Says our unemployment insurance trust fund is broke. We're over a billion dollars in debt to the federal government.
New Jersey has gone into debt to cover unemployment benefits for people who lost their jobs in the Garden State.Assemblyman Jay Webber (R-Morris) made that argument in a recent NJToday interview about his opposition to proposed legislation aimed at providing unemployment benefits to certain individuals whose hours at work have been reduced.It might be a good idea. The problem I have is that our unemployment insurance trust fund is broke, Webber said during the Nov. 28 interview. We're over a billion dollars in debt to the federal government, and what this bill does is create another stream of income out of the fund.PolitiFact New Jersey found that Webber is right.After more than two and a half years of borrowing money to cover unemployment benefits, New Jersey still owed about $1.3 billion to the federal government as of Dec. 6, according to federal and state officials.Kerri Gatling, a spokeswoman for the state Department of Labor and Workforce Development, said the state expects to pay off the loan in late 2013.There is currently a negative fund balance resulting from the severe economic downturn whereby unemployment insurance benefit payments exceed contributions to the fund, Gatling said in an email.Webber told us the fund must be protected and its solvency ensured.Regardless of how we got there, now weve got to fix it, Webber said.Heres how we got into so much debt:New Jerseys unemployment insurance trust fund is made up of payroll taxes paid by employers and employees. The fund is used to pay unemployment benefits to people who worked in New Jersey.The idea behind such trust funds is to build up reserves when the economy is performing well in order to pay unemployment benefits during economic downturns.But state officials repeatedly diverted money from the trust fund to cover charity care payments to hospitals, ultimately reaching a total of about $4.6 billion in funds by 2005, according to the states nonpartisan Office of Legislative Services.Then, as more people lost their jobs during the recent recession and sought unemployment benefits, the trust fund was depleted by March 2009 and the state began borrowing from the federal government to cover the payments, according to OLS.The borrowing reached its height in April 2011, when New Jersey owed $2.1 billion for the loan, Gatling said. On Sept. 30, New Jersey paid nearly $48 million to the federal government to cover interest on the loan, she said.The state anticipates an interest payment of between roughly $55 million and $60 million to be made in September 2012, Gatling said.As we minimize the interest expense, we take excess funds and pay the loan balance, Gatling said. Payroll taxes are used to pay benefits and pay the loan balance.In November 2010, New Jersey voters overwhelmingly approved a constitutional amendment prohibiting the diversion of money from the unemployment insurance trust fund and other benefit funds for any other purposes.But New Jersey isnt the only state that owes the federal government money to cover unemployment benefits.As of Dec. 6, 27 states and the U.S. Virgin Islands owed a total of roughly $38.3 billion in principal alone, including New Jerseys roughly $1.3 billion, according to the U.S. Treasury Department. California owes the most, about $9.4 billion, according to the department.Our rulingWebber claimed in a television interview that New Jerseys unemployment insurance trust fund is broke. We're over a billion dollars in debt to the federal government.The assemblymans statement is on target. New Jersey currently owes more than $1 billion to the federal government for money borrowed to pay unemployment benefits.We rate the statement True. To comment on this ruling, go toNJ.com.
