Datasets:

Cartinoe5930

/

Politifact_fake_news

like 0

Donald Trump “never left” the White House There’s a brand of misinformation that spreads widely on social media that falsely suggests Donald Trump is not the former president, but the current one. We’ve checked some of it, such as this claim that Trump signed the Insurrection Act and is still president, or that he was secretly inaugurated as the president of the "restored Republic." Neither statement is accurate, and neither is the title of this video shared on Facebook on Feb. 2. "Trump is in position," it says. "He never left." This post was flagged as part of Facebook’s efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about our partnership with Facebook.) Featured Fact-check Instagram posts stated on October 10, 2022 in a post “Premature babies are at a much higher risk of injury from immunizations than full-term babies.” By Andy Nguyen • October 13, 2022 RELATED VIDEO The video offers no evidence to support this claim. While Trump is active in politics — issuing statements, holding rallies, giving interviews — he is no longer the president. He left the White House on Jan. 20, 2021, and hasn’t returned. We rate this post Pants on Fire!

A photo shows a crash in Eminence, Indiana With wintry weather striking many regions of the United States, photos are emerging from across the country showing snow plows, icy roads, and big drifts of snow. But one old picture is being mischaracterized as showing the aftermath of a crash in Eminence, Indiana. "This is currently at state road 42 and state road 142 in downtown Eminence, Indiana," a Feb. 2 post says, alongside a photo of a treacherous-looking pileup of cars and trucks. "Black ice! Drive safe folks! Right by the Citizens Bank and Dairyland. Prayers to all involved." But this photo was taken last year, and about 900 miles southwest of Eminence. Featured Fact-check Instagram posts stated on November 2, 2022 in a video Video suggests GOP voters denied access in general election. By Gabrielle Settles • November 8, 2022 This post was flagged as part of Facebook’s efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about our partnership with Facebook.) Photographer Lawrence Jenkins took it on Feb. 11, 2021, in Fort Worth, Texas, where 133 vehicles crashed after freezing rain coated the roads there, sending dozens of people to the hospital and leaving at least six dead, the Dallas Morning News reported at the time. North Texas and Central Indiana are both experiencing wintry weather, but this photo doesn’t show it. We rate this miscaptioned post False.

“The Dems demand a photo ID to get a cheeseburger. To hear one North Carolina congressman tell it, Democrats are going to great lengths to guard their grilled meats. Republican Rep. Greg Murphy tweeted on Jan. 16: "The Dems demand a photo ID to get a cheeseburger but not one to vote. The height of hypocrisy." We can’t fact check whether Democrats are hypocrites. And it’s well known that many Democrats oppose photo ID requirements at the polls. So let’s set those things aside and focus on the most glaring declaration in Murphy’s tweet: Are governments or businesses requesting photo identification from people who want cheeseburgers? It appears Murphy is referring to new COVID-19 restrictions enacted by local officials in Washington, D.C. Murphy’s tweet included a link to a story by The Gateway Pundit, whose founder has been banned from Twitter for peddling misinformation. The founder, Jim Hoft, wrote the story Murphy shared, too. The headline says "Democrats Now Demanding Proof of ID to Walk the Streets of Nation’s Capital — But NOT to Vote." PolitiFact has already debunked a rumor spreading on Twitter and TikTok that Washington residents need a photo ID to leave their home or to "buy milk." And Murphy’s tweet appears to be influenced by the same misinformation. Murphy’s office didn’t immediately respond to messages seeking comment. Featured Fact-check Senate Leadership Fund stated on October 11, 2022 in a political ad Cheri Beasley “backs tax hikes — even on families making under $75,000.” By Paul Specht • October 31, 2022 The Gateway Pundit story includes a tweet by Washington Mayor Muriel Bowser, a Democrat, that reminded residents of new COVID-19 restrictions in the city starting Jan. 15. The tweet says residents older than 18-years-old should remember proof of vaccination and a photo ID when heading out to a restaurant. Residents 12 and over need proof of vaccination, the tweet said, adding that everyone needs a mask. But the Gateway Pundit story and Murphy’s tweet both exaggerate the scope of the new requirements. Murphy’s tweet gives the impression that anyone ordering a cheeseburger will need to show a photo ID. That’s not the case. The vaccine and photo ID requirements only apply to people who want to enter a restaurant and stay a while. People can still order a cheeseburger and have it delivered. People are also allowed to enter briefly to pick up an order to go or grab a burger in a drive-thru. The restrictions don’t apply to grocery stores. So residents could also buy the ingredients they want for a cheeseburger and then grill them at home. Murphy’s tweet also leaves out the fact that the congressman’s workplace isn’t bound by the Washington mayor’s order. Eateries in the Capitol complex are continuing to serve patrons without requiring them to produce proof of vaccination, Roll Call reported last week. In fact, the Rayburn House Office Building is home to a Steak n’ Shake, which sells something called a "steakburger with cheese." Our ruling Criticizing Democratic opposition to voter ID requirements, Murphy said, "The Dems demand a photo ID to get a cheeseburger." Murphy is greatly exaggerating the effects of Washington’s latest COVID-19 rules. Adults in Washington, D.C., do need to show a form of photo ID to dine inside a restaurant or other eatery. But there’s more than one way to get a cheeseburger and we’re not aware of any Democrats or businesses withholding them from people who don’t produce photo identification. People without a photo ID can still go through a drive-thru, have one delivered, place an order to go, or head to the grocery store for beef, buns and condiments. We rate this claim Mostly Fals

