2001 and 2002, according to the Internal Revenue Service. In addition, Bush has rung up record budget deficits, and he will be the first president since Herbert Hoover in the Great Depression to have lost more jobs than he created, Kerry said. "Franklin Roosevelt, Jack Kennedy, Lyndon Johnson and Richard Nixon all created jobs during their presidencies, even though they had wars to contend with," Kerry said. The jobs developed under Bush's administration are nothing to shout about, Kerry went on. He seized on a just-released Bureau of Labor Statistics report that said new jobs in growing industries pay $8,848 a year less than jobs that were lost, either because of shrinking industries or exportation of work to foreign soil. "If you think that's moving in the right direction, go vote for the other guy," Kerry said to the hecklers. According to the e-mail, "This mornings papers are reporting how hecklers tried to interrupt Kerry as he spoke to the neighborhood gathering, but he turned our chants to his favor by calling us rude." The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette had a different take on what was said and why: Patricia Romano of Canonsburg told Kerry that she has had 11 throat surgeries and must pay so much for prescription drugs that she had to get a part-time job at age 70. Hecklers drowned out Romano at one point. That prompted Kerry to say, "While the Bush people were rudely shouting, we had a 70-year-old woman trying to speak" about runaway costs of prescription drugs. The identity of the person who wrote this by now much-traveled account remains a mystery. Roughly three of every four copies that found their way to us were prefaced: "Received this from a very good friend in PA. She wants everyone to know what she saw." Yet in none of those forwards was the 'very good friend in PA' identified by name or her e-mail address provided; other than her gender and state of residence, nothing is known about the purported authoress of this chronicle. Paradoxically, about one-quarter of the narrations bears the name "Ken Armstrong," and about one-twentieth "Charles A. Walter." Both are decidedly male names, further muddying the question of authorship. Barbara "front porch remarks, back fence gossip" Mikkelson Last updated:  20 October 2004    Sources:   Hazlett, Terry.  "Prepping a Porch for Kerry."   [Washington] Observer-Reporter.  8 September 2004  (p. A1).    Simonich, Milan.  "Kerry Jousts with Hecklers."   Pittsburgh Post-Gazette.  7 September 2004  (p. A3).    Walters, Patrick.  "Heinz Kerry Visits Pittsburgh, Philadelphia for Labor Day Parades."   The Associated Press.  7 September 2004.    Warco, Kathie.  "Rendell, Hoeffel Stump in S. Strabane."   [Washington] Observer-Reporter.  7 September 2004  (p. A1). In the weeks after a gunman opened fire at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida on 14 February 2018, killing seventeen people, Internet trolls and "hoaxers" continued to share an already completely debunked rumor that David Hogg  a teenaged survivor of the mass shooting who has since become an outspoken advocate of gun control  is actually a professional actor who went to school in southern California:   As Hogg's classmates have pointed out and as we reported previously, the above meme is a very low-quality, low-effort Internet hoax  the photograph actually confirms that Hogg is legitimately an Marjory Stone Douglas High School student because the image was taken from MSD's yearbook, a fact that could be gleaned from another student in the very same image wearing an MSD "Eagles" mascot shirt two rows above him: reported previously Theres a photo going around claiming David Hogg did not attend Douglas, but a school in California. Heres a video to debunk that: pic.twitter.com/hJsMNSdAsF pic.twitter.com/hJsMNSdAsF  Joey (@_Joey_Wong) February 21, 2018 February 21, 2018  Hogg had visited California in 2017 and witnessed an altercation, about which he made a video blog  a simple fact that was blown out by conspiracy theorists to mean he already lived in Los Angeles and was part of the entertainment industry. (Hogg did live in California, but relocated with his family to Florida before starting high school; he returns to visit every year, as many people do.)  video blog Nikolas Cruz, 19, a former Marjory Stone Douglas student who used an AR-15 semi-automatic firearm he had reportedly purchased from a gun store to carry out the mass shooting, has since been charged with murder; Parkland students have galvanized a national movement calling for stricter gun legislation. Hogg has been one of the most vocal leaders in what has become known as the "March For Our Lives." known as The students' activism has made them the target of "hoaxers"  deranged Internet users and grifters who spread false information that mass shooting incidents are manufactured by the government to seize guns and hand power to a secret global cabal working to install an authoritarian world government. hoaxers Such hoaxers have periodically been arrested and jailed for physically stalking and harassing survivors, but despite their outlandish beliefs and apparent moral debasement, they are not exactly the "fringe." Far-right web sites and Internet personalities like GatewayPundit.com writer Lucian Wintrich, undeterred by ongoing lawsuits related to previous conspiracy theory-related blunders, have claimed the Parkland students were reading from scripts, while the National Rifle Association said in an official statement in response to a nationwide march on 24 March 2018 that the events were staged by "Hollywood elites." arrested jailed stalking ongoing lawsuits blunders claimed statement DAngelo, Bob.  "NRA: March Fueled By 'Gun-Hating Billionaires and Hollywood Elites.'"
Dayton Daily News.  25 March 2018. Herman, John. "The Making of a No. 1 YouTube Conspiracy Video After the Parkland Tragedy."
The New York Times.  21 February 2018. Chavez, Nicole.  "School Shooting Survivor Knocks Down 'Crisis Actor' Claim."