Claim:  Apple is selling brand new iPhone 6S units for $1 each.  Example:  [Collected via Facebook, October 2015] Apple iPhones for $1....is it a trap/scam?  Origins:  Yet another form of the ubiquitous "sweepstakes scam" hit social media in October 2015, with the repeated posting of a Facebook item promoting "Apple's Shocking 2015 Sale" under which customers "Can Now Get a Brand New iPhone 6 for $1." Those who clicked on the link underlying such posts were taken to a page imitative of a news article, reporting that "As part of a special promotion, Apple is working with its trusted distribution partner, FunkyClock, for giving away iPhone 6S's that cost 99% off regular retail price." But FunkyClock isn't a "trusted distribution partner" of Apple, and they aren't participating in a promotion to "give away' iPhone 6s or sell them for $1 each.  FunkyClock is a game site, and users who read the fine print for this promotion will note that they have to sign up with FunkyClock, supply a credit card number, play at least 10 complete games, and agree to pay a hefty monthly subscription fee of $119, all to gain a one in 500 chance at winning a "free" iPhone 6. fine print Of course, $1 isn't the price of a "New iPhone 6S"; it's a charge that will be applied against the credit card number you supply to FunkyClock to ensure it's valid (and thus open to future additional charges).  It's also unlikely there will be any actual "winners" of "free" iPhone 6s in this promotion, but even if there were, agreeing to pay $119 per month to gain a 0.2% chance of winning an iPhone that retails in the $700-800 range is a very bad bet indeed.    Last updated:  13 October 2015 Republican Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene from Georgia has courted controversy on various issues by promoting QAnon conspiracy theories, alongside a history of anti-Muslim and anti-Semitic remarks. Years-old views, including a Facebook interaction in which she agreed with a comment that the Parkland shooting was a "false flag" staged event, and a video in which she pushed 9/11 conspiracy theories, have been unearthed. Marjorie Taylor Greene courted controversy interaction 9/11 conspiracy theories One post from 2018 in particular was reported on by Media Matters for America, a watchdog group, where she speculated about a conspiracy surrounding the November 2018 wildfires in California. In the now-deleted post, Greene theorized that a space-based solar generator, used in a clean-energy experiment with the goal of replacing coal and oil, could have beamed the sun's energy back to Earth and started the fires. We have covered similar claims surrounding the wildfires before. reported now-deleted theorized similar claims She said, "there are too many coincidences to ignore" and "oddly there are all these people who have said they saw what looked like lasers or blue beams of light causing the fires."   Greene also speculated that a range of people or groups were involved in this fire, including former California Gov. Jerry Brown, Pacific Gas & Electric (PG&E), and Rothschild Inc., an investment firm. She said that Roger Kimmel, who was on the board of PG&E, was also "Vice Chairman of Rothschild Inc," and "If they are beaming the suns energy back to Earth, I'm sure they wouldn't ever miss a transmitter receiving station right??!! I mean mistakes are never made when anything new is invented. What would that look like anyway? A laser beam or light beam coming down to Earth I guess. Could that cause a fire? Hmmm, I don't know. I hope not! That wouldn't look so good for PG&E, Rothschild Inc, Solaren or Jerry Brown who sure does seem fond of PG&E." The Rothschilds, a Jewish banking family, have long been the targets of anti-Semitic conspiracy theories claiming that Jewish people are in control of the entire world. While Greene specifically did not use the words "Jewish space laser," she heavily implied that the Rothschilds were involved in the laser conspiracy. targets An investigation showed that the California wildfires of 2018 were ignited by PG&E power lines, and then spread with the help of warm temperatures, dry vegetation, and strong winds. showed In late January 2021, CNN reported that dozens of posts from 2018 and 2019 had been removed from Greene's Facebook page. removed Given that Greene did not directly state that "Jewish lasers" caused the fires, but did speculate that laser beams somehow connected to the Rothschild investment firm were a cause, we rate this claim as "Mixture." In May 2014 Facebook announced they would be rolling out an "Identify TV and Music" feature that would allow users who access the social media platform through their cell phones to identify and tag music or television programs playing in their area. When a user begins to compose a status update, Facebook will activate the phone's microphone, filter out live conversations, and try to detect and identify audio programming. If a matching song is found, Facebook will include a sample of the music in the status; if a matching television program is found, Facebook will label the specific season and episode "so you can avoid any spoilers": announced When writing a status update  if you choose to turn the feature on  you'll have the option to use your phone's microphone to identify what song is playing or what show or movie is on TV. That means if you want to share that you're listening to your favorite Beyonc track or watching the season premiere of Game of Thrones, you can do it quickly and easily, without typing. If you share music, your friends can see a 30-second preview of the song. For TV shows, the story in News Feed will highlight the specific season and episode youre watching, so you can avoid any spoilers and join in conversations with your friends after you've caught up. Facebook said the digital fingerprinting feature would be opt-in only, meaning users would have to give the program permission to start. Once activated, an icon on the face of the phone would indicate that the microphone was active and the phone was listening. Users who opted in could still choose to turn off the feature on a post-by-post basis. (Audio fingerprinting would only be available in the United States and only via iOS and Android mobile apps; it would not function if Facebook were accessed through a browser.)   Facebook's announcement was later updated to address rumors that the new app would listen in on, and store, user conversations: Myth: The feature listens to and stores your conversations. Fact: Nope, no matter how interesting your conversation, this feature does not store sound or recordings. Facebook isn't listening to or storing your conversations. Here's how it works: if you choose to turn the feature on, when you write a status update, the app converts any sound into an audio fingerprint on your phone. This fingerprint is sent to our servers to try and match it against our database of audio and TV fingerprints. By design, we do not store fingerprints from your device for any amount of time. And in any event, the fingerprints can't be reversed into the original audio because they don't contain enough information. Myth: Facebook is always listening using your microphone. Fact: Nope, if you choose to turn this feature on, it will only use your microphone (for 15 seconds) when you're actually writing a status update to try and match music and TV. Two years later, a similar rumor erupted, holding that Facebook was listening to user conversations in order to better target advertising and content to them. rumor  Griffin, Andrew.  "Facebook Is Using Smartphones To Listen To What People Say, Professor Suggests."
  The Independent.  31May 2016. Hill, Kashmir.  "Facebook Wants To Listen in on What You're Doing."
  Forbes.  22 May 2014. Kleinman, Zoe.  "Facebook 'Listening' Claim Denied By Professor"
  BBC.  3June2016. Tate, Ryan.  "Facebook Will Soon Detect What You're Watching and Listening To."
  Wired.  21 May 2014. Tate, Ryan.  "Why Facebook Spent a Year Learning to Listen in on Your TV Shows."
  Wired.  22 May 2014. Facebook Newsroom.  "Facebook Does Not Use Your Phones Microphone for Ads or News Feed Stories."
  2 June 2016. DidTravis Allen, arguably the most conservative candidate for California governor, donate campaign money to three of the states leading liberal Democrats? Thats the Republican-on-Republican attack levied by John Coxs campaign for governor in arecent TV adthat goes after Allen, an Orange County assemblyman whos positioned himself as a GOP populist. Heres the full text of the ad, which includes three attacks on Allen: Narrator: For Republicans, the race for governor is crystal clear: Theres conservative businessman John Cox, leading the opposition to Jerry Browns Sanctuary State and chairman of the initiative campaign to repeal the gas tax. Then theres career politician Travis Allen. He gave campaign donations to Jerry Brown. Gavin Newsom and Barbara Boxer. And on the floor vote, Allen refused to join Republicans opposing driver licenses for illegal aliens. The conservative choice is clear: John Cox for governor. The ad was paid for by John Cox for Governor 2018. Well examine the other two attacks on Allen in future fact-checks. In this piece, well focus on the claim he donated to top Democrats. Background on GOP rivals Recent polls show growing support for Coxs campaign for governor, less than a week after President Trumpendorsedthe San Diego businessman. A surveyreleased Wednesday nightfrom the Public Policy Institute of California shows Newsom, the states lieutenant governor, leading Cox, 25 percent to 19 percent. Former Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa was third, at 15 percent, followed by Allen with 11 percent,  State Treasurer John Chiang at 9 percent and former state schools chief Delaine Eastin with 6 percent. Coxand Allen have sparred at campaign events over who is the most conservative candidate. Theyve both criticized Californias Democratic leadership over the gas tax increase and sanctuary state protections. The top two candidates in the June 5 primary, regardless of party affiliation, will move on to the November runoff. Donating to Democrats? The ad accuses Allen of donating to three of the states