Says Johns Hopkins virologist "James Kelly" said the COVID-19 vaccine “discriminates, divides, and judges society as it is. A long statement is being shared on social media that looks critically at COVID-19 vaccines relative to other vaccines. "I have never seen a vaccine that forced me to wear a mask and maintain social distance, even when you are fully vaccinated," the statement says. "I have never seen a vaccine like this one, which discriminates, divides and judges society as it is. And as the social fabric tightens… it’s a powerful vaccine! She does all the things except IMMUNIZATION. If we still need a booster dose after we are fully vaccinated, and we still need to get a negative test after we are fully vaccinated, and we still need to wear a mask after we are fully vaccinated, and still be hospitalized after we have been fully vaccinated, it will likely come to "‘it's time for us to admit that we've been completely deceived.’" Who said it? According to a Feb. 2 Facebook post, it was a Johns Hopkins Hospital doctor — "Dr. James Kelly, virologist" on Jan. 12, 2022. This post was flagged as part of Facebook’s efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about our partnership with Facebook.) We reached out to Johns Hopkins Medicine about the post. Featured Fact-check Instagram posts stated on October 12, 2022 in an Instagram post Pfizer executive “admits” vaccine was never tested for preventing transmission. By Jeff Cercone • October 13, 2022 Lisa Burgunder, a spokesperson for Johns Hopkins Medicine, told us that human resources had confirmed the hospital doesn't have "any active physician employees by the name of James Kelly." Searching for part of the quote online, we found no results that supported the claim that a Johns Hopkins virologist named James Kelly — or anyone with Johns Hopkins Medicine — said this. RELATED VIDEO We didn’t find a James Kelly searching among doctors on Johns Hopkins’ website, or anything to lend credence to the post’s claim that a Johns Hopkins doctor made the statement shared there. We did find a 2018 Baltimore Sun obituary for Dr. James H. Kelly, who in 1985 was named associate professor of otolaryngology-head and neck surgery at Johns Hopkins Medical School. But we found nothing to corroborate this post. We rate it Fals

“Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau pays mainstream media $600 million to report in favor of him. A Feb. 2 Instagram post claims that Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau "pays mainstream media $600 million to report in favor of him." The evidence? A clip of Trudeau saying just that. "You sometimes hear about liberal bias in the media these days, how they’re constantly letting our government off the hook for no good reason," he says in a video in the post. "Frankly, I think that’s insulting. It’s clear that they let us off the hook for a very good reason. Because we pay them $600 million." The video in the post then cuts to an image of Trudeau with text appearing that says "Mainstream media? I just bought it." Meanwhile, he can still be heard saying: "You don’t get stellar headlines like these without greasing the wheels a bit." This post was flagged as part of Facebook’s efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about our partnership with Facebook.) The video comes from the 2019 Parliamentary Press Gallery dinner, an annual event at which attending politicians give speeches with plenty of jokes, much like the White House Correspondents’ Association dinner. Featured Fact-check Facebook posts stated on October 9, 2022 in a Facebook post “Donald Trump is back on Twitter,” thanks to Elon Musk. By Sara Swann • October 10, 2022 About 39 minutes into this video of the dinner, posted on YouTube by Global News, Trudeau makes the comment that appears in the post. It was an allusion to a Canadian government program to help struggling news outlets. But while the post cuts away from the actual speech and shows a still image of Trudeau, footage from the dinner shows unflattering headlines projected behind the prime minister such as "Justin Trudeau is tampering with Canada’s brand" and "Trudeau has lost the moral mandate to govern." Later that year, a misleadingly edited video like the one that appears in this Facebook post started to appear online. "It’s a small tweak that distorts the video’s meaning without sophisticated editing," the CBC reported at the time, "but it’s effective because it plays on very real concerns and criticisms of the government’s so-called media bailout program." The Canadian government had then earmarked $600 million for tax credits and other incentives to help struggling news outlets, according to the CBC. But Trudeau was making a joke during the dinner. He wasn’t claiming that he had bribed the media. We rate this post False.

Dr. Phil and other celebrities are endorsing CBD gummies Before you go out and buy CBD gummies that purportedly help to treat diabetes or to quit smoking, please know that these people are not endorsing or selling them: Baptist pastor Charles Stanley, TV evangelists Joel Olsteen and Pat Robertson, former Shark Tank contestants Donna and Rosy Khalife, neurosurgeon and CNN medical correspondent Dr. Sanjay Gupta, actor Kevin Costner, and celebrity surgeon and Senate candidate Dr. Mehmet Oz. We’ve fact-checked claims about all of these people — blog posts that look like news articles that are actually advertisements falsely claiming celebrity endorsements — and yet the cannabidiol misinformation continues to spread online. A Jan. 31 Facebook post suggesting that Dr. Phil McGraw was endorsing CBD gummies to fight dementia has inspired us to set the record straight about posts you might see on social media touting a celebrity-backed CBD gummy product: those posts are scams, including the one about Dr. Phil. The Jan. 31 post was flagged as part of Facebook’s efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about our partnership with Facebook.) If you click on the post’s link, which has a picture of Dr. Phil standing in front of a gummy bears with the words "bye bye dementia…" written above, it brings you to what looks like a news article with this headline: "Dr. Phil & Dr. Oz discuss how Martha Stewart’s 20 second ritual for restoring forgotten memories has gone viral." Featured Fact-check Instagram posts stated on October 12, 2022 in an Instagram post Pfizer executive “admits” vaccine was never tested for preventing transmission. By Jeff Cercone • October 13, 2022 The story goes on to say that "the breakthrough product Martha produced is called Eagle Hemp Gummies CBD." However, previous posts that we have debunked have falsely claimed that Eagle Hemp Gummies CBD were created by the Shark Tank contestants, Costner, and Gupta. We reached out to the Dr. Phil show and didn’t immediately hear back. However, in February 2021 both he and Dr. Oz appeared on TMZ Live to warn people not to fall for scams using their names to sell CBD and that they don’t endorse CBD products. Oz told TMZ Live that he tested some of the products sold online that falsely claim to have his endorsement and that a lab testing showed high lead levels. Buyer beware. We rate claims that celebrities are creating, selling or endorsing this product False.

