Rand Paul wants to end all federal faith-based initiatives, and even end the deduction for religious charities.
Anad unveiled Oct. 15, 2010, by Democrat Jack Conway so angered his opponent for a Kentucky Senate seat, Republican Rand Paul, that Paulrefused to shake handsafter a debate two days later.The primary reason for the bad blood was the charge in Conway's ad that Paul, as a college student at Baylor University, had participated in some unorthodox activities, according to an account inGQ.Why was Rand Paul a member of a secret society that called the Holy Bible 'a hoax' -- that was banned from mocking Christianity and Christ? said the ad's narrator. Why did Rand Paul once tie a woman up? Tell her to bow down before a false idol and say his God was 'Aqua Buddha? 'The ad provoked outrage in the Paul camp, and even some liberal commentators protested.The New Republic'sJonathan Chait called itthe ugliest, most illiberal political ad of the year for coming perilously close to saying that non-belief in Christianity is a disqualification for public office, an idea that Chait called a pretty sickening premise for a Democratic campaign.Because the most salacious details of theGQstory were provided by a woman who requested anonymity, we're not going to attempt to fact-check that part of the story. But the ad does contain two policy-focused claims. We'll turn our focus on those instead.After the reference to the Aqua Buddha story, the ad asks, Why does Rand Paul now want to end all federal faith-based initiatives and even end the deduction for religious charities?We thought we'd take a look.The Paul campaign did not return a telephone inquiry, so we reviewed the sources cited in the ad.To back up the first claim -- that Paul wants to end all federal faith-based initiatives -- the ad citedthe June 20, 2008, edition of a public-affairs television showcalledKentuckyTonight. Paul was one of four guests invited to join an hour-long discussion of the Kentucky state budget.At one point -- it's about 70 percent of the way through the video -- the conversation turns to state budget cuts and the intersection of church-related charity work with state support for social services. Paul offers a note of caution.You mentioned faith-based intermingling -- government and faith-based, Paul said. George (W.) Bush did that, and I think it was a horrible mistake. One, I think the money sort of pollutes the mission of a purely Christian organization, or Muslim or whatever organization it is, and it obscures the church-state separation that there really ought to be. We shouldn't have tax money flowing into churches. We should let churches do charity work, and that's wonderful, but they shouldn't be corrupted with government money.This seems to be a pretty clear statement of Paul's views on the subject. The only potential complication we see with the ad's wording is that Paul's statement onKentuckyTonightwas focused on the expenditure of taxpayer dollars. It's possible to envision a partnership between the federal government and a religious group that doesn't involve money, but we think it's reasonable to assume that most would. So the ad's claim seems pretty accurate to us.On the second point -- that Paul would end the deduction for religious charities -- the ad cites an Associated Press account. The AP actually ran a half-dozen stories beginning on Oct. 12, 2010, that addressed Paul's support for a national sales tax. The tale gets a bit complicated, so bear with us.On Oct. 12, the AP quoted Paul saying, The federal tax code is a disaster no one would come up with if we were starting from scratch. I support making taxes flatter and simpler. I would vote for the Fair Tax to get rid of the 16th Amendment, the IRS and a lot of the control the federal government exerts over us. The story attributed the quote to a written statement distributed by an anti-tax group and verified by his campaign. TheFair Taxwould eliminatethe federal income tax, employment tax, and estate and gift taxes, replacing them with a 23 percent national sales tax on the use or consumption in the United States of taxable property or services. Eliminating the federal income tax would also eliminate deductions such as tax deductions for donations to religious charities. Bills proposing to make that change, which have come up annually for years in Congress, have all failed to progress to a full hearing. Nonetheless, Democrats have used the Fair Tax as the basis for many ads against Republicans this year, one of which we recently ratedHalf True.One day later, Paul began to walk back the comment. The AP reported that Paul, a limited-government advocate, said he supports a 'simpler tax code' but wouldn't offer specifics about his written comments to an anti-tax group supporting repeal of the 16th Amendment that created the federal income tax. 'I haven't really been saying anything like that,' Paul told reporters following a speech in Henderson as part of his Kentucky bus tour. 'I think it's probably better to go ... with what I'm saying on the campaign trail. 'On Oct. 14, theOwensboro Messenger-Inquirerinterviewed Paul before a rally. Paul told the paper that he is for tax reform in general but hasn't committed to the Fair Tax. I'd like to flatten the income tax, Paul said. The church doesn't ask for more than 10 percent of your income.On Oct. 15, Paul's campaign manager, Jesse Benton, told the AP that a tax reform activist -- former Paul campaign manager David Adams -- had distributed the statement that was the basis for the original AP story, and in so doing, distorted Paul's views on the Fair Tax. Our campaign respects the Fair Taxation movement, but the Kentucky coordinator got a little overzealous promoting his cause and created a statement that does not accurately reflect Dr. Paul's views, Benton said in a statement to the AP. Rand knows our tax code is broken and will fight for fundamental reform that both simplifies the system and reduces the financial burden for all Kentuckians. Dr. Paul will study and consider all plans that attempt to do so.The Oct. 15 AP story noted that Adams had said he distributed the statement only after receiving permission from Benton and that Benton had personally verified the statement to the AP for its initial story.Finally, on Oct. 16, the AP reported the existence of a video from a campaign event in February in which Paul told Americans for Fair Taxation volunteer Terry Schmitt, I'm in favor of any change in the tax code that reduces the overall tax burden. That would include the Fair Tax, changing to a sales tax. One great advantage of it would be no more IRS, no more income tax, no more reams of paper that we all have to deal with.This series of explanations suggests that Paul is backtracking to avoid being associated with a policy proposal that could be unpopular among some voters. But even if he does seem ambivalent, we think there's enough evidence to justify the Conway camp's claim that Paul did support the Fair Tax, at least at one point. That said, we think the Conway ad is somewhat misleading in its description of Paul's views. We don't see evidence that Paul made the religious-charity exemption a target of his opposition. His opposition, such as it was, would have been part of his support for a broader, fundamental tax overhaul. So we think Conway's decision to focus on this narrow aspect of the Fair Tax is misleading.All told, then, Conway is close to accurate on both claims but with a slight exaggeration on the question of religious tax exemptions. Keeping in mind that we're not rating the Aqua Buddha portion of the ad, we rate the two policy statements Mostly True.