top Democrats. The irony, of course, is that Allens run for governor has centered on criticizing those same politicians, particularly Brown and Newsom. We found clear evidence supporting the claim, though Coxs ad ignores the fact that the contributions took place nearly a decade ago, before Allen ran for elected office, and that he also donated to Republicans. Campaign finance records show that in October 2010, Allen donated $1,000 to Jerry Brown for Governor, through Wealth Strategies Group, his wealth management firm in Huntington Beach. In August 2010, Allen gave $100 to Gavin Newsom for Lieutenant Governor. And, in October 2010, he donated $250 to Barbara Boxer for Senate. SOURCE: Campaign finance records from the California Secretary of State'swebsite. Asked about this, a spokeswoman for Allens campaign said in an email that the contributions took place before Travis was an elected official, as a businessman, he purchased tickets to some events. A November 2017 Mercury-Newsarticlesummarized these and additional donations Allen made to Democrats in 2010 and 2011. He told the paper at that time: As a businessman I was invited to some events by friends, and I purchased tickets to these events. Attending these events, however, opened my eyes to the damage the Democrats were doing to California, and brought about my decision to do everything in my power to stop them, including running for public office. Similar claim In April 2016, PolitiFact California ratedMostly Truea similar claim about then Presidential candidate Donald Trump donating to Democrats. Texas GOP Sen. Ted Cruz, at the time Trumps rival for the Republican presidential nomination, claimed Trump has given $12,000 to Jerry Brown, Gavin Newsom and Kamala Harris. Campaign finance data showed the claim was accurate, though we noted Cruz left out that the donations took place long before Trump announced his run for president. The contribution to Jerry Brown took place in 2006, while the donations to the other Democrats took place in 2009, 2011 and 2013. Our ruling In a recentTV ad, John Coxs campaign for governor claimed rival GOP candidate Travis Allen donated to three of Californias top Democrats. Campaign records prove the claim, though the contributions took place a decade ago, before Allen entered politics. The statement is accurate but needs this clarification. We rate it Mostly True. MOSTLY TRUE The statement is accurate but needs clarification or additional information. Click here formoreon the six PolitiFact ratings and how we select facts to check. In late July 2020, Snopes readers asked for verification of numerous social media posts that stated Target had canceled its annual "Shop with a Cop" program, which is officially known as "Heroes & Helpers," in an effort to "distance themselves from Police Officers." Here is an example of one such post circulating on Facebook:   Similar posts also made the rounds on Twitter, and to add to the confusion, a website called The Courier Daily only reported that people were talking about the rumor on Twitter but didn't offer any evidence for the claim. posts website We reached out to the source itself, asking Target Corporate whether it had ended the long-standing program that pairs children from low-income backgrounds with local law enforcement officers for holiday shopping trips funded by charitable donations. A spokesperson for Target told us that the program will continue, although details about how it will move forward amid the COVID-19 pandemic are still pending. In response to our question asking whether the program had been canceled, the company sent the following statement: We plan to continue to support children with Heroes & Helpers events across the country this holiday season. Like many of our holiday programs, were carefully considering how to manage these events during the COVID-19 environment in a way that ensures the health and safety of our team and guests. We will have additional details to share as we approach the holiday season. The program was launched in 2009 and takes place in stores nationwide. To date, $5 million in grants has been used to support the shopping trips, and more than 100,000 children and 60,000 police officers have participated, per Target. program The false social media rumors may have been inspired by the fact that since the May 25, 2020, death of George Floyd in Minneapolis police custody, there have been ongoing protests against and conversation about police violence and racism in America, spurring calls to reform policing practices and even some activists calling for police departments to be defunded. George Floyd However, Target, as of this writing, doesn't plan to cancel the program as a result of the racial justice protests. With the information currently available, we rate this claim  A Bullseye View.  "Target Teams Up with Donnie Wahlberg to Celebrate 10 Years of Heroes & Helpers."
  4 December 2019. Trujillo, Damian.  "Shop With a Cop Foundation Considers Name Change to Reconnect with Community."
  KNTV.  2 July 2020. Hill, Evan, et al.  "How George Floyd Was Killed in Police Custody."
