Can a meme effectively convey the significance of Kamala Harris being Vice President?
Voting in the 2020 U.S. Election may be over, but the misinformation keeps on ticking. Never stop fact-checking. Follow our post-election coverage here. here On Inauguration Day, Kamala Harris made history several times over. In being sworn in on Jan. 20, 2021, the outgoing California senator became the first Black person, first woman, and first person of South Asian heritage to be elevated to the vice presidency.  Inauguration Day The historic nature of her achievement was placed in stark context in a viral meme that showed Harris, whose parents immigrated to the United States from India and Jamaica, respectively, juxtaposed with a long list of official portraits of white men. (Charles Curtis, who served with Herbert Hoover from 1929 to 1933, had some Native American heritage and was therefore the first person of color to hold the office of vice president). Charles Curtis The meme also highlighted several purported landmarks in the slow progress of women's rights and racial desegregation in the United States, as follows: Dont understand why its a big deal that Kamala Harris is VP? Until Red box? She would have been enslaved. Until Blue box? She couldnt vote. Until Yellow box? She had to attend a segregated school. Until Green one? She couldnt have her own bank account.   The following screenshot shows a selection of instances of the meme on Facebook and demonstrates its popularity on social media in January 2021: popularity   The vice presidents highlighted in various colors were as follows (along with the dates of their tenure as vice president): Red: Andrew Johnson, March 4 to April 15,1865 Andrew Johnson Blue: Calvin Coolidge, March 4, 1921, to Aug. 3, 1923 Calvin Coolidge Yellow: Richard Nixon, Jan. 20, 1953, to Jan. 20, 1961 Richard Nixon Green: Spiro Agnew, Jan. 20, 1969, to Oct. 10, 1973 Spiro Agnew The claims made in the meme were therefore that: until Johnson's tenure as vice president (in 1865), Harris would have been enslaved due to her racial heritage; until Coolidge's tenure as vice president (1921 to 1923), she would have been denied the right to vote due to her gender; until Nixon's tenure as vice president (1953 to 1961), she would have been forced to attend a segregated school due to her racial heritage; and until Agnew's tenure as vice president (1969 to 1973), she would have been denied the right to her own bank account, due to her status as a married woman.  On the whole, the claims contained a high degree of historical accuracy, though in some cases they over-simplified certain discriminatory practices and made some relatively minor errors in identifying the vice president in office during certain major reforms. As a result, we're issuing a rating of "true." The following is our assessment of each of those claims.   The creator of the meme appears to have chosen the year 1865, and therefore the tenure of Johnson, because that is the year in which the 13th Amendment, which outlawed slavery, was passed. The text of the amendment reads as follows:  text Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction. Congress passed the amendment in January 1865, while Johnson was vice president-elect to President-elect Abraham Lincoln, but it was not ratified by the states until December 1865, by which time Johnson had ascended to the presidency after Lincoln's assassination, leaving the vice presidency vacant for the duration of his presidency. So the sequence of events is a bit muddled, but it is certainly reasonable to place the 13th Amendment, and the abolition of slavery, during the Johnson era.  Until the passing of the 13th Amendment, Black people in the United States lacked legal protection against enslavement. That doesn't mean that all Black people before 1865 were slaves, but the vast majority were. Based on figures included in the 1860 U.S. Census (page 14), some 89% of Black people in the country at that time were slaves. page 14 Slavery was far more prevalent in the southern states, but on average, a Black woman in the U.S. shortly before the 13th Amendment had close to a 90% likelihood of being enslaved. From a human rights perspective, Black people had no legal or constitutional protection from slavery, which is likely the thrust of the point made in the meme.   The 19th Amendment, which gave women the right to vote, was passed by Congress in June 1919 and ratified by the states in August 1920. The text of the amendment read: text The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex. Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation. On both those dates, Thomas Riley Marshall was vice president, under President Woodrow Wilson. So the meme was incorrect in stating that women could not vote until the vice presidency of Calvin Coolidge. In fact, women voted for the first time in the November 1920 election, which saw Warren Harding and his running mate Coolidge elected president and vice president, respectively.  Thomas Riley Marshall That inaccuracy does not impinge upon the truth of the broader point being made in the meme, namely that Harris, as a woman, would not have been able to vote in the United States until the early 1920s. However, the meme does miss an important additional barrier to voting rights that Harris, as a Black woman, could have faced even after the passage of the 19th Amendment.  While the 15th Amendment in principle gave Black men the right to vote, and the 19th Amendment gave all women the right to vote, states continued to discriminate against Black voters by imposing obstacles such as poll taxes, literacy tests, and "grandfather clauses"  all of which were designed to suppress Black voters. 15th Amendment obstacles It wasn't until the Voting Rights Act of 1965 that such practices were prohibited by federal law, although many activists argue that present-day voter-ID rules continue the legacy of electoral restrictions that have a disproportionate impact on voters of color. Voting Rights Act argue   The creator of the meme appears to have selected the vice presidency of Nixon (1953 to 1961) because that was the period during which the U.S. Supreme Court declared racial segregation in public schools constituted a violation of the Equal Protection clause in the 14th Amendment of the Constitution, in the landmark 1954 ruling in Brown vs. the Board of Education. In a follow-up ruling in 1955, the court ordered school districts to arrange for the desegregation of public schools "with all deliberate speed."  declared follow-up ruling Most, though not all, schools were racially segregated in the 19th and early-20th centuries in the United States. So a Black student, such as Harris, would very likely have been forced to "attend a segregated school," as the meme claims. Brown vs. the Board of Education marked the beginning of the end of school segregation, but it did not bring about integration overnight. Over the course of the 1950s, 1960s, and 1970s, state lawmakers and local authorities fought protracted and often bitter battles to resist the Supreme Court's clear mandate. battles So while the meme was right to point out that Black students would be very likely forced to attend segregated schools before the decision in Brown vs. the Board of Education, it's also the case that many Black students were forced to attend segregated schools for many years after the ruling, as well. What changed in 1954 was that the nation's highest court clearly declared that system of racial segregation to be unconstitutional.   The meme appears to refer to the enactment of the Equal Credit Opportunity Act (ECOA) in the early 1970s, which made it illegal for financial services companies to discriminate against customers on the basis of anything other than their creditworthiness. The legislation stated that: stated It shall be unlawful for any creditor to discriminate against any applicant, with respect to any aspect of a credit transaction(1) on the basis of race, color, religion, national origin, sex or marital status, or age (provided the applicant has the capacity to contract)... However, the law wasn't enacted until October 1974, when the office of vice president was vacant. Spiro Agnew resigned in late 1973, after he was charged with bribery and tax fraud, and his replacement, Gerald Ford, ascended to the presidency in August 1974, after Nixon resigned. So the meme is again mistaken on the precise sequence of events. While Agnew was vice president, banks could (and did) legally deny credit to a woman on the basis of extraneous considerations such as her marital status, her husband's income and credit history, and so on. and did The meme also somewhat overstated the restrictions in place before 1974. Women, including married women, could open their own bank accounts before the ECOA was passed, but often faced difficulty and discrimination in doing so. It was particularly difficult for women to obtain a line of credit or a credit card, in her own name. In 1972, the National Commission on Consumer Finance published a report that found the following common discriminatory practices in lending: report What the ECOA changed in 1974, and what the meme appears to allude to, is that banks and lenders could no longer legally engage in such discriminatory practices.