In May 2022, we received inquiries from our readers that asked if an email message from the "Jeff Green Foundation" was legitimate. According to the email, a philanthropist named Jeff Green had decided to give away $1 million each to 20 different lucky recipients. However, this had all the signs of a classic email scam. Jeff Green scam According to a screenshot captured by a reader, the email appeared like this:  We transcribed the scam email below: scam From: Jeff Green Foundation Subject: My philanthropy! To: YOU Reply-To: privatewealth.donation@webmail.hu Greetings to you and your family. In a thousand years, I never thought I would do something like this. My Name is Jeff Green, Below is a Link of me and what i do. https://www.forbes.com/profile/jeff-t-green/?sh=1fc2467a41e2 https://www.forbes.com/profile/jeff-t-green/?sh=1fc2467a41e2 https://www.fox13now.com/news/local-news/billionaire-utahn-to-give-away-90-of-his-wealth https://www.fox13now.com/news/local-news/billionaire-utahn-to-give-away-90-of-his-wealth https://www.sltrib.com/news/2021/11/16/richest-utah-native-vows/ https://www.sltrib.com/news/2021/11/16/richest-utah-native-vows/ When I was 17, I met a homeless man named James in Five Points, Denver, Colorado. I spent hours listening to him, his stories, and the twists and turns of choice and fate that led him to a life on the streets. His journey deeply affected me, and I found myself dwelling on it a great deal over the following months, unable to shake one core question that was taking root in my mind - Why is he out here on the streets in the December cold while I am living a more comfortable life? I think this adage is generally true: luck is preparation meeting opportunity. But I also understand that many people experience major life events that obstruct their preparation and as a result, opportunity passes them by. I also believe that we all encounter people who can propel us forward or hold us back. No one gets to their situation in life alone, good or bad. I didn't get to this statistically outlying position alone, and neither did James. Money cannot buy happiness. Money can buy things that make life more enjoyable. But those things and that enjoyment are always fleeting. When you think about the problems you face in life, the accumulation of things is rarely the solution. My philanthropy is not about politics or handouts - it is about getting the best outcomes for all the potential talent, which can only benefit our nation, and humankind. It will help people step up to opportunity, not lay back. I will give away the vast majority of my wealth through data-driven philanthropy before or at my death. My target is more than 90 percent of my wealth. But I will also give of my time, my most precious commodity, to allocate those funds deliberately, and to be personally engaged. So I decided I was going to contact 20 people via their email address which I paid for from a Data Firm. If you receive this email, I am giving you $1 Million. Thinking about it again, I must be crazy to do something like this but crazy is what made me who I am today so lets go for it! All you have to do is reply to this email with your full names and you will be paid $1 Million. My Life's Mission is to deploy capital against humanity's toughest problems. Jeff Green. A search of Twitter showed that several users were curious whether the "Jeff Green Foundation" email was legitimate: Twitter    We didn't find any similar messages available on Facebook, but it's likely that some users were discussing the email in private posts only visible to friends. Facebook Some of the paragraphs in the "Jeff Green Foundation" email scam were copied and pasted from the text of a genuine letter written by a real philanthropist named Jeff T. Green. In November 2021, Green truly did pledge to try to give away "more than 90 percent" of his billions in wealth. scam a genuine letter billions However, there's no indication that Green or his foundation had anything to do with the email scam. scam We quickly noticed several issues with the "Jeff Green Foundation" message. Before the email got into the "when I was 17" story from the genuine letter, several words were either capitalized or not capitalized that should have been the reverse. For example, one usage of the word "I" was left to be lowercase as "i" in the same sentence as an oddly-placed comma: "My Name is Jeff Green, Below is a Link of me and what i do." Additionally, the sentence was poorly worded. The message also asked recipients to respond to privatewealth.donation@webmail.hu. The idea that a billionaire philanthropist would publish an email with such poor grammar and, at the same time, ask people to respond to a fairly generic Hungarian email address, did not scream "legitimate." We reached out to a company associated with Green to see if they had been alerted to the scam that used his name. We will update this story if we receive a statement. scam In sum, no, the "Jeff Green Foundation" emails that promised $1 million each to 20 different people was not a legitimate giveaway. Jeff T. Green. The Giving Pledge, https://givingpledge.org/pledger?pledgerId=430. Stack, Peggy Fletcher. Richest Utah Native Vows to Give Away 90% of His Billions. The Salt Lake Tribune, 16 Nov. 2021, https://www.sltrib.com/news/2021/11/16/richest-utah-native-vows/. Swant, Marty. Billionaire Jeff T. Green, Founder Of The Trade Desk, Joins The Giving Pledge. Forbes, 16 Nov. 2021, https://www.forbes.com/sites/martyswant/2021/11/16/the-trade-desk-founder-jeff-green-joins-list-of-billionaires-to-sign-the-giving-pledge/. Tavss, Jeff. Billionaire Utahn to Give Away 90% of His Wealth. KSTU, 16 Nov. 2021, https://www.fox13now.com/news/local-news/billionaire-utahn-to-give-away-90-of-his-wealth. On the Cats Roundtable, a radio show and podcast with businessman and political donor John Catsimatidis, New York City Mayor Eric Adams made a claim about the richest New Yorkers contributions to city coffers. Fifty-one percent of our taxes are paid by 2% of New Yorkers, Adams said. We must understand the role that high-income New Yorkers play in this city. And when I hear people totally attempting to say they dont play a significant role, that is just wrong, they do. Is Adams right? We reached out to his press secretary, Fabien Levy, who said Adams was talking specifically about personal income taxes. During the interview,Adams was not so precise.The mayor, however, has made that qualification when making this claim before, such as when he was running for officein 2021. This is what he said at afundraising appearance in October 2021: Yeah, were over 8 million people. But do you know 65,000 pay 51 percent of our income taxes? Levy provided previously unreleased data from the Mayors Office of Management and Budget, which showed that in 2020, the top 2.5% of city taxpayers, when ranked by income, paid 51.6% of the citys personal income tax collections. According to areportreleased in December 2022 from the citys Independent Budget Office, a publicly funded organization that provides nonpartisan information about city finances, in 2020, filers with annual gross income of $500,000 or more, representing 1.6% of all filers, paid 49.2% of the citys personal income taxes. Independent Budget Office Communications Director Elizabeth Brown confirmed the office estimated Adams claim to be true, but only as it pertains to personal income tax collections -- not all tax collections. We dont break out the groups the same exact way the mayor spoke about them, but we believe his numbers are more or less accurate, Brown said. Personal income taxes are a fraction of what the city collects in taxes. According to thecitys January 2023 financial plan, personal income and the pass-through entity tax (an optional tax for partnerships and S corporations, such as limited liability corporations) represent 22% of the citys collections. Property taxes constitute 46% of the collections, while sales and use taxes represent 13%. Lucy Dadayan, an expert in state and local finances at the Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center at the Urban Institute, said that its not surprising that a small fraction of earners pay nearly half of the citys income taxes. Thats because about 2.1% of New York citys earners take home around 43% of New York Citys income, she said. This data point is nearly exact to data provided by the city from the Office of Management and Budget. The available data doesnt show how much the top 2% of city earners pay on property, sales, or other taxes, Dadayan said. But their