  The New York Times.  31 May 2020. On 9 April 2019, the "Santorini Holidays" Facebook page posted a set of picturesque images and claimed that any social media user who commented and shared the post would have a chance to win an all-expenses paid vacation to the "Grand Opening Celebration" of this new hotel in Greece: Facebook picturesque The Facebook message reads: "We're going to celebrate our Grand Opening by doing something special for you. We're going to be rewarding someone who has shared then commented by April 16th with a 7 night holiday for 4 people in this 2 Bedroom 5 star hotel. You will have a year to use the holiday. No need to worry about flights & travel, it's all included."  This Facebook post contains all of the hallmarks of a like-farming scam, and none of the information (such as the name of the new hotel) that would be included in a genuine giveaway.  This genre of scam relies on the promise of a big giveaway (we've previously covered similar scams giving away everything from gift cards, to cars, to cash to airline tickets) in order to generate likes, shares, and comments. This can drive up the value of the page, which can then be sold to a third-party or used to sell advertisements. gift cards cars cash airline tickets You can read more about like-farming scams here. For the moment, let's address some of the red flags that give away the fact that this is a giveaway scam.  here For starters, this post provides no basic information about this alleged hotel. Despite reporting that the vacation would take place during the "Grand Opening," this message does not contain the address of the hotel, a phone number, or even the property's name. We looked for a hotel named "Santorini Holidays" on the Greek island but found no matches.  When we performed a reverse-image search on the photos, we found they came from a variety of sources, such as stock photography websites, travel blogs, and online booking platforms. These photographs also show a variety of properties. For instance, the image of the oval, blue pool was taken at the Volcano View Villas Hotel and the images of the bathroom interior come from the Chromata, both in Greece. Neither of these hotels is having a "grand opening" this weekend.  Volcano View Villas Hotel  Chromata,  The Facebook page itself is also suspicious. For example, this page claims in its "About" section (left) to have been established in April 2014, but Facebook's Page Transparency blurb (right) states that it was actually created in March 2019:   In short, social media users who share and comment on the Santorini Holidays Facebook page's "Grand Opening Celebration" giveaway post should not expect to win an all-inclusive vacation to Greece.  GreekTravel.com.  "Where to Stay in Santorini."
  Retrieved 15 April 2019. Claim:  Caroline Kennedy said that she can't stand President Obama's voice and that he's a liar. UNDETERMINED Example:  [Collected via e-mail, August 2012] Just saw on Facebook a photo of Caroline Kennedy quoting that she just can't stand to listen to President Obama's voice and that he is a liar. True?    Origins:  The quote attributed to Caroline Kennedy (daughter of President John F. Kennedy) referenced above originated with Edward Klein's 2012 book The Amateur: Barack Obama in the White House.  It appeared in the following passage, which talked about Caroline Kennedy  who had been a strong supporter of Barack Obama during the 2008 presidential campaign  becoming disenchanted with the Obamas for making "catty" remarks about her family and for not being more liberal in political policy-making:  "Through these [spies that the Kennedy family has in the Obama administration] and other people, Caroline heard back that there was a lot of nasty shit being said about the Kennedys by the president and Michelle," [a] family member [said]. "There were catty remarks about how badly the Kennedy women dressed, and how their houses were shabby and threadbare. Caroline got the impression that most of this negativity was coming from Michelle, who didn't want the Kennedys to be part of the administration for fear that they would have too much influence over the president." "Gradually, Caroline began to change her tune and side with Bobby and Kathleen [Kennedy Townsend] against the Obamas. Unlike Jackie, who was completely apolitical, Caroline is a liberal with a capital L. When Obama didn't raise taxes to balance the  budget, Caroline marked him down. In her eyes, he's a mess because he doesn't follow the liberal bible on politics. More important, Caroline discovered that the Obamas didn't give a damn about her support.  