In the summer of 2020, readers sent Snopes multiple inquiries about widely shared social media posts claiming that PepsiCo, the company that makes Pepsi, had donated $100 million to the Black Lives Matter (BLM) movement. In May 2020, a Black man named George Floyd died in police custody in Minneapolis, Minnesota, prompting a renewed wave of nationwide and international protests against racial injustice and police brutality. The BLM movement spearheaded much of that protest and debate, and in response, critics of the protests targeted BLM, often deploying false, exaggerated, or distorted allegations.  targeted During the summer of 2020, those critics sought to target several major U.S. companies, including PepsiCo, by claiming they had each donated substantial amounts to BLM. Social media posts in July read that: Social media posts BankofAmerica Gave them $1 BILLIONPepsiCo - $400 MILLIONWalmart - $100 MILLIONApple - $100 MILLIONComcast - $100 MILLION Right-wing activist Charlie Kirk alluded to an incident in St. Louis, Missouri, in June 2020, in which local residents Mark and Patricia McCloskey pointed firearms at protesters, writing on Twitter:  pointed firearms writing "In America if terrorists show up to your home, you get charged for showing that you own a weapon after they tear down your gate. And the thugs who entered on to your property get $400 million from PepsiCo. as a reward." In August 2020, social media users focused on PepsiCo, and the amount of the company's purported donation to BLM shifted from $400 million to $100 million, for reasons that are unclear, but may have resulted from a misreading of earlier posts that claimed Walmart, Apple, and Comcast had each donated $100 million to BLM.  A typical version of the post claimed that: "PEPSI JUST GAVE BLM A HUNDRED MILLION DOLLARS... PLEASE BOYCOTT PEPSI!" typical version post claimed   The August posts that claimed PepsiCo had given $100 million to BLM appeared to have been based on the earlier claims that the company had donated $400 million. In turn, those earlier posts stemmed from an announcement the company made in June 2020. On June 16, PepsiCo CEO Ramon Laguarta wrote: wrote "Today, I am announcing the next step in PepsiCos journey for racial equality: a more than $400 million set of initiatives over five years to lift up Black communities and increase Black representation at PepsiCo. These initiatives comprise a holistic effort for PepsiCo to walk the talk of a leading corporation and help address the need for systemic change." Specifically, the company pledged to spend, over the course of five years: We asked PepsiCo whether it, or any charitable entities associated with the company, had donated to groups or projects associated with BLM, including the Black Lives Matter Global Network Foundation, a Delaware-registered entity that is one of the leading formal embodiments of the movement. We also requested a list of any recipients of charitable disbursements from the $400 million investment announced in June. We did not receive a response in time for publication. However, since $415 million was reserved for supporting Black-owned suppliers, restaurants, and small businesses, as well as starting a fellowship program, it was therefore mathematically impossible for $100 million to have been pledged for BLM. The only component of that spending that appears to leave room for any involvement with BLM is the $6.5 million reserved for "community impact grants to address systemic issues." So even if that entire portion of funding went to BLM, it would still constitute only a small fraction of the $100 million and $400 million claimed in social media posts in the summer of 2020. None of those who promoted those claims presented any evidence that linked PepsiCo's pledged investment with specific, named organizations or projects associated with the broader BLM movement or the Black Lives Matter Global Network Foundation. The claim that PepsiCo had donated $100 million (or $400 million) to BLM appeared to be based on a basic misunderstanding of the company's June 2020 announcement  or the false assumption that any investment associated with the Black community or rectifying racial injustice must be directly connected to BLM.  Laguarta, Ramon.  "Pepsico's Journey to Racial Equality: A Message from Our CEO."
  PepsiCo. 16 June 2020. Talk-radio host and former Providence Mayor Vincent A. Buddy Cianci Jr. recently referred to a member of Governor Chafees staff as the guy who still owes $250,000 to the state.Ciancis jab at Michael F. Trainor,  aired on Sept. 1, 2011 on WPROs The Buddy Cianci Show.Because it wasnt the first time that Cianci had made the comment -- and because a bankruptcy judge had discharged most of Trainors debt nearly a year ago -- we thought it was worth looking into.Trainor has built a career in public relations representing some of the states high-profile politicians and corporate players. He was an advisor and spokesman for Lincoln Chafee during Chafees successful 2010 run for governor.But Trainor has had his own public relations problems ever since it became known late last year that he and a business partner from Connecticut defaulted on a $250,000 federal small business loan granted through the Rhode Island Economic Development Corporation.According to the EDC and bankruptcy court documents,  heres what happened:The duo and two of their partners started a Rhode Island company, called Genesis Distribution & Marketing, in 2006 to distribute and market retractable window screens and hurricane shutters.Trainor and his partners had already bought a company in Connecticut that distributed and installed hurricane shutters. And they planned to buy three more in the South that made the shutters. In January 2007, the EDC loaned  the business $250,000 through the federally funded Small Business Loan Fund to buy inventory, furniture, fixtures and equipment and hire three employees.But the business was short-lived.Just two months after receiving the EDC loan, the partners fell behind on their payments. In 2008, the company folded.Trainor and his partner from Connecticut, who had pledged their homes as collateral for the loan, talked with representatives from the EDC about a settlement. But the talks broke off in August 2009, when Trainor notified the agency that he was filing for bankruptcy.By then, the housing market had tanked along with the value of Trainors house.The partners had repaid $36,326 of the loan; with interest and late fees, the debt on the loan at the time totaled $250,723.In September 2010, a bankruptcy judge granted Trainors petition for Chapter 7bankruptcy.An explanation of the ruling in the bankruptcy court documents states: The chapter 7 discharge order eliminates a debtor's legal obligation to pay a debt that is discharged.The EDC loan was written off on Nov. 30, 2010. The agency concluded that it couldnt recover any money from its lien on Trainors home because the mortgage balance exceeded the propertys value.In December, 2010, Trainor, who was being considered for a job in the Chafee administration, toldThe Providence Journalthat he had not walked away from his obligations, saying hed like to negotiate a settlement with the EDC.Governor Chafee discussed Trainors situation on Channel 12 Newsmakers in December 2010, saying that there would be an effort made to repay the EDC. [Well] make sure Mike does that, he said.So it certainly sounded then as though Chafee and even Trainor himself believed that Trainor still owed the EDC the money.Chafee hired Trainor as spokesman when he took office in January, a job that paid $129,235.That month, Trainor also repaid the state $20,788.75 in taxes -- which were not  dischargeable in the bankruptcy -- owed on his failed business. In return, the state Division of Taxation removed the lien on his property. Six months later, in July, the bank sold his house at a foreclosure auction. Trainor served seven months as Chafees spokesman before he was transferred, in August, to the Department of Higher Education. His salary has dropped to $88,177. So, does he still owe the $250,000, as Cianci claims?That debt was discharged, Andrew S. Richardson, a lawyer and the U.S. Bankruptcy Court Trustee in the Trainor case, said. (He) can no longer be forced to pay the obligation -- nor can the creditor take any steps to try and collect it.In other words, Richardson said, theres no legal obligation that Trainor repay the loan.But other lawyers who specialize in bankruptcy see it differently.Most people understand (bankruptcy) as destroying the debt  but technically the discharge in bankruptcy doesnt destroy the debt at all, Jason Kilborn, a lawyer, law professor and resident scholar at the American Bankruptcy Institute in Virginia said. It does not destroy the obligation from a moral or even a legal obligation. It just prevents the creditors from collecting on that debt.The American Bankruptcy Institutewas founded in 1982 to provide Congress and the public with unbiased analysis of bankruptcy issues.In other words, the debt remains, even though the creditors are forced to write it off as uncollectable.So if the debt remains but Trainor isnt obligated to repay it, does he really owe the state money?We called Cianci and challenged him on his use of the term owes. Trainors bankruptcy discharge, he maintained, doesnt change the fact that Trainor still owes the EDC the $250,000.Maybe it was discharged, he said, but in the mind of the taxpayer who fronted the 250 grand? Yeah, he still owes it.Said Richardson, the trustee: I think it depends on whose point of view youre looking at, the creditor or the debtor.We agree.Practically speaking, the bankruptcy ruling and the fact that the mortgage on the Trainors home exceeded its value made it impossible for the EDC to recoup its money.But even after the debt was discharged in bankruptcy Trainor and Chafee both said theyd make an effort made to repay the EDC.After all, a debt can be owed even if its never collected.For that reason, we rule Ciancis statementMostly True. In June 2021, as former Minneapolis police officer Derek Chauvin faced sentencing for the murder of George Floyd, one widely-shared social media post accused Chauvin of other crimes, namely tax evasion. On June 25, @davenewworld_2 wrote on Twitter: "Derek Chauvin underreported half a million dollars in income while owing $20,000+ in taxes, and then fucking murdered George Floyd over an alleged $20 counterfeit bill..." wrote   That tweet, and the claims it contained, were further promoted in a popular Reddit post, on the following day. popular Reddit post On June 25, Hennepin County Judge Peter Cahill sentenced Chauvin to 22 and a half years in prison for the murder of Floyd, a Black man who died after Chauvin kneeled on his neck for more than nine minutes, in May 2020. sentenced The claim that Chauvin "underreported half a million dollars in income" stems from an ongoing criminal case against him, and his former wife Kellie May Chauvin. However, Chauvin has not yet entered a plea in that case, and has not been tried or convicted, as of June 28, 2021. As a result, we are issuing a rating of "Unproven," for now. When the case is resolved, we will update this fact check accordingly. A brief note: Kellie May and Derek Chauvin divorced in February 2021, and during those proceedings she expressed an intention to change her last name. However, we have not been able to find any record of that name change, so this article refers to her using her last-known last name, Chauvin.  