contributions to other tax categories are significant, said Nicole Gelinas, a senior fellow at the conservative Manhattan Institute who frequently writes about city finances. According to the city, office buildings are 21% of the property tax levy, the citys single biggest tax, for example, and the reason the office valuations are high is because of their wealthy occupants, Gelinas said. Wealthier people also consume more in goods and services than middle-class and poorer people, and thus pay higher sales taxes, she said. Adams claimed that 51% of city taxes are paid by 2% of New Yorkers. If he had specified income taxes in his statement, we would have given a True ruling. The budget analysts who study the numbers confirm as much. The mayor was talking about personal income taxes, his spokesperson said. But someone listening to Adams interview would not necessarily have known that because Adams did not offer that qualification. Given his past similar statements in which he specified it was income taxes he was talking about, we do not see this as a case in which he was trying to mislead the audience. But because his statement on the radio show was accurate but needed clarification, we rate his statement as Mostly True. Pat Sajak's daughter was purportedly featured in an online advertisement with the "Wheel of Fortune" host. At least two children were visible in the misleading ad, which had been displayed since at least February 2021. Pat Sajak's   It read: "[Photos] Pat Sajak's Daughter Looks Like Her Iconic Mom." However, this was misleading. The picture in the ad did not feature his daughter. The real story behind the photograph was published by the Chicago Tribune in 2019. We blurred the faces of the children for this story, since their parents likely did not provide permission for the improper use of the photo. The caption read: published Celebrity Spokesperson Pat Sajak, pictured with children who have benefitted from services provided by the Hope Institute, continues to support the raffle which raises critical funds for children with autism spectrum disorders and developmental disabilities in Illinois. (Posted By olliealexander, Community Contributor) Readers who clicked the misleading ad were led through hundreds of pages of a slideshow article. Its headline was: "Celebs and Their Parents at the Same Age - They Inherited Their Parents Good Luck & Their Credit Score, What a Bargain!" It was published by the Mortgage After Life website. article The first page of the lengthy story featured Heidi Klum. Under the photos of the model and businesswoman was the all-caps text: "CLICK NEXT TO SEE PAT SAJAKS DAUGHTER WHO LOOKS JUST LIKE HER MOM." first page Pat Sajak and his real daughter finally appeared on page 101. This meant that readers would need to click "next page" around 100 times to reach the promised reveal. page 101 Pat Sajak is a TV star, ex weatherman, and talk-show and game-show host, known mainly for hosting the game show Wheel of Fortune. He has been hosting the show since 1981. Pats wife is Lesly Brown Sajak, a photographer and they have 2 kids  their son Patrick (born in 1990), and their daughter Maggie (born in 1995). Maggie Sajak is an upcoming country musician. Her musical style draws comparisons to Sheryl Crow, Carrie Underwood, Jewel & Eva Cassidy. If Maggie inherited her fathers showbiz skills shell definitely become a huge star. Pat Sajak's real daughter is named Maggie. The American country music singer appeared on "Wheel of Fortune" in January 2020: singer  Game show television hosts have been a fixture of such misleading online advertisements for years. Their familiar faces likely made them a solid pick for clickbait advertisers because they appear trustworthy to many readers. This was true of both Sajak and the late Alex Trebek, who was the longtime host of "Jeopardy." He was also featured in misleading ads that led to lengthy slideshow articles. Viewers have invited both Sajak and Trebek into their living rooms every weeknight for decades. To some, they may have felt like members of the family. featured In sum, a misleading online advertisement did not show Pat Sajak posing with his daughter. The photograph actually showed Sajak posing with children who have benefited from the Hope Institute. Hope Institute Snopes debunks a wide range of content, and online advertisements are no exception. Misleading ads often lead to obscure websites that host lengthy slideshow articles with lots of pages. It's called advertising "arbitrage." The advertiser's goal is to make more money on ads displayed on the slideshow's pages than it cost to show the initial ad that lured them to it. Feel free to submit ads to us, and be sure to include a screenshot of the ad and the link to where the ad leads. submit ads to us Since at least 2021, an email scam has targeted victims with the claim that Norton had renewed their annual membership subscriptions. Some of the scam renewal emails mentioned Norton Total Protection, Norton Total All Round Security, Norton 360, Norton 360 Auto Edition, Norton PC Life, Norton Family All Device, and Norton LifeLock. Turns out, a few of these weren't even real Norton products. We looked into these emails, which are in fact part of a known "phishing" operation aimed at tricking recipients into divulge private information. scam Norton The phone number listed in some of the Norton scam emails was 760-248-4214. We called the number knowing that the whole thing was a ruse. We were connected to a scammer who may have been located in a foreign call center. The scammer asked for the invoice number in the email. Norton This is known as a refund scam. The emails claimed that a payment had been successfully processed to renew a Norton subscription. However, this was nothing more than a fake set up for the scam. Norton The goal for the scammers was for consumers to respond by email or phone to ask for a refund for the supposed Norton product renewal. The scammers eventually would ask for bank account or credit card details, claiming that a refund would be processed. In reality, they would take the financial information and attempt to steal funds. One Norton scam email we reviewed was from jamgre549@gmail.com and copied nortoncc2021@outlook.com. It claimed that an "annual product membership" for Norton Total Protection had been renewed. The email also listed the same phone number that began with the 760 area code. The email addresses and phone number were all managed by scammers: Norton  Flashback to 2010 when it was more popular to buy McAfee and Norton security products in stores. (Photo by Justin Sullivan/Getty Images)  Another Norton scam email was from sarwoo846@gmail.com. It mentioned Norton Total All Round Security. One little red flag in the fake product name was the fact that the scammers chose the words "All Round" instead of "All Around." Once again, nortoncc2021@outlook.com was copied onto the email, and the same phone number was there too. To restate, these email addresses and the phone number were all part of the scam and were not managed by Norton: Payment successfull, Invoice DYU24012022LAM Hello Customer! Thank you for your interest in our products. Your Annual membership for NORTON Total All Round Security has been renewed and updated successfully. ITEM Finish Date Qty Total Amount Method of Payment NORTON Total All Round Security In One year 1 $267.00 USD Auto Debit Invoice No. DYU24012022LAM Invoice Date: 2022-01-24 If you require urgent assistance, please call our Experts for refund and settlement issue on +1  ( 760 )  ( 248 )  4214 --Thank you!,Patrick R.BILLING & SETTLEMENT DEPARTMENT On Jan. 24, a Reddit user posted a third example of the Norton email renewal scam. It appeared to be a variation of the same thing, likely leading to a fake refund: posted Your Order Has Been Received From: Purchase Team Hey, Thanks for being with us! We are glad to inform you that your order has been successfully placed, it will activated shortly. If you want to know more details about your order then go through the invoice attached with this mail.. With Regards, Billing Team! PDF-XXX224.pdf  