Thanks to the American Rescue Plan’s changes to the Affordable Care Act, “four out of five consumers (are) finding quality coverage for under $10 a month. President Joe Biden recently trumpeted that during the most recent open enrollment period, a record 14.5 million Americans signed up for health coverage through the Affordable Care Act, the health insurance law that passed when Biden was vice president. In a Jan. 27 statement, Biden cited changes that were included in the American Rescue Plan, the coronavirus and economic relief legislation that Biden signed several weeks after his inauguration in 2021. The legislation boosted the amount of subsidies for private insurance plans offered on the ACA’s marketplaces, while widening eligibility for receiving those subsidies. The American Rescue Plan, Biden said, "did more to lower costs and expand access to health care than any action since the passage of the Affordable Care Act. It made quality coverage more affordable than ever, with families saving an average of $2,400 on their annual premiums, and four out of five consumers finding quality coverage for under $10 a month. As a result, millions of our fellow Americans have now gained the security and peace of mind that dependable health insurance brings." When we looked into the numbers, we found that Biden incorrectly framed that "four out of five" figure. He conflated two pieces of data that have been released by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, a federal agency. One statistic reported by the agency is that "four out of five consumers can find a plan for $10 or less per month" due to the changes under the American Rescue Plan. However, that refers to the percentage of potential consumers who would find themselves eligible for a plan costing $10 a month or less if they looked. It doesn’t refer to the percentage who are "finding" such coverage, much less deciding to purchase such coverage. Featured Fact-check Instagram posts stated on October 10, 2022 in a post “Premature babies are at a much higher risk of injury from immunizations than full-term babies.” By Andy Nguyen • October 13, 2022 The percentage of people actually signing up for coverage who are paying that little per month is much lower. About one-third of consumers who signed up for ACA coverage following implementation of the American Rescue Plan chose a plan costing $10 per month or less, the agency reported. All told, the agency said, more than 1 million consumers selected a Marketplace plan with premiums of $10 or less per month. The White House stood by Biden’s framing, arguing that the notion of "finding" coverage covers the availability of insurance, not just its purchase. However, a plain reading of Biden’s wording suggests that while four of five consumers may be eligible for coverage that costs that little, those consumers are not necessarily getting the message. Our ruling Biden said that due to the American Rescue Plan’s changes to the Affordable Care Act, "four out of five consumers (are) finding quality coverage for under $10 a month." Biden has conflated two statistics. Four of five consumers would qualify for coverage costing that little if they looked for it. But only about one-third of actual insurance signups under the Affordable Care Act ended up costing $10 or less per month in premiums. We rate the statement Mostly Fals

Research from Japan shows “ivermectin is effective against omicron in Phase III trial. Spotify podcaster and vaccination skeptic Joe Rogan was quick to share a headline on Twitter that portrayed the anti-parasitic drug ivermectin as effective against the omicron variant of COVID-19. What Rogan didn’t share was a prominent correction that followed: The drug was found only to have an "antiviral" effect, and did not involve a clinical study of humans. Rogan shared a tweet from Disclose.tv that said: "JUST IN - Japan's Kowa in partnership with Kitasato University at Tokyo Medical University says ivermectin is effective against Omicron in phase III trial." "Well, lookie here…" Rogan wrote in a since-deleted quote-tweet. Rogan had taken the drug when he contracted COVID-19 in September, he said at the time. Disclose.tv was pointing to a Reuters report that said Japanese pharmaceutical company Kowa and Tokyo-based Kitasato University found ivermectin to be effective against omicron in Phase III clinical trials, which are conducted with human participants. Reuters rewrote the story with a correction. But the uncorrected claim had already spread across Twitter, with The Blaze senior editor Daniel Horowitz and Fox News host Laura Ingraham tweeting similar claims. What Kowa actually said was that scientists using non-clinical research found ivermectin to have an "antiviral effect." Non-clinical lab results are not the same as clinical studies, and just because something has an antiviral effect does not mean it is effective. Non-clinical studies involve experiments that are typically conducted under lab conditions, like a test tube, according to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Reuters said its journalists "misinterpreted the Kowa announcement" in a comment to Washington Post media critic Eric Wemple. Wemple said he asked why the study’s "antiviral" finding was newsworthy even after the correction. Featured Fact-check Instagram posts stated on October 12, 2022 in an Instagram post Pfizer executive “admits” vaccine was never tested for preventing transmission. By Jeff Cercone • October 13, 2022 "The antiviral capabilities of ivermectin against SARS-CoV-2 in a test-tube environment are not a matter of breaking news: Research dating to 2020 showed that ‘a single dose of ivermectin was able to reduce the replication of an Australian isolate of SARS-CoV-2 in Vero/hSLAM cells by 5000-fold,’" Wemple wrote. Kowa said on Jan. 31 that it is testing ivermectin in Phase III clinical trials. Per the FDA, each phase of a clinical trial involves a larger number of people, and phase III can usually involve up to 3,000. Participants are randomly assigned the drug or a placebo. "We believe that it is our mission as a pharmaceutical company to contribute to the treatment of new coronavirus infections and protect the health of the people, and we are conducting clinical trials to confirm the efficacy and safety of ivermectin for new coronavirus infections," the company said. With multiple studies around the world under way, ivermectin is still not authorized to treat or prevent COVID-19 in the U.S. "To date, published clinical trials have shown mixed results," Chanapa Tantibanchachai, an FDA spokesperson, wrote in an email to PolitiFact for a Jan. 28 fact-check. Tantibanchachai said that ivermectin can be prescribed by doctors for COVID-19 if they deem it appropriate, though "the safety and efficacy" hasn’t been established. The drug has many advocates who see it as an over-the-counter alternative for preventing or treating COVID-19; they tend to ignore contrary evidence or tout flawed research. Last year, poison control centers received a surge of calls from people who self-medicated with the drug. The World Health Organization said it should only be used in clinical trials until more data is found. The updated Reuters story points out that hydroxychloroquine, an antimalarial drug also used to treat lupus, had been touted as a potential treatment for COVID-19 by former President Donald Trump and others after promising lab results. Subsequent studies on humans did not find a benefit. Claims that new research shows ivermectin is effective for treating COVID-19 were based on a reporting error. We rate them Fals