expressed an intention On July 22, 2020, the office of Washington County Attorney Pete Orput charged the Chauvins with nine counts each of felony tax evasion, claiming that they "failed to file income tax returns and pay state income taxes, underreported and underpaid taxes on income generated from various employments each year, and failed to pay proper sales tax on a vehicle purchased in Minnesota." charged The complaint against Derek Chauvin summarized the details of their alleged offenses, as follows: complaint The Chauvins did not file tax returns in 2016, 2017, and 2018. The filed tax returns for years 2014 and 2015 did not report income received from D. Chauvin's off-duty security work and K. Chauvin's photography income. Tax returns for years 2016, 2017, 2018, and 2019 filed on June 26, 2020, did not report D. Chauvin's off-duty security work and K. Chauvin's photography income.  According to prosecutors, the Chauvins under-reported a total of $464,433 in income between 2014 and 2019, just short of the "half a million dollars" included in the widely-shared tweet from June 2021:  Source: Washington County Attorney's Office  However, the Chauvins have not yet entered pleas in this case, as of June 28, 2021. An omnibus hearing, at which the two defendants could potentially enter pleas, was scheduled for June 30, the Washington County Attorney's office told Snopes.  could potentially enter pleas Since Derek Chauvin has not yet pleaded guilty or been convicted of the charges against him, and neither might ever occur, the claim that he "under-reported half a million dollars in income" was unproven, as of June 28. When the case is resolved, we will update this fact check accordingly. When it comes to family budgets, one of the biggest bites can be child-care costs. Just how big is that bite? Child care costs account for 24% of a WI familys budget.This is well above the 10% affordability threshold established by the U.S. Dept. of Health & Human services. Paid Family Leave would allow parents the flexibility necessary 2 ensure they are able 2 put their family first, state Rep. David Crowley, D-Milwaukee, saidOct. 22, 2019in a Twitter post. Crowleys tweet came on the same day Assembly Democrats reintroduced the Wisconsin Family Medical Leave Insurance Act. Under the bill, Wisconsin workers without employer-funded family medical leave would be able to buy into a state-run insurance program. The proposal would expand the states current family medical leave law to allow individuals to take leave for more family members, including care of grandparents and siblings. According to a Legislative Reference Bureau analysis, a covered individual who is on family or medical leave would be eligible, beginning on Jan. 1, 2024, to receive up to 12 weeks of family or medical leave insurance benefits. This is thethird timethe measure has been introduced; it has not gained support from Republican lawmakers. Is Crowley, who has announced hiscandidacyfor Milwaukee County executive, on target about the cost of child care for Wisconsin families? Lets take a look. The evidence When asked for backup, Crowleys staff pointed us to a 2018United Wayreport. The report focused on a population group that has been given the acronym ALICE -- Asset Limited, Income Constrained, Employed. The ALICE Report was part of a collaboration between the United Way in Wisconsin and 16 other states. Indeed, the report itself includes a line that is nearly identical to Crowleys tweet: In the Household Survival Budget, child care accounts for24 percentof the Wisconsin family budget, well above the 10 percent affordability threshold established by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. But where did the numbers come from? Officials with the state Department of Children and Families told us they do not collect that data. They pointed us to a series of advocacy groups, as opposed to any government agency or repository. According to the United Way, the reports child care budget is based on the average annual cost of care for one infant and one preschooler in registered family child care homes -- the least expensive childcare option. The most recent U.S. Department of Health and Human Services reports,dating from 2016onward, recommend that child care be considered affordable if out-of-pocket costs are equivalent to 7% of total household income. In earlier years, dating back to at least 2015, the federal benchmark for child care affordability was reported as 10%, the figure referenced in the second part of Crowleys tweet. Additional groups Other advocacy groups have done their own tallies -- though each measures a slightly different thing: Economic Policy Institute: A July 2019 report from the institute puts the average cost of infant child care in Wisconsin at $12,597 a year. The report states that care for one infant would take up 18.5% of a median familys income in Wisconsin. Wisconsin is ranked 20th out of 50 states and the District of Columbia for most expensive infant care. The groupssource listincludes the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Child Care Aware of America and the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Child Care Aware: According to a2017 report, the average cost of center-based infant care across all states tops 27% of the median income for single parents, an increase of 3 percentage points from findings in the groups 2016 report, Parents and the High Cost of Care. The group says it obtains data through surveys of state child-care referral agencies. For states that did not respond to the survey, child care capacity and price data was pulled from publicly accessible databases and market rate surveys. Center for American Progress: On average, a family making the state median income in the United States would have to spend 18% of its income to cover the cost of child care for an infant, according to a November 2018report. The 18% number is based on the state median income for a family of four, which comes from 2018U.S. Department of Health and Human Servicesdata. Its also important to flag that the 18% number is the cost of child care for an infant in a center-based program. If you are focused on home-based child care as implied by one part of the statement we would note that the number for home-based family care is 11%, Steven Jessen-Howard, a Center for American Progress spokesman, said in an email. The high cost of child care is out of reach for most working families, said Simon Workman, co-author of the American Progress report in a statement. In short, each of the studies support Crowleys central point that child care costs consume a far greater share of an average Wisconsin familys budget than is recommended -- though the estimates vary, from 11% to 27%. Our ruling Crowley said child care costs account for 24% of a WI familys budget. Child care costs can vary, of course, based on age of the child, number of children receiving care and where the care is provided. But each of the available reports supports Crowleys main point -- that the costs far exceed the recommended amount -- even if the numbers come up somewhat different in each analysis. At PolitiFact Wisconsin, a statement is Mostly True when it is accurate but needs clarification or additional information. That fits here. This fact-check has been updated to change an emailed quote mistakenly attributed to Julia Cusick of the Center for American Progress to Steven Jessen-Howard from the same organization. FACT CHECK:  Photograph shows shooting victim Trayvon Martin at Space Camp.  Claim:  A photograph shows shooting victim Trayvon Martin at Space Camp in 2009.    MOSTLY  Summary:   A photograph of Trayvon Martin at a STEM (science, technology, engineering, and mathematics) Education Coalition-related activity is real, although it was taken at Experience Aviation and not at Space Camp (or Aviation Challenge Camp). Example:    [Collected via e-mail and Facebook, September 2015]  I saw a facebook post with a picture of a young black youth from 2009. The post says: Notice how we never knew Trayvon Martin went to space camp. How media shapes black boy narratives. Is this really a picture of Trayvon Martin at Space Camp? -------------------------------------------------------- I've seen this circulating on Twitter and Facebook... this particular one is from "The Other 98%." Its a photo supposedly of Trayvon Martin at Space Camp taken on 8/11/2009. I've been unable to find a reputable source corroborating its authenticity but it appears to be fake in order to advance a particular political persuasion. Origins:   In late September 2015, Florida resident George Zimmerman (acquitted of criminal charges in the fatal shooting of Trayvon Martin in 2012) attracted media attention once again after re-tweeting a photograph of Martin's body. Consequently, a social media claim about photograph documenting Martin's attendance at a Space Camp gained related traction. George Zimmerman Renewed interest in the photograph of Martin at Space Camp didn't begin with Zimmerman's controversial Twitter activity, as copies of it were circulating several weeks prior (in August 2014): Trayvon Martin at Space Camp in Florida. #BlackLivesMatter pic.twitter.com/z98u2d4OPs #BlackLivesMatter pic.twitter.com/z98u2d4OPs  Khaled Bey (@KhaledBeydoun) August 15, 2015 August 15, 2015   Notice how we never knew #TrayvonMartin went to Space Camp. how media shapes black boy narratives. #GeorgeZimmerman pic.twitter.com/18NjL0fwz2 #TrayvonMartin #GeorgeZimmerman pic.twitter.com/18NjL0fwz2  Raqiyah Mays (@RaqiyahMays) August 18, 2015 August 18, 2015   While the claim was neither extraordinary nor implausible, persistent tensions over Martin's death and Zimmerman's acquittal led to doubt among some social media users about whether the photograph was authentic. Debate over its authenticity escalated after Zimmerman's re-tweet, and on 26-27 September 2015 comedian Steve Marmel published items to Twitter and Facebook encouraging fellow users to respond to Zimmerman with the photograph whenever he mentioned Martin on social media. Twitter In his Facebook post, Marmel included the photograph shown above and explained his intent in publicizing the image: post Yesterday, I learned that George Zimmerman decided it would be fun to retweet Trayvon Martin's dead body. Soulless. Someone on this page - you can scroll the comments to see who - suggested that whenever Zimmerman does that.... And he does it a lot because he seems to be a sociopath, the reply should be this. A picture of the life he took. On his timeline. For all to see. I'm tired of this guy too. I want twitter to shut off his megaphone - to stop him from harassing INDIVIDUAL PEOPLE and doing this endless end-zone dance about how he got away with it. And after that, I never want to speak of him again. I do not wish him harm. I just wish him obscurity. Until then: Support for this man should be a societal litmus test that you either pass or fail. I thought this was a good idea.  