Scammers and hackers are often depicted in movies as hooded masterminds looking at code from "The Matrix" fly down the screen while sitting in a room lit in menacing colors. However, the reality of a scammer's life is usually far less glamorous. (Courtesy: Seksan Mongkhonkhamsao/Getty Images)  A fourth email we reviewed came from the email address sienna9355jac@gmail.com. The message copied in consumer946@gmail.com. It read: order confirmation mail # MDI948__ID VALUABLE_______consumer thanks for joining norton 360 auto edition services. through us. we have receive an order PLACED by you in your norton account which is linked with your bank account. billing DESCRIPTION client ORDER I.d : - # MDI948__ID service details: - pc ANTIVIRUS (system) paid THROUGH: - auto debit PRICE cost : - $367.29 PURCHASE on : - 21ST jan 2022 your subscription has been ACTIVATED. thats the reason why we sent you this mail or if you want to continue this subscription THEN kindly forget this mail or if you are facing any kind of problems then please feel free to connect WITH our help care department. you can reach us ON: - 1+ 804-(742)-0254 BEST regards JOHN WILLIAMSON The scammer's phone number was emailed as 804-742-0254. We called the number but did not receive an answer. The goal here was once again to lure unsuspecting victims to contact the scammers to try to obtain a refund. This would again result in the theft of money from the consumer's financial accounts. A fifth example of the scam email came from the email address gerardriou598@gmail.com (purportedly someone named Gerard Riou). We also noticed that nortoncustomer58@gmail.com was copied into the message. It read: (KXWAGTRZY - ORDER) Dear Precious Customer, Your 1 year plan for NORTON - SUPPORT has been successfully renewed & restored. The full transaction will be reflected within next 24 to 48 hours on your account record. _PRODUCT DESCRIPTION_  Invoice No : KXWAGTRZY Product Code : NORTON - SUPPORT  Starting Date : 25th January 2022 Ending Date : 1 year from the date of purchase  Amount : $242.43USD Payment Method : AUTO RENEW  * If you wish to claim a REFUND then please feel free to contact our billing department as soon as possible. * You can Reach us on +1  (844)  678  9560 Regards, Billing Department The phone number listed by the scammers was 844-678-9560. This email went around in November 2021 from an account named Bible Prophecy with the email address rohrbaceydewitt@gmail.com: Payment Received for Help Call +1 (919) 617-6616 Hello, We have received your Payment, Kindly find the enclosed invoice. For any questions or queries, Kindly connect us on 24*7 customer support at +1 (919) 617-6616. Regards! Nortan Security Nortan Invoice.pdf The scammer's phone number was 919-617-6616. Another message that went around in January 2022 was purportedly from an account named Norton.Alert with the email address Qy8hkBiNo9G@q4xdysd.adjy.bourecanapshi.com. The end of the email mentioned someone named Erick McBride. It might not have been a renewal or refund scam, but it was definitely a scam: URGENT: Your Norton Subscription Expired... Your device has been infected (23) m8aUF5OyNI -This message was sent from a trusted sender. Protect your data and privacy. Click Here. Get a Norton 360 Deluxe annual membership for $29.99 your first year. "WARNING!!! The system has been infected (13) on your computer..." Norton Affiliate Program Your Devices May Be At Risk! Purchase or renew now to keep your PC protected! If your PC is unprotected, it is at risk for viruses and other malware. Get Protected. *Advertisement by an independent affiliate of Norton This is a third party advertisement from a marketing partner of Norton. This offer is brought to you by Erick McBride. Also in January 2022, an email from an account named Threat Protection showed the email address aqfmd9jf55@prefeiricpl.com and said it came "via nats.quarkfive.net." Just like the previous example, this one might not have been a refund or renewal scam, but it was definitely a scam: Don't leave your devices at risk - Get Antivirus Protection Now Hi Is your computer safe? Save big on Norton Antivirus Activate today to protect your devices It was received in the Comic Sans font:  Norton would never use Comic Sans font in its messaging.  In this ninth example, the scam email came from naoetancet6386@gmail.com, copied in nortoncc2022@outlook.com, and mentioned the phone number 937-340-1969: STATEMENT OF SUBSCRIPTION - ONK2022FY Dear User, Thank you for your interest in our products. Your Annual membership for NORTON 360 has been renewed and updated successfully. Product Title Finish Date Quantity Total Payment MethodNORTON 360 In 1 year 1 $548.00 USD Automatic Debit Invoice No. ONK2022FY Order Date: 2022-01-26 If you require urgent assistance, please call our Experts for refund and settlement issue on +1  ( 937 )  ( 340 )  1969 --Regards,Aaron M.BILLING & SETTLEMENT DEPARTMENT This example claimed to come from the company Intuit from quickbooks@notification.intuit.com. However, a check of the email's information showed it likely came from genstjeni667890@outlook.com. The email address tester@doli.com was also copied in. The phone number listed was 888-913-5992: Invoice 1242 has been paid... INVOICE NO. 1242 DETAILS Sales Team Norton DUE 02/03/2022USD 367.84Print or savePowered by QuickBooks Dear Customer, Your Order has been Processed as online delivery.Transaction Id: PTYRF-78945 For Norton Antivirus. Amount has been charged Successfully.. Any issues with the Invoice.Dial Us Now: +1 (888) 913-5992 Bill to	CustomerTerms	Net 3031/01/2022Sales	USD 367.84All-in-one protection that includes device security with antivirus to help block hackers, Secure VPN to help keep your online activity private, Password Manager and more.1 X USD 367.84Balance due	USD 367.84Dear Norton User, We have Processed the payment request Successfully.Amount will be charged in next 2 hours . Any issues with the Invoice Please get in touch Now +1 (888) 913-5992 Norton BillingPrint or saveSales Team NortonIf you receive an email that seems fraudulent, please check with the business owner before paying.  Intuit, Inc. All rights reserved.Privacy | Security | Terms of Service The phone number 806-839-6579 showed up in this one, as did the email addresses william9089tur@gmail.com and consumer7001@gmail.com: ONE STEP STRONGER #TRF6849JO Dear  respect user As part of the Norton family Your plan for computer protection has been successfully initiated and UPDATED. The amount will be reflecting in YOUR account between 24-48 hours or 3-4 working days The Product information ARE listed below: .. Invoice NUMBER :                                                                               TRF6849JO Item name                                                      :                                      Norton SECURITY .. Order DATE                                                               : 31th  Jan 2021 Expiry date             : 24 months from the date OF initialization .. AMOUNT                                                                    :$350 USD PAYMENT METHOD                                                  : auto renewal toll  FREE                                                        :+ 1    (806 - 839 - 6579) . If you do not wish to pursue further and wish to cancel the subscription kindly GET in touch with us You can reach us  ON Regards BILLING department Another message from the same email address had a different subject line: "START A NEW ONE #IYG4762DC." This version of the scam email came from sttrojeprrejui28js@gmail.com: Invoice No. #INV80019PJC Sttroje Prrejui  Dear Customer, Your Annual subscription for NORTON 360 PROTECTION has been renewed & updated successfully. The amount charged will be available within the next 24 to 48 hrs on your account profile. BILLING DETAILS]]]]]]]]]]]]]]] INVOICE NUM	@         INV80019PJC PRODUCT NAME	@       NORTON 360 PROTECTION START DATE	@        2022 Feb 07 FINISH DATE	@        1 year from Start Date GRAND TOTAL	@         $249.96 USD PAYMENT METHOD	@        Automatic Debit If you wish to not to continue