‘The Simpsons’ predicted Canada’s trucker convoy protest The writers of the long-running animated Fox comedy "The Simpsons" have uncannily predicted several things over the years – Lady Gaga’s Super Bowl halftime show, a "Game of Thrones" plot twist and Donald Trump’s presidency, to name a few. Now, several videos posted on social media are falsely claiming the show predicted the so-called "Freedom Convoy" of truckers in Canada, who are protesting vaccine mandates and other government regulations. A video shared widely on Facebook shows Homer Simpson driving a truck with his son, Bart. He says: "Look son. It’s one of nature's most beautiful sights…the convoy!" Their truck is then surrounded by several others. The video then shows Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau crawling out of his office window and down the building while screaming, "they’re coming in through the back door!" This post was flagged as part of Facebook’s efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about our partnership with Facebook.) As fact checkers at Snopes and Reuters have previously reported, the video combines two separate clips from "The Simpsons" episodes 20 years apart to give the false impression that the show predicted the convoy and Trudeau fleeing his office to escape the protests. It’s not clear if whoever created the video meant it as satire or to intentionally deceive others, but a person who shared the video on Facebook did not make any disclaimers. Caption for the video the Facebook user shared says: "The Simpsons even predicted the trucker convoy." There is a similar, widely-viewed version of the video on YouTube that makes clear in its description that it’s pieced together from two episodes. Featured Fact-check Instagram posts stated on October 12, 2022 in an Instagram post Pfizer executive “admits” vaccine was never tested for preventing transmission. By Jeff Cercone • October 13, 2022 Here’s where the two video clips came from to create the video we are checking. The first part of the clip, with Homer and Bart in the truck being surrounded by a convoy, is from the season 10, episode 17 episode called "Maximum Homerdrive" that first aired in 1999. The clip involving Trudeau was from 2019’s "D’oh Canada," season 30, episode 21, where Trudeau meets with Lisa Simpson over Skype. He is standing on his hands to prove to her that he’s not "weak," after Lisa apologizes for comments Trump made about him. She then tries to ask him about the "SNC-Lavalin scandal," and Trudeau nods to an aide, who then opens the window, and the prime minister, still walking on his hands, crawls out and down the building to escape. The actual episode does not have Trudeau screaming as he flees. In real life, that SNC-Lavalin scandal was about accusations that Trudeau, or someone in his administration, tried to pressure the attorney general in a criminal case against a business. Our ruling A video shared on social media claims that "The Simpsons" predicted the Canadian trucker convoy and Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s reaction. That’s not the case. The video pieces together clips from two episodes that aired 20 years apart and adds audio to give a false impression. We rate this claim Fals

Says 700 CIA agents were arrested Did you hear about "the arrested 700 CIA agents?" That’s part of the shocking title of a recent, widely-shared Facebook video. But there’s a catch: In the video itself, there’s no evidence to support the claim. And that’s because it’s not true. This post was flagged as part of Facebook’s efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about our partnership with Facebook.) Featured Fact-check Instagram posts stated on October 10, 2022 in a post “Premature babies are at a much higher risk of injury from immunizations than full-term babies.” By Andy Nguyen • October 13, 2022 We’ve checked claims like the title of this video before. Sometimes posts overstate what’s actually said in the video, or they even fabricate a sensational, clickbait-worthy headline. Some examples of these kinds of claims that we’ve checked and found inaccurate: "The military’s actually been in charge since November 3rd." "Ivanka Trump is joining the Democrats to run against her dad." "Hillary replaces Kamala Harris." "Trump was secretly inaugurated as president of the restored Republic." The search for reports, news articles, or credible sources to corroborate the statement is fruitless. That’s the case here — we found nothing to remotely suggest that 700 CIA agents were recently arrested. We rate this post Pants on Fire

“The convoy in Canada has made the Guinness Book of World Records for the longest convoy. We don’t know exactly how many truckers are participating in the "Freedom Convoy" in Canada, a protest against vaccine mandates in the country that has culminated at the capital, but some claims have been so high they defy logic. Another way that the convoy’s supporters are boasting about the demonstration’s scope: invoking the Guinness World Records, which considers itself "the global authority on all things record-breaking." "JUST IN," one Jan. 30 Facebook post says. "The Freedom Convoy in Canada could break the Guinness Book of World Records for longest truck convoy by a factor of 10!" But another Jan. 25 Instagram post goes even farther, straying from speculation to assertion: "The convoy in Canada has made the Guinness Book of World Records for the longest convoy." The Jan. 25 post was flagged as part of Facebook’s efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about our partnership with Facebook.) Featured Fact-check Viral image stated on October 16, 2022 in an Instagram post “Covid vaccinations now prohibited in people under 50 in Denmark.” By Ciara O'Rourke • October 18, 2022 Guinness didn’t immediately respond to PolitiFact’s questions about the convoy, but a spokesperson for the organization told AFP that the "Freedom Convoy" in Canada "is not an official Guinness World Records Title attempt." The AFP story doesn’t say why this isn’t an official record attempt. Guinness has strict requirements for how to achieve a Guinness title. For starters, people attempting to set a record must apply with the organization and then wait to receive guidelines before, say, organizing and executing the world’s longest truck convoy. The organization also requires a number of pieces of evidence to verify the achievement, such as video and photographic evidence, witness statements, cover letters, and statements from stewards who have been tapped to supervise the record attempt. RELATED VIDEO The longest convoy, or the "largest parade of trucks," in Guinness’ words, was achieved in Egypt in November 2020 by the Tahya Misr Fund, which advocates for needy families and organized a parade of 480 trucks "amid harsh weather and heavy rain, breaking the Guinness World Records title for the largest parade of trucks," according to an entry on the World Records website. The previous record was achieved 16 years earlier in the Netherlands with 416 trucks, according to the site. We rate claims that the "Freedom Convoy" in Canada achieved a Guinness World Record Fals