CNN.  21 February 2018. Readers responded with bemusement and skepticism in June 2019 after an "Official 2020 Trump vs Democrat Poll" emerged online and on social media, appearing to pose questions framed in a heavily anti-Democrat way. For example, one survey question asked, "Who would you rather see fix our Nation's shattered immigration policies? President Trump // A MS-13 loving Democrat," while another somewhat tautological question asked: "Who would you trust to NOT raise your taxes? President Trump // A High Tax Democrat." Such bias in the questions, as well as some clear nods to Trump's go-to insults against his political opponents (the poll referenced "a Lyin' Democrat" and "a Low IQ Democrat"), prompted inquiries from Snopes readers who were uncertain whether they were reading a parody or hoax or an official Trump 2020 campaign poll. One reader asked, "Oh my gosh, is this really from the Trump campaign? Or some satire site?" while another wrote, "Is this for real? It sounds too crazy ..." The survey was indeed published by Trump's official re-election campaign committee, on that campaign's official website. An archived version can be read here. The site on which it appeared, donaldjtrump.com, is run by two formally registered, pro-Trump committees and the Republican National Committee (RNC). The website contains the following disclaimer, which makes clear the official nature of the June 2019 survey and all other content featured on the site: here "Paid for by the Trump Make America Great Again Committee, a joint fundraising committee authorized by and composed of Donald J. Trump for President, Inc. and the Republican National Committee." Committee Inc Committee The poll's true purpose may not have been to create a set of results that reflected in a misleadingly positive way on the president but rather to harvest contact information  respondents were required to enter their name, zip code and email address in order to submit their answers.  The full list of questions was as follows: The "Trump vs Democrat" poll bore similarities to another survey on the subject of "mainstream media accountability," which Trump's website published in February 2017, and that included heavily slanted questions such as. "Do you feel that the media is too eager to slur conservatives with baseless accusations of racism and sexism?"  accountability DonaldJTrump.com. "Official 2020 Trump vs Democrat Poll."
 June 2019. DonaldJTrump.com. "Mainstream Media Accountability Survey."
 February 2017. Claim:  Diet Coke (or Diet Pepsi) contains more calories than claimed, but the company gets away with the deception by paying a yearly fine.  Examples:  [Collected on the Internet, 2003] There was an old rumour that stated that a particular diet soda company (Coke I believe) paid a fine to print their cans as stating that the soda had 'just one calorie'.  According to the rumour, companies who knowingly printed misinformation on the nutritional facts of their product would have to pay a fine.  The company in question figured it could make more money by convincing people the product only had 1 calorie than it would cost to pay the fine, meaning a higher profit margin for them.  [Collected on the Internet, 2002] I heard a rumor today that Diet Coke actually contains 40 calories, and the Coca-Cola company pays a huge fine to the FDA every year to keep "0 calories" on the can.  Have you heard anything of this?  [Collected on the Internet, 2004] Comment: Is it true that Pepsi One is really not one calorie and that Pepsi Co. pays a fine every year for false advertising (because the calorie count is a lot higher than that)? Origins:  How long this particular belief about low-calorie sodas has been around is anyone's guess, but we have recorded sightings of it dating back to 1990. We've encountered claims of Diet Coke, Diet Pepsi, or Pepsi One (which are listed as containing zero, zero, and one calories per 12-oz. can, respectively) actually containing 25, 50, 70, or 90 calories, in each case with the parent   company's paying an annual fine to continue falsely listing the beverage's caloric content.  (A can of non-diet cola typically contains about 120 calories.) The rumor associates most strongly with Diet Coke (which is known as Coca-Cola Light outside the U.S., Canada, Australia, and Great Britain).  In the U.S., laws governing the disclosure of nutritional and caloric content of ingestibles prevent the rumor from being true. The Federal Trade Commission serves as the watchdog in this area: under the Federal Trade Commission Act, it is empowered to "prevent persons, partnerships, or corporations" from using "unfair methods of competition in or affecting commerce, and unfair or deceptive acts or practices in or affecting commerce." At various times in its history it has fined corporations for their having made false or misleading nutritional claims about their products. Such fines are a reaction to what has already taken place; they are not grants of immunity against continued breaking of the rules. Consumers have legal remedy available to them against corporations that have deceived them through certain provisions of the Lanham Act. Many other countries have similar safeguards in place. Federal Trade Commission Act Lanham Act Common sense should also serve to rule out what the whispers say about an annual payoff.  For health reasons, many potential consumers of diet drinks have to carefully monitor what they ingest. Were the rumor true, diabetics with a love of Diet Coke, for instance, would experience glucose levels spiraling out of control. Imagine the lawsuits resulting from  that! This false belief enjoys a measure of popularity because of what it says about common perception of large companies and of the government agencies tasked with shielding consumers from harm: that one will bamboozle its customers for the sake of financial profit, the other will sell out those it is mandated to protect, and neither is to be trusted. Such misgivings also find voice in other rumors, such as the one about bananas imported from Costa Rica being infected with a flesh-eating bacteria. bananas If there is the tiniest bit of truth to this rumor, it's that even though sodas such as Diet Coke and Diet Pepsi are advertised as having zero calories, they do have some caloric content from ingredients such as artificial sweeteners, citric acid, and caramel coloring.  However, the number of calories per can is still less than one, and FDA regulations allow any food product that contains fewer than five calories per serving to be advertised as calorie-free. Barbara "calorie countered" Mikkelson Last updated:  26 August 2013