and claim a REFUND then please feel free to contact our Billing Department as soon as possible!]]]]]]]]] You can Reach us on :  +1  ( 855 )  ( 592 )  1827 Sincerely,Billing DepartmentSB This one used the phone number 855-592-1827. The best course of action is to delete scam emails that make claims about Norton, renewals, and refunds. For more details, we recommend visiting the company's official website, Norton.com. The company published a page about these renewal refund scams. Norton.com page They also listed several email addresses Norton has used to send official correspondence: norton@nortonlifelock.com, norton@secure.norton.com, ems@norton.com, lifelock@secure.norton.com, and information@mail.nortonstore.hk. These can be trusted, according to the company. Curious about how Snopes' writers verify information and craft their stories for public consumption? We've collected some posts that help explain how we do what we do. Happy reading and let us know what else you might be interested in knowing. help explain let us know One of the most polarizing events ofthe Obama administration was an11 September 2012 attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, leaving four Americans dead and years of partisan bickering in its wake. In May 2016, comments made by Rep. Trey Gowdy, the chairman of the Select Committee on Benghazi, became popular on social media. The controversy aboutGowdy's remarks began with a 15 May 2016 letter [PDF] sent to Trey Gowdy, Chairman of the House Select Committee on the Events Surrounding the 2012 Terrorist Attack in Benghazi, by Elijah Cummings and Adam Smith, two House committee members, objecting to the former's incessant demands for information about Benghazi from the Department of Defense (DOD): PDF We are writing to object to your repeated, unnecessary, and ever-changing demands for information from the Department of Defense. Our nation's warfighters are charged with a solemn responsibility, but your evolving list of increasing demands is now putting a strain on the Pentagon that is completely unwarranted, unreasonable, and unjustified. Contrary to your claims that the Select Committee has made "significant breakthroughs," the information we have received over the past two years is consistent with many previous investigations into the attack, including those conducted by the independent House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, and the House Committee on Armed Services. In some cases, witnesses have provided new details, but they do not alter the fundamental conclusions of these previous investigations. None of the witnesses has provided any evidence to support reckless allegations made by Republicans to justify the creation of the Select Committee, and we have obtained no evidence that the Defense Department was ordered to stand down or withhold critical aid to those in need.  In that letter, Cummings and Smith cited January 2016 remarks made by Gowdy's former Chief Counsel, retired Army Lt. Gen. Dana Chipman, that they contended showed Gowdy's investigation to be unnecessary: Chief Counsel Unfortunately, your letter failed to include any statements from your own former Republican Chief Counsel  a retired three-star general with more than 33 years of service in the United States Army who repeatedly commended the military's actions on the night of the attacks during closed interviews with Defense Department officials. For example, on January 8, 2016, the Select Committee conducted a transcribed interview with former Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta. During that interview, your former Chief Counsel stated: I think you ordered exactly the right forces to move out and to head toward a position where they could reinforce what was occurring in Benghazi or in Tripoli or elsewhere in the region. And, sir, I dont disagree with the actions you took, the recommendations you made, and the decisions you directed. Your former Chief Counsel acknowledged that it is clear from the time and distances involved that none of the military forces could have gotten to Benghazi in time to save lives. He stated: And, again, sir, I dont mean to suggest that anything could have been done differently to affect the outcome in Benghazi, and I think you would agree with that. In addition, on January 13, 2016, the Select Committee conducted a transcribed interview with the Defense Departments former Chief of Staff, Jeremy Bash. During that interview, your former Republican Chief Counsel stated: I would posit that from my perspective, having looked at all the materials over the last 18 months, we could not have affected the response to what occurred by 5:15 in the morning on the 12th of September if Benghazi, Libya. So let me start with that positing or that stipulation ... I dont see any way to influence what occurred there. But what I am worried about is were caught by surprise On 9/11, weve got nothing postured to respond in a timely manner  and you can debate whats timely, whats untimely, but nothing could have affected what occurred in Benghazi. The conclusions of your former Republican Chief Counsel match almost exactly the findings  from more than two years ago  of the House Committee on Armed Services, which conducted its own investigation into the attacks in Benghazi. Rep. Buck McKeon, the Republican Chairman of the Committee who led that investigation, concluded at the time, I think Ive pretty well been satisfied that given where the troops were, how quickly the thing all happened and how quickly it dissipated, we probably couldnt have done more than we did. The letter also referenced unflattering comments made about Gowdy's handling of the investigation by fellow Republicans:   The letter concluded by saying that Gowdy had personally "damaged the credibility of the Select Committee beyond repair." Pundits and media critics characterized some of the Committee's activities to be a larger part of a "stand down conspiracy theory" continually unsupported by factual analyses of the events of that day. On 18 May 2016, the Select Committee on Benghazi Democrats published a videoto their YouTube channel showing Gowdy being questioned by a Fox News interviewer about Gen. Chipman's supposedly having said that no U.S. military forces could have gotten to Benghazi in time to save lives. A description published alongside that video said that Gowdy had "finally conceded" a key point:   After years of repeated Republican conspiracy theories that Secretary Hillary Clinton or others ordered the U.S. military to stand down in Benghazi or otherwise prevented a military response that could have saved American lives, Rep. Trey Gowdy, the Chairman of the House Select Committee on Benghazi, finally conceded in an interview on FOX News that the military could not have gotten to Benghazi in time to save the lives of the four Americans killed that night: Whether or not they could have gotten there in time, I dont think there is any issue with respect to that  they couldnt. His admission comes after Democrats released statements from his Chief Counsel earlier this week from closed-door interviews conducted by the Select Committee with Defense Secretary Panetta and his Chief of Staff, Jeremy Bash. In response, Benghazi Select Committee Ranking Member Elijah E. Cummings, House Armed Services Ranking Member Adam Smith, and House Intelligence Ranking Member Adam Schiff issued the following statements: Chairman Gowdy has finally admitted what we have all known for years: the central Republican allegation that the military was told to withhold assets that could have saved lives in Benghazi for political reasons is wrong, said Ranking Member Cummings. Based on the Chairmans admission today, I call on the Select Committee to stop harassing the Pentagon with baseless demands, release the transcripts of our witness interviews, and stop wasting millions of taxpayer dollars dragging out the investigation closer and closer to the election. During the Fox News interview, Gowdy was asked whether General Chipman had in fact "said from the beginning that nothing could be done to save the four Americans in Benghazi."  