Claims (unaccompanied by photographs) that Trayvon Martin had attended Space Camp emerged early on in the debate over his death. A 13 April 2012 editorial in Ebony, published when polemics assailing Martin's character had not yet begun to gain significant traction, examined the impact of respectability politics on the Martin family during the very early, pre-trial days of the case. At the time of the article's publication, Ebony's assertion about Martin and Space Camp was not yet the sort that would solicit doubt or skepticism as part of a narrative that hadn't yet developed: respectability However, it is worth considering how differently this developing story might be playing out if Trayvon and his clan were not such respectable Negroes; no one has been able to document any real evidence of Martin being anything other than a typical kid. One who wore Hollister clothes, went to space camp and played football. One who seemed more poised for the next season of Degrassi before youd ever picture him hanging around the kids from The Wire. A 19 July 2013 HLN piece partly corroborated the claim by way of Martin's mother, Sybrina Fulton: piece Fulton also made mention of her son's interest in aviation.  She noted, "I actually have a brother that was involved in aviation. I don't want to say 'convinced,' but he encouraged him to pursue aviation. And Trayvon did. He went to experience aviation  the program Barrington Irving has. He started going there, like, over the summer.  He really enjoyed the program. He really was very interested. He would not miss a day. It was just something that he was focused on. He wanted to just be in the aviation industry."  The photograph of now-contested authenticity depicted Martin in a hangar wearing a Space Camp-style flight suit, and it was dated 11 August 2009. Martin was repeatedly mentioned on Facebook by Experience Aviation shortly after his death, and related organizations similarly confirmed that Martin attended "Experience Aviation" in the summer of 2009. Experience Aviation's web site details the organization's mission: Space Camp flight suit mentioned Experience Aviation Experience Aviation Experience Aviation is a nonprofit organization that utilizes aviation to build STEM skills in students and direct them toward careers in aviation and other STEM-related fields. In 2005, at age 21, Barrington Irving founded the non-profit organization, Experience Aviation Inc., to address the shortage of skilled professionals in aviation and other STEM-related industries by motivating youth and encouraging them to pursue careers involving Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math. Experience Aviation is a 501-C3 non-profit organization based at Opa-Locka Executive Airport and the Glenn Curtiss Mansion in Miami Springs. The organization operates two 3,200-square-foot Learning Center facilities. Successful programs offered at the Center and at community partner facilities include a 10-week Build & Soar Project, a STEM Summer Academy, Inspiration Career Tours, and a Career Development/Internship program.  Irving spoke of Martin in a 30 March 2012 CNN piece about the teen's death and was depicted alongside a younger Martin in a separate article: piece separate During the summer of 2009, his parents  who separated when Martin was 11, but shared custody  enrolled their 14-year-old son in "Experience Aviation," a nonprofit program in Opa-Locka, Florida, that introduces young people to aviation. The seven-week program is the brainchild of Barrington Irving, the youngest person ever  and the first black pilot  to fly solo around the world, a feat he accomplished in 2007 at the age of 23. Irving remembered Martin as "a polite kid" who enjoyed flying. "When I first met Trayvon he had a strong interest in football. He reminded me of myself because I had a strong interest in football until I fell in love with aviation," said Irving. After graduating from the program, Martin spent the following summer as a volunteer, assisting new students enrolled in the aviation program. The photograph was authentic as confirmed by multiple involved parties in April and May of 2015. It bordered on splitting hairs to note that the program was not specifically Space Camp, but a separate, STEM-based summer science enrichment program called Experience Aviation. Conflation of the two was neither likely deliberate nor largely inaccurate: Martin did attend aviation camp during the summer of 2009, and was fondly remembered by the organization that hosted him. The September 2015 controversy (reignited by Zimmerman's tacit Twitter approval of a graphic photo of Martin's dead body) filtered the claim through a then-current lens: folks believed those who maintained Martin went to Space Camp had  fabricated the detail to further paint the teen as sympathetic or otherwise more worthy of compassion in light of that renewed debate. But the photograph appeared on the Internet no later than May 2012, a time when attacks on Martin's character had not yet begun in earnest. Martin's STEM camp attendance described in print in April 2012 (in a slightly inaccurate manner), and photographs supporting that assertion surfaced on the web in May 2012 or earlier. Not only did those separate assertions precede the bulk later claims about Martin, they appeared separately and remained largely uncontested until Zimmerman's retweet in September 2015. May 2012 Last updated:     28 September 2015 Originally published:   28 September 2015 Amid national debates about income inequality and tax cuts for the ultra-rich, one talking point is frequently highlighted in online memes and by political figures such as Bernie Sanders is that online retailing giant Amazon.com, despite taking in $5.6 billion in profit in 2017, paid no federal corporate income taxes for that year: Bernie Sanders   (With respect to the claim about Amazon employees on welfare, see our fact check on that topic here.) here In regards to U.S. federal income taxes, the claim that Amazon paid none in 2017 is almost certainly factual. While Amazons tax filings are not public, their SEC filing for the year 2017 illustrates that the company used the tax code expertly (and legally) to their advantage, so well that the company anticipated a $137 million tax refund from the federal government (numbers are in millions of dollars): SEC filing   Amazon did pay taxes to individual U.S. states ($211 million) and to international jurisdictions ($724 million), but their federal income tax burden was (less than) zero. The filings indicate that two factors provided the lion share of Amazons reduced federal tax liability: $220 million worth of tax credits, and $917 million in tax-deductible executive pay derived from the sale of stocks:   The third negative item in the SEC filing, $789 million in reduced tax burden as a result of the 2017 Tax Act, will be applied to future tax years, according to a report from the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy. report SEC filings do not require a company to list the specific credits they utilize, but there are several avenues Amazon would likely have pursued. Annette Nellen, a professor and director of the Master of Science in Taxation program at San Jose University, said that Amazons write-offs likely include credits for research and development, domestic production, and equipment depreciation. And according to a report from the Economic Policy Institute, Amazon receives myriad tax incentives from state and local governments as well: said report The expansion of Amazons physical distribution network has coincided with a strategic business plan of negotiating millions in tax abatements, credits, exemptions, and infrastructure assistance from state and local governments in the name of regional economic development. By the end of 2016, Amazon had likely received over $1 billion in state and local subsidies for its facilities, which would include not only fulfillment centers but sortation centers that only sort packages, mailing centers, and other facilities. Publicly-traded corporations can list the stock options they grant to employees as a business cost in their accounting, and if an option-receiving employee makes over $1 million a year in salary, the profits from the sale of those stocks can be then counted as a federal income tax deduction for the corporation (primarily due to a Clinton-era compromise over how to cap executive pay). Stock options allow an employee to purchase stock in their employers company at a set price, regardless of its current market value: list Options give executives and investors the right to buy shares of a company at a later date and at specific prices. For example, if a chief executive joins a media company when its stock is trading at $55 a share, but years later, the share price has skyrocketed to $100, that chief executive can still buy the shares at $55, pocketing the massive difference. In the cases of their highest paid employees, Amazon and other companies are able to deduct the massive difference employees make when they sell that stock at a profit. According to the Center for Tax Justice, because companies typically low-ball the estimated values, they usually end up with much bigger tax write-offs than the amounts they deduct as a 'cost' in computing the profits they report to shareholders. The $917 million in stock-based compensation listed in Amazon's SEC filing likely stems from their top employees' cashing in on their stock options for a large profit. deduct While it is impossible to know the exact amount of money Amazon did or did not pay to the federal government in 2017, their own accounting suggests that they expected their federal corporate income tax burden to be negative that year.  U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission.  Amazon.com Inc. Form 10-K"