For instance, she was not invited to the state dinners at the White House hosted by the Obamas, or to the president's forty-ninth birth celebration in Chicago. "It really annoyed Caroline when comparisons were made by the media between Michelle [Obama] and Jackie [Kennedy]. Caroline had a word for such comparisons; she called them 'odious.' She really got annoyed. And when she began to fall out of love with the Obamas, love was replaced by outright scorn. Now she says things about Obama like, 'I can't stand to hear his voice any more. He's a liar and worse.'" However verifying exactly what Caroline Kennedy might have said is difficult because the quote offered in this passage is second-hand rather than direct (i.e., it's someone else talking about what she said, not a direct statement from Caroline Kennedy herself) and because the source of the statement is anonymous (beyond the description of his or her being a "member of the Kennedy clan"). Caroline Kennedy herself has neither confirmed nor denied that she made the remarks attributed to her, but even after their publication she has continued to publicly express support for the Obamas, such as issuing a message to wish President Obama a Happy Father's Day, campaigning in New Hampshire for the President's re-election, and making plans to attend the Democratic National Convention. message campaigning attend Last updated:  19 August 2012 Appearing at a rally with President Donald Trump in Charleston, W.Va., Patrick Morrisey -- the Republican challenger to Democratic Sen. Joe Manchin -- riled up the crowd by invoking a particularly embarrassing remark by Hillary Clinton, the 2016 presidential nominee of Manchins party. Joe Manchin strongly supported and voted for Hillary Clinton after she said, Were going to put a lot of coal miners and coal companies out of work, Morriseytold the crowdafter Trump turned over the podium on Aug. 21, 2018. Morrissey's statement has a basis in truth, but it glosses over some context. (We're not addressing the portion of Morrisey's remark about how Manchin voted, since ballots are cast privately, making it impossible for us to verify independently.) On March 13, 2016, as she was running for president, Clinton appeared at a televised town hall in Columbus, Ohio. At one point during the event,Clinton said, Im the only candidate which has a policy about how to bring economic opportunity  using clean, renewable energy as the key  into coal country. Because were going to put a lot of coal miners and coal companies out of business. She continued, And we're going to make it clear that we don't want to forget those people. Those people labored in those mines for generations, losing their health, often losing their lives to turn on our lights and power our factories. Now we've got to move away from coal and all the other fossil fuels, but I don't want to move away from the people who did the best they could to produce the energy that we relied on. While the latter portion of her comments communicated empathy for coal-mining families, her remark that were going to put a lot of coal miners and coal companies out of business drew intense criticism, not only from Americans in coal country but also with her allies, who said Clintons phrasing seemed to trivialize the seriousness of coal workers economic dilemma. So how did this episode affect Manchins support for Clinton? Lets review. Manchin and Clinton had known each other for years, and he endorsed her on CBSsFace the Nationon April 19, 2015. I support Hillary Clinton. I know Hillary Clinton, and I find her to be warm and engaging, compassionate and tough. All of the above,  Manchin said. After the town hall remark,MetroNewsreported that a senior advisor to Manchin was troubled and concerned by the comments and reached out directly to the Secretary and her senior advisor for energy. In June 2018, Manchin toldPoliticothat he repeatedly threatened to revoke his support for Clinton after her remark. First, Manchin told Bill Clinton that he would withdraw his support, as the former president pleaded with him not to, Politico reported, Then Hillary Clinton called him. She said, Please dont. Let me come to West Virginia, I need to explain. I said, Thats a bad idea, you shouldnt come, Manchin recounted. But the two sides reconciled, and on March 15 -- two days after the town hall -- Clinton formally reacted to the fallout from her remark, sending aletterto Manchin. Simply put, I was mistaken in my remarks, she wrote. I wanted to make the point that, as you know too well, while coal will be part of the energy mix for years to come, both in the U.S. and around the world, we have already seen a long-term decline in American coal jobs and a recent wave of bankruptcies as a result of a changing energy market  and we need to do more to support the workers and families facing these challenges. She also said in the letter that she supported the Miners Protection Act backed by Manchin, which would provide health benefits and pensions for former miners and family members. I pledge to you that I will