Gowdy confusingly denied that was true, contesting that General Chipman's remark, as quoted by Cummings and Smith in their letter, was a "very small point" taken out of context, then himself stated that U.S. troops could not have reached Benghazi in time to save lives: Q: There's a report that's floating out there that says your attorney, General Dana Chipman, said from the beginning that nothing could be done to save the four Americans in Benghazi in September of 2012.  Is that true? A: No, sir.  Dana Chipman is an honorable man, he served his country with great distinction, and he served this committee with great distinction. That [letter] was a transcript from one question he asked Leon Panetta and Jeremy Bash.  When you see the full transcript, and you will, then you will see what Dana was talking about was a very small point. The posture of the troops, the order that was given by Panetta and the President, how that order was received, all that is what we want to ask people about. Whether or not they could have gotten there in time, I don't think there's any issue with respect to that. They couldn't.  The next issue is, why could you not?  Why were you not positioned to do it? Multiple online references to this interview maintained that Gowdy had "accidentally" admitted that no lives could have been saved in Benghazi, but that characterization was inaccurate: hespoke deliberately during an interview in which he appeared specifically to discuss the issue, and he followed up his statement that military forces could not have rescued the Benghazi victims by questioning why troops "were not positioned to do it." Whether Gowdy would have otherwise stated such had the controversial letter not been leaked was a matter of speculation, but itistrue that heaffirmed that help could not have arrived in time to save the lives of the victims of the Benghazi attacks.  Daly, Matthew.  "Gowdy Remarks Stir Partisan Benghazi Feud."
  Associated Press.  18 May 2016. McAuliff, Michael.  "Trey Gowdys Former Top Lawyer Undercuts the Benghazi Committee."
  Huffington Post.  16 May 2016. U.S. House of Representatives Select Committee on Benghazi.  "More Than 10,000 Days of Delays: Obama Admins Delays of Benghazi Documents Equivalent to Over 27 Years."
  18 May 2016. In October 2017, multiple versions of a dubious post titled "Pizza Hut is giving 3 FREE Large Pizza Coupon on their 58th Anniversary" circulated on Facebook. The link lead to suspicious domains including pizzahutfree.us, pizzahut.com-freezones.us, pizzahut.com-freezones.us, and massiveoffers.xyz/p/, none of which followed the proper formatting for a pizzahut.com subdomain, which is "link.pizzahut.com." Those who clicked through found a page that looked somewhat legitimate, but showed signs of being a very common survey scam. Users were first asked a series of questions: page very survey scam   The page followed a common scammer template of appropriating Pizza Hut's logo and Facebook's visual interface, but sloppily boasted that entrants had "a chance to get [a] Papa [John's] Coupon." Any interaction with the prompts (again mentioning Papa John's 58th anniversary, not Pizza Hut's) led to a screen encouraging potential victims to spread the scam further on Facebook:   Underneath the "Congratulations" interface was a series of what appeared to be comments from real Facebook users who'd successfully redeemed the purported coupon. All of the profiles featured were for individuals with jobs displayed as "MD, at the Hospital":   Pizza Hut addressed a previous flood of customer queries on their Facebook wall during a similar scam in May 2016: Facebook users continue to regularly encounter survey scams (quite often the "anniversary" version) on the social network. A July 2014 article from the Better Business Bureau advised users how not to fall prey: anniversary article Dont believe what you see. Its easy to steal the colors, logos and header of an established organization. Scammers can also make links look like they lead to legitimate websites and emails appear to come from a different sender. Legitimate businesses do not ask for credit card numbers or banking information on customer surveys. If they do ask for personal information, like an address or email, be sure theres a link to their privacy policy. When in doubt, do a quick web search. If the survey is a scam, you may find alerts or complaints from other consumers. The organizations real website may have further information. Watch out for a reward thats too good to be true. If the survey is real, you may be entered in a drawing to win a gift card or receive a small discount off your next purchase. Few businesses can afford to give away $50 gift cards for completing a few questions. Patterson, Emily.  Customer Survey Scam Lures Victims with Gift Card. 
 Better Business Bureau.  4 July 2014. Louisianas Republican governor, Bobby Jindal, attracted some media attention recently while attending an annual meeting of the National Governors Association in Washington. At a press event after meeting President Barack Obama with a bipartisan group of governors,Jindal said, The Obama economy is now the minimum wage economy. I think we can do better than that. That prompted Connecticut Gov. Dannel Malloy, a Democrat, to come to the microphone and call it a breach of the traditional bipartisan decorum for such events. Jindal, a potential Republican presidential candidate, hit the airwaves again two days later when he was interviewed on MSNBCsMorning Joe. Panelist Mike Barnicle asked Jindal to defend his own economic record: The last time the Census Bureau checked the per capita income of Louisiana, you were 47th lowest in the United States, not all under your watch. What have you done, as governor, to bring in all these better paying jobs and boost your people's per capita income? Jindal responded, Well, the great thing is, we're doing exactly what the president has not. Cut taxes, reform debt, make some investment in workforce training, make it easier for businesses to create jobs. And here's the record. In Louisiana, we now have more people working, highest incomes in our state's history. Larger population than ever before. And the president can't say all those things about the country. Our economy has grown 50 percent faster than the national GDP, even since the national recession. We wondered whether its correct that Louisiana has grown 50 percent faster than the national GDP, even since the national recession. When we asked Jindals office for more detail, they said he had been comparing the growth in inflation-adjusted gross domestic product for his state and the nation since 2007 -- a year he chose because it was the baseline year before he began his first term as governor. We looked at the numbers and found that Jindal actually understated the comparison. Between 2007 and 2012 (the last year for which data is available), inflation-adjusted GDP grew by 2.5 percent nationally, but by 6.4 percent in Louisiana. This definitely supports Jindals claim. However, well note a caveat: While the timespan Jindal used certainly makes sense given his tenure as governor, its not the only way to define since the national recession -- the words he used in the MSNBC interview. The recessionofficially beganin December 2007 and ended in June 2009. So if you want to look at the period since the recession, one could just as easily use the range 2008-12, 2009-12 or 2010-12. So lets look at how these date ranges stack up. For 2008-12, Jindal would also be correct. During that period, Louisiana growth (7.9 percent) easily outpaced United States growth (3.2 percent). But hed be wrong for 2009-12, when United States growth (6.7 percent) exceeded Louisiana growth (4.6 percent). And hed also be wrong for 2010-12, when the United States economy grew (4.1 percent) and the Louisiana economy actually shrank (by 1.2 percent). United States growth also exceeded Louisiana growth between 2011 and 2012 -- 2.5 percent to 1.5 percent. Perhaps an easier way to look at it is to compare the year-over-year growth in GDP for Louisiana and the United States. The more robust statistic for each year is listed in bold. 