  2 February 2018.
 Gardner, Mathew.  "Amazon Inc. Paid Zero in Federal Taxes in 2017, Gets $789 Million Windfall from New Tax Law."
  Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy.  13 February 2018.
 Tobias, Manuela.  "Bernie Sanders Says Amazon Paid No Federal Income Tax in 2017. He's Right."
  Politifact.  3 May 2018. 
 Jones, Janell and Ben Zipperer.  "Unfulfilled Promises."
  Economic Policy Institute.  1 February 2018. 
 Gunjan, Banerji.  "Potential Loser in Tax Overhaul: Executive Stock Options."
  The Wall Street Journal.  19 December 2017.
 Citizens for Tax Justice.  Fortune 500 Corporations Used Stock Option Loophole to Avoid $64.6 Billion in Taxes Over the Past Five Years."
  9 June 2016. Claim:  E-petitions urge Americans to buy/not buy Citgo brand gasoline.  OF AND  INFORMATION Examples:  [Collected via e-mail, 2006] Looking for an easy way to protest Bush foreign policy week after week? And an easy way to help alleviate global poverty? Buy your gasoline at Citgo stations. And tell your friends. Of the top oil producing countries in the world, only one is a democracy with a president who was elected on a platform of using his nation's oil revenue to benefit the poor. The country is Venezuela. The President is Hugo Chavez. Call him "the Anti-Bush." Citgo is a U.S. refining and marketing firm that is a wholly owned subsidiary of Venezuela's state-owned oil company. Money you pay to Citgo goes primarily to Venezuela  not Saudi Arabia or the Middle East. There are 14,000 Citgo gas stations in the US. (Click here to find one near you.) By buying your gasoline at Citgo, you are contributing to the billions of dollars that Venezuela's democratic government is using to provide health care, literacy and education, and subsidized food for the majority of Venezuelans. here Instead of using government to help the rich and the corporate, as Bush does, Chavez is using the resources and oil revenue of his government to help the poor in Venezuela. A country with so much oil wealth shouldn't have 60 percent of its people living in poverty, earning less than $2 per day. With a mass movement behind him, Chavez is confronting poverty inVenezuela. That's why large majorities have consistently backed him in democratic elections. And why the Bush administration supported an attempted military coup in 2002 that sought to overthrow Chavez. So this is the opposite of a boycott. Call it a BUYcott. Spread the word.  Of course, if you can take mass transit or bike or walk to your job, you should do so. And we should all work for political changes that move our country toward a cleaner environment based on renewable energy. The BUYcott is for those of us who don't have a practical alternative to filling up our cars. So get your gas at Citgo. And help fuel a democratic revolution in Venezuela.  Venezuela Dictator Vows To Bring Down U.S. Government Venezuela government is sole owner of Citgo Gasoline Company Venezuela Dictator Hugo Chavez has vowed to bring down the U.S. government. Chavez, president of Venezuela, told a TV audience: "Enough of imperialist aggression; we must tell the world: down with the U.S. empire. We have to bury imperialism this century." The guest on his television program, beamed across Venezuela, was Cindy Sheehan, the antiwar activist. Chavez recently had as his guest Harry Belafonte, who called President Bush "the greatest terrorist in the world." Chavez is pushing a socialist revolution and has a close alliance with Cuban dictator Fidel Castro. Regardless of your feelings about the war in Iraq, the issue here is that we have a socialist dictator vowing to bring down the government of the U.S. And he is using our money to achieve his goal! The Venezuela government, run by dictator Chavez, is the sole owner of Citgo gas company. Sales of products at Citgo stations send money back to Chavez to help him in his vow to bring down our government. Why should U.S. citizens who love freedom be financing a dictator who has vowed to take down our government? Very important. Please forward this to your friends and family. Most of them don't know that Citgo is owned by the Venezuela government. Origins:  Dueling Citgo e-mails reached our inbox in early 2006, one urging Americans to buy only Citgo brand gasoline in order to support "Venezuela's democratic government" and avoid sending more U.S. dollars to Saudi Arabia and other Middle Eastern countries, and the other urging Americans to boycott Citgo over remarks by Venezuelan president Hugo Chvez. Hugo Chvez The television incident referenced in the second message occurred on 29 January 2006, when anti-war activist Cindy Sheehan appeared on Chvez's weekly TV broadcast, following a similar recent meeting between the Venezuelan president and entertainer Harry Belafonte: Cindy Sheehan, who gained international fame when she camped outside President Bush's ranch in an anti-war protest, plans to pitch her tent again, Venezuela's president said Sunday as he urged activists worldwide to help bring down "the U.S. empire." Hugo Chvez, an arm around Sheehan's shoulders, told a group of activists that she had told him "she is going to put up her tent again in front of Mr. Danger's ranch." In some of his strongest recent comments aimed at Washington, Chvez condemned the Bush administration and said his audience should work toward ending U.S. dominance. "Enough already with the imperialist aggression!" Chvez said, listing countries from Panama to Iraq where the U.S. military has intervened. "Down with the U.S. empire! It must be said, in the entire world: Down with the empire!" Sheehan also noted that singer and activist Harry Belafonte recently called Bush "the greatest terrorist in the world," and said, "I agree with him. George Bush is responsible for killing tens of thousands of innocent people." Hugo Chvez, the president of Venezuela, is certainly no fan of the U.S., and his trading rhetorical political barbs with U.S. government officials (and others) has been common news fodder for several years now.  (Chvez was elected president of Venezuela in 1998, and after a failed coup in 2002, he won a referendum over whether he should serve out the remainder of his term.  The war of words reached a  coup  new peak in August 2005, when Christian broadcaster Pat Robertson suggested to viewers that the U.S. should assassinate Chvez.) Pat Robertson In 2006 U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice labeled Chvez a "challenge for democracy" and a danger to Latin America and announced the establishment of contacts with government officials in other South American countries for the purpose of creating a united front to oppose Venezuela. Chvez responded to Rice's comments in a television appearance by blowing her a screen kiss and announcing, "Don't mess with me, girl," as well as warning that he would consider suspending Venezuela's oil exports if the U.S. went "too far with the Venezuelan government."  (Venezuela is the fourth-largest supplier of crude oil to the U.S., sending the states about 1.5 million barrels daily.)  Chvez also denounced President George W. Bush as "the devil" in a September 2006 speech before the U.N. General Assembly and called Bush an "alcoholic" during a visit to Harlem the following day. U.S. attitudes towards President Chvez in early 2006 tended to be polarized along political lines, with one side declaring him a dangerous dictator who supported America's enemies, while the other side defended him as a democratically-elected leader who was the target of the Bush administration's enmity primarily because he dared to stand up to the U.S.  Excerpts from two U.S. newspaper Op-Ed pieces of that period illustrated this dichotomy: [Corrales, 2006] Hugo Chvez [was] elected president of Venezuela in December 1998. The lieutenant colonel had attempted a coup six years earlier. When that failed, he won power at the ballot box and is now approaching a decade in office. In that time, he has concentrated power, harassed opponents, punished reporters, persecuted civic organizations and increased state control of the economy.  [W]hen it comes to accountability and limits on presidential power, the picture grows dark. Mr. Chvez has achieved absolute power over all state institutions that might check his power. He controls the legislature, the Supreme Court, two armed forces, the gigantic state-owned oil company PDVSA  the only important source of state revenue, which comes in handy at election time  and the institution that monitors electoral rules. As if that weren't enough, a new media law allows the state to supervise media content, and a revised criminal code permits the state to imprison any citizen for showing "disrespect" toward government officials.  By compiling and posting on the Internet lists of voters and their political tendencies  including whether they signed a petition for a recall referendum in 2004  Venezuela has achieved reverse accountability. The state is watching and punishing citizens for political actions it disapproves of rather than the other way around. If democracy requires checks on the power of incumbents, Venezuela doesn't come close.  [Weisbrot, 2006] Venezuela is a democracy  despite the best efforts of the Bush team to use President Hugo Chvez's close relations with Cuba's Fidel Castro as evidence to the contrary. Its elections are transparent and have been certified by observers from the Organization of American States, the Carter Center and the European Union. Freedom of speech, of the press, of assembly and of association prevail, at least as compared with the rest of the hemisphere.  In fact, most of the media remains controlled by the opposition, which attacks the government endlessly on all the major TV channels. It is the most vigorous and partisan opposition media in the hemisphere, one that has not been censored under Chvez. Like all of Latin America, Venezuela has governance problems: a weak state, limited rule of law, corruption and incompetent government. But no reputable human rights organization has alleged that Venezuela under Chvez has deteriorated with regard to civil liberties, human rights or democracy, as compared with prior governments. Nor does the country compare unfavorably on these criteria with its neighbors in the region. In Peru, the government has shut down opposition TV stations; in Colombia, union organizers are murdered with impunity. From a Latin American point of view, Venezuelans should have the right to choose their own president  even one who sometimes insults the American president  without interference from the United States. And Chvez's anger at Washington, from Latin Americans' point of view, appears justified. U.S. government documents released under our Freedom of Information Act indicate that Washington not only supported but was involved in the military coup that temporarily overthrew Venezuela's elected government in April 2002. Neither a "buycott" nor a boycott was likely to accomplish much beyond the symbolic.  In the first case, the Citgo brand (marketed by Citgo Petroleum Corporation, which has been owned by Petrleos de Venezuela,  Citgo the national oil company of Venezuela, since 1990) doesn't have nearly the capacity and presence in the U.S. to satisfy demand and wean American consumers from Middle Eastern oil supplies; in the second case, boycotting a gasoline brand over political issues is problematic for a number of reasons (not least of which is the notion that threatening not to buy gasoline from someone who is threatening not to sell it to you doesn't sound like an effective ploy for either side).   Many different oil companies buy crude oil from Venezuela, so even Americans who shun CITGO brand gasoline have no guarantee that they aren't still sending their money to that country.  And although Citgo may be owned by Petrleos de Venezuela, it is a formerly American company which is still headquartered in the U.S. (in Houston, Texas), employs 4,000 people, and supplies 14,000 independent retailers with gasoline and other petroleum products  Americans with no substantive connection to Venezuela who would be economically harmed by such an action. (Citgo also provides free or discounted heating oil to low-income communities and tribal reservations within the United States.) And, of course, in a tight oil market Citgo could likely find alternative buyers for its products far more easily than the U.S. could make up the shortfall created by a cut-off of Venezuelan oil.   As we've noted in many other articles discussing various schemes regarding where and how people should purchase gasoline, the global and fungible nature of the world oil market doesn't really provide consumers with many effective opportunities to influence political issues through their buying patterns.  articles Since the original e-petitions cited above originally appeared in early 2006, they have gone through a number of changes that added and dropped additional claims about Citgo.  In September 2006, the following addendum to one of the Citgo-related e-mails began circulating:  Friends, I asked you earlier to boycott Citgo Gas Stations in response to the actions of Hugo Chavez and the Venezuelan Government.  I am coming to you again and asking you to take this a step further. Many 7-11 Stores sell Citgo gas.  I ask you to boy cut these stores and notify the Southland Corp. & the store managers of your action and be sure they know that it is because they sell Citgo Gas Products. You may think this is an extreme step but Hugo & other American haters count on Americans not to have the stomach to do anything. Prove them wrong! One by one we can make a difference.  Please forward this to others if you believe in taking a stand against the thugs of our century. God Bless America! Shortly afterwards, 7-Eleven Inc. announced it was dropping Citgo Petroleum as its gasoline supplier, although the convenience store chain also stated the move was not motivated by political issues: 7-Eleven's contract with Citgo was due to expire at the end of September 2006, and the company had already made plans to market its own brand of gasoline. In October 2006, the following e-mail about Citgo and Petro Express began circulating: CITGO, BEING AWARE THAT GASOLINE SALES ARE DOWN DUE TO U.S. CUSTOMERS NOT WANTING TO BUY FROM "CHAVEZ".... HAVE  BEGUN CHANGING THE NAME OF SOME OF THEIR CIRCLE K STORES IN TEXAS & OKLAHOMA...AND POSSIBLY OTHER PLACES AS WELL, TO: "PETRO  EXPRESS" THEREFORE, DO NOT BUY FROM "PETRO EXPRESS", ...NOR CITGO....  "PETRO EXPRESS" IS ALSO 100% OWNED BY "CHAVEZ" .... Both Circle K and Petro Expressare privately-owned chains of convenience stores, the former an international property of Quebec-based Alimentation Couche-Tard, and the latter owned by The Pantry, Inc., which is headquartered in Sanford, North Carolina.  Neither chain is owned by Citgo or the Venezuela government.   Circle K Petro Express The Pantry Petro Express outlets (which the parent company has been converting to their Kangaroo Express brand) were known for selling Citgo-branded gasoline.  The Pantry stated in October 2006 that the chain would be phasing out sales of that brand by 2007, and  soon after The Pantry's acquisition of Petro Express in 2007,  the new parent company announced that gasoline sales at those outlets would be converted to Chevron's Texaco brand.  However, The Pantry's 2010 annual report indicates that Citgo is still one of their fuel suppliers, with a contract running through August 2013: acquisition As of September 30, 2010, Marathon, BP and CITGO supplied approximately 68% of our fuel purchases. On July26, 2010, we entered into a new fuel supply agreement with Marathon. Our contract with Marathon for unbranded fuel anddistillate expires on December 31, 2017, and our contract with Marathon for branded fuel and distillate expires on June 30,2013, with an option for the Company to renew until December 31, 2017. As a result of this new fuel agreement withMarathon, we now have three principal suppliers for the majority of our fuel. On September 1, 2010 we entered into aMarketer Franchise Agreement, including an Addendum to Marketer Franchise Agreement, with CITGO. Our contract withCITGO expires August 31, 2013 and our contract with BP expires September 30, 2012. It is not uncommon for independent stations and chains to switch fuel suppliers from time to time.  Occurrences of independents' dropping Citgo in favor of other suppliers are often misinterpreted by the public as attempts on Citgo's part to "switch names" in order to fool consumers into continuing to purchase Citgo gasoline. An addendum about AK-47 factories and Iranian-run oil refineries was also later appended to this piece: NEWS FLASH: Chavez is NOW getting a Russian Weapons Factory built by Putin. The RUSSIANS are building an AK-47 Kalashnikov Assault Rifle  factory in Venezuela to give armament support to Communist Rebel groups throughout the Americas. Chavez NOW has IRANIANS operating his oil refineries in Venezuela for him. It is likely only  a matter of time, if not already, before Chavez has Iranian built LONG RANGE missiles,  with a variety of warhead types aimed at: Guess Who? According to news reports, Russia's Izhevsk Mechanical Plant (IMP) has already manufactured and supplied about 100,000 AK-103 assault rifles to Venezuela under an earlier contract, and they have also signed a contract for two arms plants in Venezuela (one to produce AK-103a  and the other to produce 7.62-mm ammunition for those rifles), with construction to begin at the end of 2007 and be completed by 2010. Also in 2007, Venezuela and Iran signed a $4 billion deal to develop Ayacucho 7, a block of the lucrative Orinoco Reserve in Venezuela which is believed to hold more than 30 billion barrels of oil.  Under the deal, Iran will build four oil rigs off the shore of Venezuela by the end of the year.  Last updated:  8 January 2012    Corrales, Javier.  "Hugo Chvez Is Part Robin Hood, Part Oil Mogul, Part Electoral Wizard."   The Dallas Morning News.  12 February 2006.    Douglass, Elizabeth.  "7-Eleven Dumps Venezuela-Backed Citgo to Pump Own Brand."   Los Angeles Times.  28 September 2006  (p. C1).    Gentile, Carmen J.  "Venezuela, Iran Team Up on Oil."   United Press International.  17 July 2007.    Kirkpatrick, Christopher D.  "Petro Express Nixing Citgo Gas."   The Charlotte Observer.  17 October 2006.    Padgett, Tim.  "Chavez: 'Bush Has Called Me Worse Things.'"   Time.  22 September 2006.    Sieff, Martin.  "Defense Focus: Venezuela's Kalashnikovs."   