focus my team and my Administration on bringing jobs to Appalachia, especially jobs producing the carbon capture technology we need for the future, Clinton wrote. About six weeks later, on May 2, Clinton came to West Virginia for aroundtableat the Williamson Health and Wellness Center. At that event, she talked with Manchin and a former coal miner, Bo Copley. I don't know how to explain it, other than what I said was totally out of context from what I meant because I have been talking about helping coal country for a very long time and I did put out a plan last summer, Clinton said. It was a misstatement, because what I was saying is that the way things are going now we are going to continue to lose jobs. What I said was that is going to happen unless we take action to try to help and prevent it. At the roundtable, Manchin also expressed his discomfort with Clintons initial statement. I have two ways to go when that statement came out, Manchin said. I could have said, 'I thought she was my friend, by golly I'm done, I'm gone.' Now that's not the way we were raised, I wasn't raised that way. So, I said I'm going to call her instead. He added, If I thought that was in her heart, if I thought she wanted to eliminate one job in West Virginia, I wouldnt be sitting here, and she wouldnt be sitting here if she felt that way.. Manchins office did not respond to an inquiry, butCNNreported on June 17, 2016, that Manchin remained one of the Democratic Senators who were backing Clinton for president. And in the 2018 Politico interview, Manchin called his decision to stick by Clinton a mistake. It was a mistake politically. But the article added that to Manchin, her $20 billion commitment to his state was too much to pass up. Is this about me? Or trying to help a part of my state thats never recovered and is having a tough time? Morrisey said Manchin strongly supported and voted for Hillary Clinton after she said, Were going to put a lot of coal miners and coal companies out of work. Its worth noting some of the context that Morrisey left out -- that Clinton had also expressed empathy for coal miners economic challenges in her initial remark, that she later clarified what she had meant to say, and that Manchin had worked to convince Clinton of why her remarks had been unacceptable. Still, none of that changes the gist of Morriseys assertion -- that Clinton said the remark, and that Manchin remained in her camp through the election (while we know he endorsed her, we do not know for sure he voted for her, as ballots are secret). We rate the statement Mostly True. In May 2022, after the leak of a Supreme Court draft opinion showed that the justices were set to overturn Roe v. Wade, a piece of text supposedly written by a pastor named Dave Barnhart about how the "the unborn are a convenient group of people to advocate for" was widely circulated on social media: the leak of a Supreme Court draft opinion widely circulated  This message was truly written by the pastor. Barnhart, who is a pastor at Saint Junia United Methodist Church in Birmingham, Alabama, first posted this message to his Facebook page in 2018. At the time, Alabama politicians were in the process of passing an amendment to the state's constitution that would "recognize the rights of the unborn" in order to ensure that "state funds [would] not go to funding abortion care," according to AL.com. was truly written posted this message to his Facebook page in 2018 according to AL.com The full text of Barnhart's Facebook post read:  "The unborn" are a convenient group of people to advocate for. They never make demands of you; they are morally uncomplicated, unlike the incarcerated, addicted, or the chronically poor; they don't resent your condescension or complain that you are not politically correct; unlike widows, they don't ask you to question patriarchy; unlike orphans, they don't need money, education, or childcare; unlike aliens, they don't bring all that racial, cultural, and religious baggage that you dislike; they allow you to feel good about yourself without any work at creating or maintaining relationships; and when they are born, you can forget about them, because they cease to be unborn. It's almost as if, by being born, they have died to you. You can love the unborn and advocate for them without substantially challenging your own wealth, power, or privilege, without re-imagining social structures, apologizing, or making reparations to anyone. They are, in short, the perfect people to love if you want to claim you love Jesus but actually dislike people who breathe. Prisoners? Immigrants? The sick? The poor? Widows? Orphans? All the groups that are specifically mentioned in the Bible? They all get thrown under the bus for the unborn. Some of the most popular iterations of this quote introduced Barnhart as a "traditional Christian" pastor. Other versions introduced Barnhart as a "Methodist pastor" or simply a "pastor." Barnhart operates a network of house churches called the Saint Junia United Methodist Church. Saint Junia United Methodist Church describes itself on its Facebook page as a "a diverse community of sinners, saints, and skeptics who join God in the renewal of all things." Methodist pastor pastor Facebook page Claim:  At the end of 2009, Bank of America will be dropping FDIC coverage on all interest-bearing accounts.  