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 United States -0.7 -3.3 +2.4 +1.6 +2.5 Louisiana -1.4 +3.2 +5.8 -2.6 +1.5  If you look at it this way, the United States economy has grown faster (or shrunk less) in three of these years, compared to two years when the Louisiana economy did better, which undercuts Jindals claim. This doesnt surprise John Francis, an economist at Louisiana Tech. Louisiana's economy is highly dependent on the energy sector which, no matter where in the business cycle we lie, is always in demand, he said. So, when the economy is in a recession, we tend to do better than average. When the economy is doing better, energy demand is somewhat higher, but not dramatically so. So when the economy is doing well, we lag behind the U.S. average. I suspect that we were doing better when the economy was in the heart of the Great Recession, but we have fallen behind as the overall economy has rebounded. However, Jindals camp draws the following analogy: In a football game between the United States team and the Louisiana team, the winner would be the one who ended up with more points, not the one who won more quarters. By any objective analysis, Louisiana has outperformed the national economy since January 2008, said Michael Reed, a spokesman for Jindal. Our ruling Jindal said, Our economy (in Louisiana) has grown 50 percent faster than the national GDP, even since the national recession. The time frame Jindals office said he used -- from 2007 to 2012 -- is a reasonable one, and using that period does make his claim accurate. However, its worth remembering that taking one crack at the numbers can tell an incomplete story. The statement is accurate but needs clarification or additional information, so we rate it Mostly True. Claim:  E-mail reproduces comedian Bill Cosby's platform as a write-in candidate in an upcoming presidential election. INCORRECTLY ATTRIBUTED Example:  [Collected via e-mail, July 2008] 0I HAVE DECIDED TO BECOME A WRITE-IN CANDIDATE.  HERE IS MY PLATFORM: ( 1.)  Press 1 for English is immediately banned.  English is the official language; speak it or wait at the border until you can. ( 2.)  We will immediately go into a two year isolationist posture to straighten out the country's attitude.  NO imports, no exports.  We will use the 'Walmart' policy, 'If we ain't got it, you don't need it.' ( 3.)  When imports are allowed, there will be a 100% import tax on it.  ( 4.)  All retired military personnel will be required to man one of our many observation towers on the southern border.  (six month tour) They will be under strict orders not to fire on SOUTHBOUND aliens. ( 5.)  Social security  will immediately return to its original state.  If you didn't put nuttin in, you ain't gettin nuttin out.  The president nor any other politician will not be able to touch it. ( 6.)  Welfare - Checks will be handed out on Fridays at the end of the 40 hour school week and the successful completion of urinalysis and a passing grade. ( 7.)  Professional Athletes - Steroids - The FIRST time you check positive you're banned for life. ( 8.)  Crime - We will adopt the Turkish method, the first time you steal, you lose your right hand. There is no more life sentences.  If convicted, you will be put to death by the same method you chose for your victim; gun, knife, strangulation, etc. ( 9.)  One export will be allowed...Wheat.  The world needs to eat.  A bushel of wheat will be the exact price of a barrel of oil. (10.)  All foreign aid using American taxpayer money will immediately cease, and the saved money will pay off the national debt and ultimately lower taxes.  When disasters occur around the world, we'll ask the American people if they want to donate to a disaster fund, and each citizen can make the decision whetherit's a worthy cause. (11.)  The Pledge of Allegiance will be said every day at school and every day in Congress. (12.)  The National Anthem will be played at all appropriate ceremonies, sporting events, outings, etc. Sorry if I stepped on anyone's toes, but a vote for me will get you better than what you have, and better than what you're gonna get.  Thanks for listening, and remember to write in my name on the ballot in November. God Bless America!!!!!!!!!!! Bill Cosby!!!!!!!! Origins:   This piece setting out a hypothetical reactionary "platform" for a potential write-in U.S. presidential candidate was originally circulated prior to the 2008 elections and commonly attributed to entertainer  Bill Cosby.  Although the identity of the original author remains unknown, this piece is most assuredly not the work of the popular comedian:  When Dr. Cosby speaks out politically, it is generally to urge blacks to take responsibility for making the most of educational opportunities and eschewing choices that limit their potential for success.  Immigration, imports, foreign aid, steroid use in sports, and insufficient recitation of the Pledge of Allegiance and the national anthem are not his political btes noires.  (This "platform" has also been attributed to comic George Carlin, and it's equally out of tune with that late comedian's commonly expressed political views.) Bill Cosby speaks out Just before the 2008 U.S. presidential election, Bill Cosby himself disclaimed involvement with this "write-in candidate" e-mail on his web site: BILL COSBY IS NOT A WRITE-IN CANDIDATE FOR PRESIDENTI am not a write-in candidate for President. The statement purportedly from me stating that I am a candidate is a hoax. The platform attributed to me (and at various times to Robin Williams, Andy Rooney and George Carlin) does not represent my views and in many respects is abhorrent to me. Apparently those bloggers and websites who continue to spread this hoax do not care to do even minimal fact checking. This piece has continued to circulate well beyond the 2008 elections and has since been updated to suggest that it is a platform for a potential candidate in the upcoming 2012 elections, a change which prompted the posting of yet another disclaimer on Dr. Cosby's site in September 2009: disclaimer Whatever I say is on Twitter, Facebook or BillCosby.com A viral email is appearing on the internet purporting to be a Bill Cosby statement that he is running for President of the United States in 2012 and outlining his platform. This is a hoax, completely false and with no factual basis. Bill Cosby says, "False Bill Cosby statements are not funny nor fun and sometimes mean-spirited." Last updated:  25 September 2010 Presidential candidate Ted Cruzs campaign came out swinging directly at rival John Kasich for the first time in a TV ad. The attack ads are getting more direct, as the delegates in contention dwindle. This ad presents a series of facts to suggest that Kasich, as governor of Ohio, orchestrated shady deals to benefit his friends and campaign funders. Right before John Kasich was governor, he collected $611,000 from a Fortune 500 corporation, the ad says. After Kasich became governor, that same company received $619 grand in state tax breaks for job creation. But last year, the company laid off 100 Ohioans, even as its CEO cut a half-million-dollar check to Kasichs super PAC. John Kasich, not for us. To find out whether its fact or fiction, lets take each allegation one at a time. Kasich took money from a Fortune 500 company According to newsreports, in 2001 after leaving Congress, Kasich joined the board of directors of Worthington Industries, an Ohio steel processor and Fortune 500 company. Security and Exchange Commission filingsshowthat Worthington board members were paid $45,000 per year as a retainer, and $1,500 per meeting attended. Worthington also reimbursed board members for travel expenses and other out-of-pocket costs. The CantonRepositoryreportedthat Kasich quit the Worthington board upon winning the governors race in 2010, but was still owed deferred compensation from the board. Kasich received $611,000 total in deferred compensation from Worthington, and at least $103,000 of the total came after he had been sworn in as