Picture shows the “Freedom Convoy” trucks in Canada Mixed among the factual reports of the "Freedom Convoy" of truckers who traveled to Canada’s capital to protest vaccine mandates are some claims that test credulity, and images that are being wrongly repurposed to supposedly show support for the big-rig demonstration. Among them is a picture of a long line of nose-to-tail trucks that stretches past the photo’s frame. But the image is old, and posts sharing it were flagged as part of Facebook’s efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about our partnership with Facebook.) While there are plenty of photos showing trucks on Canadian roads as part of the "Freedom Convoy," this isn’t one of them. Featured Fact-check Instagram posts stated on October 12, 2022 in an Instagram post Pfizer executive “admits” vaccine was never tested for preventing transmission. By Jeff Cercone • October 13, 2022 A reverse-image search of the photo in the post turns up a February 2019 CTV News story about a different convoy. Three years ago, Canadian truckers also drove to Ottawa but it wasn’t about a vaccine mandate — the pandemic hadn’t started yet. Rather, they were protesting what they considered the federal government’s lack of support for the energy sector. RELATED VIDEO The caption of the photo in that story says "a convoy of at least 100 trucks is driving from Alberta to Parliament Hill to draw attention to what it says is Ottawa’s lack of support for the energy sector." We rate claims that this photo shows the current convoy protesting vaccine mandates False.

“Sixty percent of (Virginia's) children don’t meet national proficiency standards… Gov. Glenn Youngkin is vowing to improve student performance in Virginia’s public schools. "Sixty percent of our children don’t meet national proficiency standards…" Youngkin, a Republican, said during his maiden address to the General Assembly on Jan 17. He then broke the statistics down by race. We fact-checked this often-made claim by Youngkin and found that his percentage is correct, but he consistently omits the caveat that Virginia students perform better than those from most states. Across the country, 65% of students didn’t meet national proficiency standards in 2019. Youngkin is referring to Virginia's performance on a standardized test called the National Assessment of Educational Progress but is better known as the "Nation’s Report Card." It’s taken by a representative sample of fourth and eighth graders in each state. In 2019, 62% of Virginia fourth graders tested below proficiency in reading and 52% didn’t reach the national standard on math. Among Virginia eighth graders, 67% were below proficiency in reading and 62% in math. The average of those results comes out at 61% below proficiency, slightly higher than Youngkin says. To grasp the meaning of that figure, however, it’s important to understand some terms used in assessing NAEP results. "Proficiency" means a student has "demonstrated competency over challenging subject matter," according to the National Assessment Governing Board, which oversees NAEP tests. It means a student can analyze the subject matter and apply it to "real-world situations." Proficiency is an aspirational term that "represents the goal for what all students should know," the board says. That sets a higher standard for proficiency than the definition many states - including Virginia - use to assess performance on their own standardized tests. States largely use the term to define a baseline of knowledge for students in different grades. "This variation in terminology is often a source of confusion when it comes to understanding the NAEP achievement levels," the national board says. Virginia’s exams are called Standards of Learning tests, or SOLs, and are taken in third grade through 12th grade. Proficiency on the exams is defined as "the minimum level of acceptable proficiency on the grade level or the course level," according to Charles Pyle, director of media relations at the Virginia Department of Education. Featured Fact-check Joe Biden stated on October 23, 2022 in a forum with Now This Student loan forgiveness is “passed. I got it passed by a vote or two. And it’s in effect.” By Louis Jacobson • October 25, 2022 In Virginia, 83% of fourth graders were deemed proficient on the state standardized test for reading in 2019, and 75% reached the level in math. But on the national tests that year, only 48% of the Virginia fourth graders were proficient in math and 38% in reading. Among Virginia’s eighth graders in 2019, 77% were proficient on state math tests and 76% on the reading exam. On the national tests that year, 38% were proficient in math and 33% in reading. Youngkin wants to raise Virginia’s standards for proficiency - set by the state Board of Education - to aspirational levels. He says Virginia’s standards are the "lowest in the nation." As we’ve noted in other fact checks, Virginia in 2019 had the lowest baselines for proficiency on its standardized tests in fourth grade reading and math and eighth grade reading, according to a study by the National Center for Education Statistics. The NCES stresses, however, that the rigor of state standardized tests does not provide a comparison of how well students in each state are learning. On the NAEP test, which does compare states, Virginia ranked near the top in fourth grade math and reading and eighth grade math. Virginia ranked 30th on eighth grade reading. Our ruling Youngkin says, "Sixty percent of our children don’t meet national proficiency standards…". He accurately cites Virginia’s overall performance on standardized national tests for fourth and eighth graders in 2019. But in using this figure to criticize Virginia’s public schools, he omits key information: Virginia is doing better than most states. Nationally, 65% of students fall short of the proficiency level. Proficiency is an aspirational standard on the national test. It’s defined as the "goal for what most students should know" at their grade level. That’s different from the minimum amount of knowledge they need to keep up in class. Because Youngkin’s statement needs clarification, we rate it Mostly True.