United Press International.  15 August 2007.    Stock, Sue.  "Petro Express Stores to Get Name Change."   The Charlotte Observer.  3 February 2010.    Weisbrot, Mark.  "The Failure of Hugo-Bashing."   Los Angeles Times.  9 March 2006  (p. B13).    Associated Press.  "Chvez Hosts Peace Activist."   Miami Herald.  31 January 2006.    The Australian.  "US Brushes Off Chavez Barbs to Rice."   22 February 2006.    BBC News.  "Profile: Hugo Chavez."   13 October 2005.    Diario El Universal.  "US Calls Empty Rhetoric President Chvez' Threats of Cutting Oil Supply."   21 February 2006. Jesse Ventura doesnt hold back when it comes to criticizing government.As a former governor of Minnesota, hes seen his share of politics on both sides of the aisle and details in his new book, DemoCRIPS and ReBLOODlicans: No More Gangs in Government, why he likens the two mainstream political parties to the infamous street gangs. Ventura notes that while gang activity generally affects neighborhoods, the actions of both parties affect the nation.Theres 21 congressmen and senators that have been convicted of felonies that still get their retirement, even in jail, Ventura said in an interview with MyCentralJersey.com, ahead of a Sept. 16 appearance at Rutgers University in New Brunswick. They dont have to wait until theyre 65.There are quite a few congressmen and senators who have been convicted of felonies, but multiple public databases with conflicting information about the number of convicted federal lawmakers makes it impossible to assess an exact number. We were intrigued, however, by the claim that federal lawmakers can collect taxpayer-funded pensions while incarcerated. And short of those officials being convicted of treason or espionage, its true.Lets look at how pensions work for members of Congress.Officials participate in one of two retirement systems, depending on when they were first elected to the House or Senate. But they do not forfeit their pensions or accumulated retirement income if indicted, or convicted of most felonies.That struck a nerve with the National Taxpayers Union which, in mid-2011, sent a letter to Illinois Sen. Mark Kirk, a Republican, to express support for his bill to increase the number of circumstances under which a member of Congress could lose his pension.Since the 1980s, NTU has identified lawmakers convicted on charges ranging from bribery to fraud who were each receiving pensions worth tens of thousands of dollars annually (or more)  sometimes while serving prison terms, NTU Executive Vice President Pete Sepp wrote. The NTU advocates for lower taxes.But can a member of Congress simultaneously receive a taxpayer-funded pension while incarcerated?The short answer is yes, John David, a senior research fellow with the Conservative Heritage Foundation, said in an e-mail. Times have changed to some extent, but if the Member is not convicted of one of the offenses that would cost him/her the pension, it will be paid as promised -- even to prison.Congressmen and senators can lose their pensions if they are convicted of a national security offense or a crime relating to public corruption and abuse of ones official position, according to the 2008 Congressional Research Service report Status of a Senator Who Has Been Indicted for or Convicted of a Felony.So, there are circumstances in which a member of Congress cant receive pension benefits.As for the rest of Venturas claim, members dont have to be 65, either, to get their retirement.A 2007 Congressional Research Service report, Retirement Benefits for Members of Congress, states members are eligible for a pension at age 62 if they have completed at least five years of service. The age requirement drops to 50 for member with 20 years of service or any age after 25 years of service.Ventura did not return three requests for comment.Our rulingVentura claimed in an interview that theres 21 congressmen and senators convicted of felonies that still get their retirement, even in jail. They dont have to wait until theyre 65.For this fact-check, we looked only at the claim that federal lawmakers convicted of felonies and can still collect retirement benefits while in jail. We attempted to count the number of convicted national lawmakers, but there are multiple public databases with conflicting information on the number of congressmen and senators convicted of felonies.In most cases, a congressman or senator convicted of a felony can receive his pension as long as the charge is not one that violates national security or relates to public corruption and abuse of official position.Members also receive pensions based on completed years of service, not an age requirement of 65.We rate the claim Mostly True.To comment on this story, go toNJ.com. One of the key issues in the global warming debate is whether modern scientists have sufficient data and tools to determine that current warming trends are indicative of long-term climatic changes rather than relatively short-term weather pattern variability.  A text widely shared online seemingly provides an example of the pitfalls of mistaking the latter for the former, purportedly reproducing a 1922 newspaper article warning that the Arctic ocean was experiencing a radical change in climatic conditions which was warming its waters, melting ice, and disrupting wildlife: The Arctic ocean is warming up, icebergs are growing scarcer and in some places the seals are finding the water too hot, according to a report to the Commerce Department yesterday from Consulafft, at Bergen, Norway. Reports from fishermen, seal hunters and explorers all point to a radical change in climate conditions and hitherto unheard-of temperatures in the Arctic zone. Exploration expeditions report that scarcely any ice has been met as far north as 81 degrees 29 minutes. Soundings to a depth of 3,100 meters showed the gulf stream still very warm. Great masses of ice have been replaced by moraines of earth and stones, the report continued, while at many points well known glaciers have entirely disappeared. Very few seals and no white fish are found in the eastern Arctic, while vast shoals of herring and smelts which have never before ventured so far north, are being encountered in the old seal fishing grounds.  I apologize, I neglected to mention that this report was from November 2, 1922.  As reported by the AP and published in The Washington Post  88 years ago! The text in the above example is a genuine transcription of a 1922 newspaper article, an Associated Press account which appeared on page 2 of the Washington Post on 2 November of that year: That article in turn was based on information relayed by the American consul in Norway to the U.S. State Department in October 1922 and published in the Monthly Weather Review: Monthly Weather Review The Arctic seems to be warming up. Reports from fisherman, seal hunters, and explorers who sail the seas about Spitzbergen and the eastern Arctic, all point to a radical change in climatic conditions, and hitherto underheard-of high temperatures in that part of the earth's surface. In August, 1922, the Norwegian Department of Commerce sent an expedition to Spitzbergen and Bear Island under the leadership of Dr. Adolf Hoel, lecturer on geology at the University of Christiania. Its purpose was to survey and chart the lands adjacent to the Norwegian mines on those islands, take soundings of the adjacent waters, and make other oceanographic investigations. Ice conditions were exceptional. In fact, so little ice has never before been noted. The expedition all but established a record, sailing as far north as 81 29' in ice-free water. This is the farthest north ever reached with modern oceanographic apparatus. The character of the waters of the great polar basin has heretofore been practically unknown. Dr. Hoel reports that he made a section of the Gulf Stream at  81 north latitude and took soundings to a depth of 3,100 meters. These show the Gulf Stream very warm, and it could be traced as a surface current till beyond the 81st parallel. The warmth of the waters makes it probable that the favorable ice conditions will continue for some time. In connection with Dr. Hoel's report, it is of interest to note the unusually warm summer in Arctic Norway and the observations of Capt. Martin Ingebrigsten, who has sailed the eastern Arctic for 54 years past. He says that he first noted warmer conditions in 1918, that since that time it has steadily gotten warmer, and that to-day the Arctic of that region is not recognizable as the same region of 1868 to 1917. Many old landmarks are so changed as to be unrecognizable. Where formerly great masses of ice were found, there are now often moraines, accumulations of earth and stones. At many points where glaciers formerly extended far into the sea they have entirely disappeared. As interesting as this nearly century-old article might be from a modern perspective, however, it isn't substantive evidence either for or against the concept of anthropogenic global warming.  As documented elsewhere, the warming phenomena observed in 1922 proved to be indicative only of a local event in Spitzbergen, not a trend applicable to the Arctic as a whole. elsewhere Associated Press.  "Arctic Ocean Getting Warm; Seals Vanish and Icebergs Melt."