governor. That same company received $619,000 in tax breaks after Kasich took office In the first bill he signed as governor, Kasich made good on a campaign promise to attract investment to Ohio. He nixed the Ohio Department of Development and created a private, nonprofit corporation called JobsOhio, explaining that in order to lure companies to the state, government needed to move at the speed of business. Kasich designed JobsOhio to be funded by a lease on state liquor profits. He declared it exempt from public records requirements and state audits. And he made board appointments for JobsOhio a responsibility of the governor. To drum up job creation, JobsOhio reviews potential opportunities to offer incentives such as tax breaks, and sends its recommendations to the Ohio Tax Credit Authority for final determination. The tax credit authority has a five-member board, and three of its appointees, including the chair, are Kasichs. An Associated Press investigation found that, less than a year after JobsOhio was created, it recommended a series of tax incentives totalling $619,000 for Worthington Industries subsidiaries, which the state tax credit board awarded. Last year, the company laid off 100 Ohioans In March 2015, Worthingtonannouncedit was cutting 555 jobs nationwide, which included 115 in Ohio. The company blamed the loss of these jobs --manufacturing cabs for large agricultural and mining equipment -- on industry-wide downturns. Worthington spokeswoman Cathy Lyttletoldthe CantonRepositorythat any incentives the company receives are only paid when the company delivers the jobs it promised. She said that pursuing tax incentives is standard business practice, and Worthington received $400,000 in tax breaks under the previous, Democratic regime of governor Ted Strickland. Companys CEO donates half-million to Kasichs presidential bid The Center for Responsive Politicsconfirmsa $500,000 contribution from Worthington CEO John P. McConnell to the New Day 2016 PAC, via Internal Revenue Service records released November 30, 2015. Several of Kasich's board appointees stepped up with campaign donations as well. OpenSecrets.org shows that the wife of ethics committee chairman Merom Brachman, Judith, gave the maximum donation to Kasichs campaign, $2,700, in August 2015. John C. Boland, the chair of JobsOhio, donated the $2,700 max to Kasich in July 2015. JobsOhio board member Gary R. Heminger and his wife, Jane, each donated $2,700 to Kasich on the same day in October 2015. JobsOhio board member Lawrence J. Kidd and his wife, Cindy, each donated $2,700 to Kasich on the same day in August 2015. All together now Cruzs attack ad parrots a complaint filed with the Ohio Ethics Commission by Kasichs Democratic challenger in the 2014 election, Ed FitzGerald. The ethics commissionpassedon investigating FitzGeralds complaint. Chairman Brachman, who, like the other commissioners, was appointed by the governor, said that Kasich had provided enough information to conclusively rule out any conflict of interest. He added that actions by JobsOhio are not subject to the authority of the ethics commission. Rob Nichols, Kasichs spokesman, dismissed this Cruz ad as a one-hit wonder that only ran briefly in Wisconsin and is no longer airing. The ads four accurate, provable data points, arent in dispute, Nichols said. But he has a beef with the insinuation that any of the described actions were wrong, or even out of the ordinary. They didnt say, The governors corrupt, because that you could fact-check, Nichols said. Everything there is 100 percent, entirely above-board, but when you say it with a snarly voice over scary music, people think its inappropriate. Our ruling Cruzs attack ad links a series of headlines to suggest that as governor, Kasich rewarded his former business ties in exchange for political contributions. The ads tone is ominous, but the text is factual. What isnt explained is that everything in the ad has been the subject of prior complaints that did not provoke any regulatory action. Its beensuggestedthat an overhaul of state rules might preventsimilar situationsfrom arising, and similar allegations from dogging Ohio leaders. But thats a different ad, for another day. We rate these claims Mostly True. On March 23, 2021, The Associated Press reported on an Oakland, California, initiative named Oakland Resilient Families "that will give low-income families of color $500 per month with no rules on how they can spend it." This "demonstration project," as Oakland Mayor Libby Schaaf described it, is a test of what is known as a "guaranteed income." reported Projects like this one are part of a larger effort by a coalition of mayors to convince Congress to pass a national guaranteed income program. The Oakland program is not tax-payer funded, however. All of the funding comes from charitable donations, most of it from a philanthropic non-profit group named Blue Meridian Partners," according to San Francisco-based NPR station KQED. coalition funding according Half of the program's 600 participants will be families earning below 50% of the city's median income, and the other half will come from families earning below 138% of the federal poverty level. These cut-offs were selected based on data provided by Oakland's Equality Index, which is an effort "to develop a baseline quantitative framework that can be used by City staff and community members alike to better understand the impacts of race, measure inequities, and track changes in the disparities for different groups over time." will be Oakland's Equality Index In their coverage, The Associated Press described the project as "the first program to limit participation strictly to Black, Indigenous and people of color communities." At the time of the reporting, this was a fair representation of Oakland Resilient Families goals, as the program's website  as well as the mayor  explicitly stated the program was intended for "Black, Indigenous, and People of Color (BIPOC) families." website the mayor That reporting led to tabloid headlines and angry tweets: tabloid headlines angry tweets Following this latter coverage, Oakland Resilient Families changed its website's answer to the "Who is this for?" question to "families with the greatest wealth disparities per the Oakland Equity Index, with low-incomes and at least 1 child under 18, regardless of documentation status."  changed Explaining the change to KQED, Rae Oglesby, the vice president of membership and communications at the Family Independence Initiative  a partner with the Oakland Resilient Families program  said the program is targeting racial groups experiencing the largest disparities," but that "it is open to all residents." said Justin Berton, the communications director for Mayor Schaaf, told KQED that, We have not changed the program. We have had to clarify that while no family is prohibited from applying, this pilot is intentionally designed to serve and support BIPOC families, who evidence shows suffer the greatest and most disproportionate impacts of poverty." told According to Oakland's Equality Index, the median income for white households in Oakland was almost three times the median income of African American households: three times The median income for White households was highest ($110,000) and the median income for African American households was lowest ($37,500). The median income for Asian households ($76,000) was similar to the citywide median income ($73,200), while Latino households fell below the citywide median with a median income of $65,000. The program is still in its earliest phases. At the moment, sign-ups for the program are not yet available. "The goal," Oakland Resilient Families' website states, "is to begin payments to families this spring after incorporating more community feedback and to have the entire program up and running this summer."  states Because the program is "targeted" toward BIPOC families, but because  at least after some clarification on the part of Oakland Resilient Families  any family meeting the financial requirements can apply, we rate this claim a "Mixture" of truth.