"The Holocaust isn't about race. No, it's not about race. Whoopi Goldberg, the co-host of ABC’s "The View," repeatedly and falsely claimed that the Nazi Germans systematic persecution of Jews during the Holocaust was "not about race." Goldberg’s comments generated widespread backlash, including from Jewish leaders and groups. She has since apologized for the comments, which came during a Jan. 31 segment about a Tennessee school district’s decision to ban "Maus," a graphic novel about the Holocaust. "If you're going to do this, then let's be truthful about it, because the Holocaust isn't about race. No, it’s not about race," Goldberg said in her initial remarks. Facing pushback from her fellow co-hosts, she argued that it was about "man's inhumanity to man," since "these are two white groups of people." "Racism was central to Nazi ideology," the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum responded in a tweet as Goldberg’s statement garnered attention online. "Jews were not defined by religion, but by race. Nazi racist beliefs fueled genocide and mass murder." The Auschwitz Memorial, meanwhile, tagged Goldberg in a tweet advertising its seven-chapter online course on the history of the Holocaust, in which the Nazis murdered some 6 million Jews. Later that night, Goldberg posted an apology on Twitter that quoted from Jonathan Greenblatt, the CEO of the Anti-Defamation League, who had tweeted that the Holocaust "was about the Nazi’s systematic annihilation of the Jewish people — who they deemed to be an inferior race." The following day, "The View" brought Greenblatt on the show, and Goldberg apologized again. "I said that the Holocaust wasn’t about race and was instead about man’s inhumanity to man, but it is indeed about race, because Hitler and the Nazis considered Jews to be an inferior race," Goldberg said. "I regret my comments, as I said, and I stand corrected." A spokesperson for ABC did not respond to a request for comment. Historians said Goldberg’s original claim distorted the history of the Holocaust, which was fueled by the Nazis’ racist ideology and policies. "As far as the Nazis were concerned, non-Jewish Germans were an entirely different race, in a very physical sense, from Jews, no matter how long a particular Jewish person or family might have lived in Germany," said Benjamin Hett, a historian at Hunter College and the Graduate Center of the City University of New York. "Goldberg is without doubt entirely wrong." Nazi ideology viewed Jews as an inferior race Racism toward Jews and other groups drove the Nazis’ ideology, policies, and mass murder of Jews in concentration camps and elsewhere, according to the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum. "Nazi antisemitism rested completely on the argument that they are not people like you Germans," said Peter Hayes, a professor emeritus of history and German at Northwestern University. "They are implacably and by inheritance different and hostile, and therefore they have to be ‘removed,’ one way or another." Nazi theories of race held that Germans and other people of Indo-European descent belonged to a superior group called the "Aryan" race. The Nazi heirarchy of races positioned the Aryans at the top, Black people at the bottom and everyone else on a scale in between, Hayes said. Featured Fact-check Kanye West stated on October 16, 2022 in an interview Suggests fentanyl, not Derek Chauvin, killed George Floyd By Gabrielle Settles • October 18, 2022 Jewish people were branded as the most dangerous threat to the Aryan race, Hayes said. They were considered conniving, hate-filled, parasitic, and capable of mobilizing the other races. Nazi leader Adolf Hitler, in particular, saw Jewish people as "subhuman" entities who threatened all other races by spreading subversive ideas like liberalism and Marxism, and by mixing with other races through marriage and sexual relations, said Christopher Browning, a professor emeritus of history at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. "For Hitler, all history was a race struggle," Browning said. Hitler described Jews as a race — not a religion — in "Mein Kampf," the autobiographical political manifesto that charted his ideology and his vision for the future of Germany. One key chapter comparing the races was titled "Nation and Race." "Hitler was very explicit about this, and always said very clearly that being Jewish had nothing to do with religious affiliation or cultural background, but was entirely physical," Hett said. The Nazis went to great lengths to try to prove through pseudoscience that Jewish people had such physical markers, even devoting an office of the government to such work, Hett said. They also implemented the Nuremberg Race Laws, which provided the legal framework for the systematic persecution of Jews, according to the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum. The first of the two laws codified a definition for Jewishness based on race and heritage that stripped them of German citizenship. The second prohibited marriage and criminalized sexual relations between Jews and non-Jewish Germans. In one of several pages about Nazi racism on its website, the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum writes: "Hitler's program of war and genocide stemmed from what he saw as an equation: ‘Aryan’ Germans would have to expand and dominate, a process requiring the elimination of all racial threats — especially the Jews — or else they would face extinction themselves." Wreaths placed at the Memorial to the Murdered Jews of Europe on the International Holocaust Remembrance Day in Berlin, Germany, on Jan. 27, 2022. (AP) Even Jews who converted to Christianity were rounded up during the Holocaust because of their parents or grandparents, rather than their religious practice. Our ruling Goldberg said, "The Holocaust isn't about race. No, it's not about race." The Nazi Germans’ persecution of millions of Jews was premised on a racist ideology that viewed Jews as an inferior race and the biggest threat to the so-called Aryan race and other races, and laws that set about defining Jews not by their religion, but by their heritage. Hitler himself expressed the belief that the Jews were a lesser race, historians said. Goldberg conceded her error and apologized. The statement is not accurate and makes a ridiculous claim. That’s our definition for Pants on Fire. RELATED: Why Holocaust comparisons by anti-vaccine activists like RFK Jr. are grossly inaccura