  The Washington Post.   2 November 1922  (p. 2). Jeff Bezos, founder and chief executive officer of online retailing giant Amazon.com, became the world's richest person in October 2017, according to Forbes magazine. And in January 2018, Bezos' company opened the first "Amazon Go"  a new kind of store with no checkout required  in Seattle, Washington, to considerable fanfare: Forbes Amazon Go  Amid a wave of increased press coverage and scrutiny, a viral meme made a number number of claims about Amazon in January 2018: meme  A spokesperson for Amazon confirmed the fact that the company's new grocery store, Amazon Go, does not accept SNAP benefits or food stamps as a form of payment. The source of the claim about Amazon workers receiving food stamps was a January 2018 report by the nonprofit group PolicyMatters Ohio, which estimated that roughly 700 Amazon workers in Ohio (more than 10 percent of the company's employees in the state) receive Supplementary Nutrition Assistance Program benefits: report As of last August, 1,430 Amazon employees or family members were getting assistance under the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), according to the Ohio Department of Job & Family Services. In August, the average Ohio family receiving SNAP contained just more than two people. Based on that average, more than 700 Amazon workers received benefits that month, or more than one in every 10 of those Ohioans employed by the company. PolicyMatters Ohio arrived at that estimate by finding the number of Ohio food stamp recipients who are part of a household where someone works for Amazon (1,430), then dividing that by 2.02 (the average size of a household on food stamps in Ohio at that time). The resulting estimate is about 700 workers, or 11.8 of Amazon's Ohio workforce. We were unable to find any research or data on Amazon workers' availing themselves of food stamps in other states.  average size PolicyMatters Ohio sent us figures to corroborate their claims, which they received from the Ohio Department of Job and Family Services. (That data is available for download in spreadsheet form here.) Further, whether or not an individual qualifies for food stamps is determined by more than just income. Having a gross monthly household income at or below 130 percent of the federal poverty limit is an important factor. However, you can also qualify for SNAP benefits with an income above the poverty limit if someone in your household is disabled or elderly, and the poverty limit is pro-rated depending on the size of your household. here factor Another factor to consider is whether a worker is employed by Amazon on a full-time or part-time basis. Someone whose only source of income was their part-time job at an Amazon fulfillment center would earn a lower monthly income than a full-time worker in a similar position, even if they received the same hourly wage. This circumstance might well qualify someone for food stamps even if their hourly wage at Amazon were otherwise not too bad. In an email, an Amazon spokesperson told us that Amazon full-time hourly employees in Ohio earn between $14.50 and $15 an hour as a starting wage with regular pay increases plus Amazon stock and performance based bonuses." On 1 February 2018, Amazon's jobs web site listed seven open warehouse positions in Ohio. Only one was full-time, a description which a company spokesperson told us entails 40 hours of work per week. The hourly wage for the part-time jobs ranged from $10.50 to $11.75, while a "reduced time" position came with a starting rate of between $14.50 and $17 an hour. The full-time position had a starting hourly wage of between $14.50 and $15. positions According to a major 2016 report by the non-profit Institute for Local Self-Reliance, a group that advocates for more sustainable community development, Amazon's warehouse workers across 11 metropolitan areas in the United States earned, on average, 15 percent lower than could be expected for a worker in that industry (page 39). report Institute for Local Self-Reliance page 39 Amazon told us this analysis was "flawed," because it compared Amazon wages with "traditional warehouse jobs and compensation," claiming that the appropriate comparison would be between Amazon wages and retail wages, because "that industry more closely resembles the environment of an Amazon fulfillment center." Additionally, the report's authors said it was difficult to ascertain exactly what proportion of warehouse workers were on permanent contracts, and what proportion were temps, but estimated (based on news reports and the industry average) that the permanent to temporary ratio was roughly 60/40.  A spokesperson for the company gave contradictory figures, saying: "Throughout the year on average, 90 percent of associates across the companys U.S. fulfillment network are regular, full-time employees. That applies for states like Ohio." The spokesperson confirmed that "regular" means permanent. The ILSR criticized Amazon for using the label "seasonal"  which has connotations of the annual retail holiday rush  to describe the temporary positions it fills year-round.  Amazon has also previously come under fire for what have been described as difficult working conditions. In its 2016 report, the ILSR summarized employment at the company's fulfillment centers as "grueling work for lower pay than average": Employees describe running across warehouses that sprawl the distance of 17 football fields; production quotas, or rates, that can be set 60 percent higher than the industry standard; and a disciplinary system that tracks workers every action and inflicts points for any deviation from Amazons standard. Underlying these conditions is Amazons fundamental approach to its warehouse workers. The companys warehouses are finely-tuned machines, and the company creates conditions such that its workers are expected to be parts of that machine. The result is a work environment that is profoundly dehumanizing. In response to these descriptions, a spokesperson for the company told us: Like most companies, we have performance expectations for every Amazon employee and we measure actual performance against those expectations. Associate performance is measured and evaluated over a long period of time as we know that a variety of things could impact the ability to meet expectations in any given day or hour. We support people who are not performing to the levels expected with dedicated coaching to help them improve. While the meme says that Amazon grossed $128 billion in sales "last year," that number is not quite accurate. For one thing, Amazon's 2017 earnings had not yet been published in January 2018, when the meme was created. Instead, Grit Post, where the meme appears to have originated, said in a list of sources that they had used Amazon's 2016 numbers. Amazon actually had net (not gross) sales of $136 billion in 2016, according to the company's full year financial results. This means gross sales (which were not reported) were even higher than that, and certainly higher than the $128 billion claimed in the meme.  sources results Amazon's sales for 2017 are likely to be astronomical. Based on the company's predictions for the final three months of the year, Amazon's full-year net sales in 2017 might reach around $178 billion.  predictions Vinton, Kate.  "Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos Is the Richest Person in the World  Again."
  Forbes.  27 October 2017. Kelly, Heather.  "Inside Amazon Go: The Store of the Future."
  CNN.  26 January 2018. Schiller, Zach.  "More Ohio Amazon Workers Relying on Food Aid."
  Policy Matters Ohio.  5 January 2018. Office of Fiscal and Monitoring Services.  "Public Assistance Monthly Statistics Report  August 2017."
  August 2017. LeVecchia, Olivia and Stacy Mitchell.  "Amazon's Stranglehold: How the Company's Tightening Grip Is Stifling Competition, Eroding Jobs, and Threatening Communities."
  Institute for Local Self-Reliance.  November 2016.