Example:  [Collected via e-mail, December 2009] Bank of America, the largest bank in the U.S., posted notices attall branches that as of January 1, 2010 it will no long participate in the FDIC insurance guarantee program on interest bearing accounts. As of January 1, 2010, all deposits in interest bearing accounts will not be protected from bank losses. This development not only suggests that the FDIC is totally insolvent, It suggests that U.S. fiat money, placed in interest bearing accounts, will soon be defaulted in bank losses or replaced. How many other banks will quickly follow?  Origins:  After a wave of bank failures that came in the wake of the stock market crash of 1929 and the prolonged economic depression that followed, the U.S. federal government created the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) to restore public confidence in (and help stabilize) the U.S. banking system. The FDIC currently provides federal government guarantees of deposits up to $250,000 per account holder per bank (subject to certain conditions) at insured financial institutions.   FDIC If, as claimed above, Bank of America (the United States' largest commercial bank) were dropping out of the FDIC program, that would certainly be alarming news that would shatter consumer confidence, not just in Bank of America, but in the FDIC and the entire U.S. commercial banking system.  Fortunately, no such thing is happening. We made a trip to our local Bank of America branch, where a helpful assistant manager made us a photocopy of the sign referenced in the example quoted above and took the time to answer some questions about its provisions.  Here is exactly how the sign reads: Beginning January 1, 2010, Bank of America will no longer participate in the FDIC's Transaction Account Guarantee Program.  Thus, after December 31, 2009, funds held in noninterest-bearing transaction accounts will no longer be guaranteed in full under the Transaction Account Guarantee Program, but will be insured up to $250,000 under the FDIC's general deposit insurance rules. The first item of importance is to note is that the change in question applies not to "interest bearing accounts" (e.g., savings accounts, certificates of deposit, individual retirement accounts, etc.) as claimed above, but only to noninterest-bearing transaction accounts (i.e., checking accounts). The second, larger item of importance is to note that Bank of America is not dropping FDIC insurance protection on any of its accounts.  It is merely winding down its participation in a temporary FDIC program that is already due to expire at the end of 2009. On 14 October 2008, the FDIC announced the implementation of its Temporary Liquidity Guarantee Program (TLGP), which included a program known as Transaction Account Guarantee (TAG). The TAG program guaranteed that the FDIC would  TAG provide full deposit insurance coverage for noninterest-bearing deposit transaction accounts (primarily business checking accounts), regardless of their dollar amount.   In other words, TAG was extra insurance protection in addition to, and separate from, the $250,000 coverage available under the FDIC's general deposit insurance rules  under TAG, a depositor who held, say, $2 million in a checking account was covered for the full $2 million amount, not just the first $250,000.  Bank of America will still be providing FDIC coverage for all accounts up to the standard $250,000 limit; it just won't be providing the extra TAG coverage that temporarily guaranteed noninterest-bearing accounts up to their full amounts beyond that $250,000 limit. Moreover, the reason Bank of America is dropping that extra coverage at the end of 2009 is because the TAG program was originally scheduled to expire on 31 December 2009.  The FDIC later announced it would provide participating institutions the choice of either opting out of TAG at the end of 2009 or of temporarily extending TAG coverage for another six months in exchange for increased fees.   Most of the largest banks in the U.S. (including Citibank, JPMorgan Chase, Bank of America, and Wells Fargo) have chosen to opt out of the program rather than pay the increased FDIC fees for extended temporary TAG coverage. expire Last updated:  20 December 2009 <!--    Ellen, Daryn.  "Guide to Tipping."   O, The Oprah Magazine.  December 2002.