"British data show the COVID shots are an abysmal failure, as COVID infection rates in the U.K. are higher among the ‘fully vaccinated’ in all adult cohorts. A doctor known for funding and spreading vaccine misinformation says evidence from overseas proves COVID-19 vaccines are failing — a claim that has been repeatedly debunked. "British data show the COVID shots are an abysmal failure, as COVID infection rates in the U.K. are higher among the ‘fully vaccinated’ in all adult cohorts," read an article by Dr. Joseph Mercola. The article, published Jan. 25 on Mercola’s website, was shared on Facebook and flagged as part of Facebook’s efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about our partnership with Facebook.) Overall, COVID-19 vaccines continue to provide robust protection against hospitalization and death, in England and elsewhere. Origin of the data cited by Mercola Mercola made a few errors when referencing what he calls "British data." He cites a Jan. 13 report from the U.K. Health Security Agency, "National Flu and COVID-19 Surveillance Report." He says it "shows COVID infection rates in the U.K. are higher among the ‘fully vaccinated’ in all adult cohorts." But the data Mercola cited is only from England, not all of the United Kingdom. The United Kingdom consists of four countries: England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. Also, that report does not contain data about COVID-19 cases by vaccination status. Information about cases, deaths and hospitalization by vaccination status is in a separate weekly government report called "COVID-19 vaccine surveillance report." Data from England shows the rate of hospitalization and death is "substantially greater" in unvaccinated people compared with vaccinated people, according to the U.K. Health Security Agency. Featured Fact-check Instagram posts stated on October 12, 2022 in an Instagram post Pfizer executive “admits” vaccine was never tested for preventing transmission. By Jeff Cercone • October 13, 2022 The rate of positive tests in England is higher in vaccinated people aged 30 and older, according to the U.K. Health Security Agency. However, that is expected in a country with very high vaccine coverage, the agency said. Rate of infection, hospitalization and death The rate of hospitalization and death remains much higher among the unvaccinated than the vaccinated. For example, among people ages 40 to 49 who were diagnosed with COVID-19, about 11 per 100,000 who were vaccinated were admitted to the hospital, compared with about 33 per 100,000 who were unvaccinated. The difference becomes more pronounced as age increases. The data on deaths shows similar disparities. PolitiFact has debunked several similar claims that vaccinated people in England are dying at a higher rate than the unvaccinated. Our ruling An article that’s being shared on Facebook says, "British data show the COVID shots are an abysmal failure, as COVID infection rates in the U.K. are higher among the ‘fully vaccinated’ in all adult cohorts." The data cited is only from England, not all of the United Kingdom. It also does not prove the vaccines are a failure. Data from England shows the rate of hospitalization and death is "substantially greater" in unvaccinated people compared with vaccinated people. The rate of positive tests in England is higher in vaccinated people aged 30 and older, but health officials say that is expected in a country with very high vaccine coverage. We rate this claim Fals

Hundreds of ‘illegals’ were dropped off at Florida hotel An online video purporting to show "illegal" migrant workers being bused to a central Florida hotel prompted dozens of people to show up there to protest. But the workers are actually in the U.S. legally as part of a program that allows companies to bring in foreign nationals to do seasonal agricultural work. The headline of an article shared widely on Facebook reads, "Impeach Biden! Laura Loomer records hundreds of more illegals dropped off at a Florida hotel" The article was flagged as part of Facebook’s efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about our partnership with Facebook.) The article points to a video shared on the social media site Gettr on Jan. 30 by Florida congressional candidate Laura Loomer, who said it showed "a bus of Hispanic illegal alliens (sic) being dropped off in front of an Extended Stay hotel in Maitland where they are being given pre loaded credit cards, hotel rooms, and clothing." Dozens of protesters showed up outside the Extended Stay America hotel a day later, waving signs opposing illegal immigration and President Joe Biden, according to the Orlando Sentinel. It turns out, they were protesting over nothing. Dewar Nurseries, the company that hired the workers, confirmed to local NBC station WESH-2 that the people in question were part of the H2-A visa program. The company has participated in that program for years. PolitiFact reached out via email to Dewar Nurseries, which is based in Apopka, and the Extended Stay hotel for comment, but have not heard back. Featured Fact-check Instagram posts stated on October 10, 2022 in a post “Premature babies are at a much higher risk of injury from immunizations than full-term babies.” By Andy Nguyen • October 13, 2022 Bryan Nelson, the mayor of Apopka, confirmed in an email to PolitiFact that the workers in question are here legally as part of the visa program for 120 days. The U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services agency describes the H-2A program as one that "allows U.S. employers or U.S. agents who meet specific regulatory requirements to bring foreign nationals to the United States to fill temporary agricultural jobs." Under program guidelines, participating employers must show that there are not enough U.S. workers who are able and willing to fill the jobs and that hiring the workers won’t adversely affect wages or conditions for similar U.S. workers. Disclosure data provided by the Labor Department shows Dewar Nurseries participating in the program in the fourth quarter of 2021, hiring dozens of "nursery workers" and putting them up at Extended Stay. Overall, the Labor Department data shows 44,706 such worker positions were certified in Florida by the department in fiscal year 2021, which ended in September. Despite being told by a WESH reporter that the workers were here legally, Loomer has since doubled down on her Gettr feed, writing that "Floridians don’t appreciate suspicious, masked, foreign men being dumped into their communities with no oversight." Loomer has been permanently banned from Twitter after anti-Muslim posts about U.S. Rep. Ilhan Omar, D-Minn., and from Facebook for violating its policies "against dangerous individuals." Our ruling An article being shared on Facebook claims that migrant workers that arrived via bus at a central Florida hotel are here illegally, citing a video first shared by a Florida congressional candidate. That’s not true, said the company that hired them and the mayor of Apopka. The people shown in the video were hired by Dewar Nurseries as part of the U.S. H2-A visa program, which allows employers to hire foreign nationals to fill seasonal agricultural jobs that couldn’t otherwise be filled. Data from the Labor Department confirms that the company has participated in the program and housed workers at the Extended Stay Hotel. We rate this claim Fals

Video shows troops at the Ukraine-Russia border on Jan. 27, 2022 Ongoing tensions at the Ukraine-Russia border have drawn international media attention and misinformation, including a video that’s being wrongly described as showing military forces on the country’s border with Russia. "Ukrainian border right now!" reads a Jan. 27 tweet that shows a video panning over a snaking line of troops and tanks. The post has the hashtags #Ukraine, #Russia and #UkraineConflict. This post was flagged as part of Facebook’s efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about our partnership with Facebook.) Russia recently dispatched 100,000 troops near its border with Ukraine. But the Jan. 27 video on Twitter was posted online nearly two years ago. Featured Fact-check Facebook posts stated on October 17, 2022 in una publicación en Facebook "Ministros de Defensa de OTAN deciden invadir a RUSIA para prevenir ataque de Putin”. By Maria Ramirez Uribe • October 17, 2022 Doing reverse image searches of stills of the video, we found a March 5, 2020, story and YouTube post by the Ukrainian site Defense Express, which describes its mission as promoting "the defense, security and development of Ukraine," according to an English translation of the "about us" section on its website. An English translation of the title of the YouTube post says, "Mechanized brigade of the armed forces of Ukraine: what is the combat power of the army." According to an English translation of the story, "Defense Express filmed one of the mechanized brigades of the armed forces of Ukraine, which conducted a control practical exercise at one of the training grounds." The story doesn’t say the location of the training grounds. We rate claims that this photo shows the Ukrainian border right now, as the tweet claims, Fals

Says Jen Psaki said in January 2022 that people will start seeing direct deposits in their bank account this weekend and payments to eligible Americans will continue for several weeks "This was announced on the TV channel last night," begins a Jan. 31 Facebook post sharing a video from a press briefing with White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki. "Some people in the country will start seeing those direct deposits in their bank accounts this weekend, and payments to eligible Americans will continue throughout the course of the next several weeks," Psaki says in the clip. What TV channel did this appear on? It doesn’t matter, because it didn’t air last night — it’s from March 2021. This post was flagged as part of Facebook’s efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about our partnership with Facebook.) Featured Fact-check Instagram posts stated on October 12, 2022 in an Instagram post Pfizer executive “admits” vaccine was never tested for preventing transmission. By Jeff Cercone • October 13, 2022 Psaki made the comments on March 11 during a White House press briefing shortly after President Joe Biden signed the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021, a $1.9 trillion pandemic relief bill. "And I have one more exciting implementation update for all of you," Psaki said about the bill. "Since the Treasury Department … and the IRS are working hard to get relief payments out the door as fast as possible to the American people, people can expect to start seeing direct deposits hit their bank accounts as early as this weekend." RELATED VIDEO The federal government has so far cut three checks to eligible adults in response to the pandemic, not counting payments from the child tax credit which ended in December. While some lawmakers have pushed for a fourth round of stimulus payments, it so far hasn’t gained traction. We rate this post False.

Bruce Springsteen, Queen, Pearl Jam and Dave Grohl removed their music from Spotify After Neil Young demanded that Spotify remove his music over COVID-19 misinformation spread by podcaster Joe Rogan, a lot of things happened almost all at once. Spotify members started to cancel their accounts and other artists, like singer-songwriter Joni Mitchell, began to follow Young’s lead. But one article circulating online goes a little too far; it wrongly claims that artists such as Bruce Springsteen and Dave Grohl removed their music from Spotify, too. "Springsteen; Queen; Pearl Jam; Dave Grohl; All Remove Music From Spotify!" reads a headline published on a blog called "CelebNMusic247." There is no evidence that these artists have asked to leave the streaming platform. The story cited a viral tweet as its source. It said: "Breaking 🚨 Willie Nelson, Bruce Springsteen, Barbra Streisand, Queen, Paul McCartney, The Rolling Stones, Dave Grohl, Joni Mitchell, Pearl Jam are removing their music from Spotify in solidarity with Neil Young!!! #Spotify can keep the fascists. #DeletedSpotify." Featured Fact-check Facebook posts stated on October 14, 2022 in an Instagram post Video footage showing Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi hiding on Jan. 6, 2021, shows the U.S. Capitol attack “was a setup.” By Madison Czopek • October 17, 2022 As of Jan. 31, Mitchell is the only person listed who requested for her music to be removed. Nils Lofgren, guitarist for Bruce Springsteen's E Street Band, also asked for his music to be pulled from Spotify, but Springsteen did not. Lofrgen played piano and guitar on Young’s album, "After the Gold Rush," and has played on and off with Young’s band for years. Music by the other artists still appears on the platform. There have been no credible news reports or updates of otherwise on their social media accounts or websites. Rogan defended his approach to the podcast in a Jan. 30 Instagram video, though he did say his show has grown "out of control" and vowed to "try harder" to be more balanced. Rogan has made several inaccurate claims about the COVID-19 vaccines and allowed vaccine skeptics to promote misinformation on his popular show. Video of his interview with Dr. Robert Malone, a former mRNA vaccine researcher, was banned by several social media platforms for violating COVID-19 standards — but not by Spotify. In mid January, more than 270 scientists and doctors signed an open letter asking Spotify to "immediately establish a clear and public policy to moderate misinformation on its platform." So far in response, Spotify has published its platform rules and said it’s working to add a content advisory to any podcast episode that includes a discussion about COVID-19. Our ruling A headline claimed that Bruce Springsteen, Queen, Pearl Jam and Dave Grohl have pulled their music from Spotify. Some artists and content producers have requested that their content be removed from the streaming platform, but there is no evidence that these musicians are among them. We rate this claim Fals

The CDC staged “the ‘escaping monkeys’ as a cover story for releasing the next bioweapon. Several lab monkeys escaped and were later recovered after a truck crashed on a Pennsylvania highway on Jan. 21. They were en route to a Centers for Disease Control and Prevention-sanctioned quarantine facility in Florida after arriving in New York from the island nation of Mauritius that morning, prompting some speculation that the incident was staged to hide something nefarious. "Did the CDC stage the ‘escaping monkeys’ as a cover story for releasing the next bioweapon?" one blog post asked. It was flagged as part of Facebook’s efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about our partnership with Facebook.) Certainly, it’s not every day a truck towing a trailer of 100 cynomolgus monkeys, or long-tailed macaques, collides with a dump truck on the highway. In this case, three escaped and were later found and euthanized. But there’s no credible evidence to support the claim that the CDC staged this event as cover for releasing a bioweapon, or "a new virus strain," as the blog post goes on to suggest. The post focuses in part on Michele Fallon, who came into contact with the monkeys after the crash. Featured Fact-check Instagram posts stated on October 12, 2022 in an Instagram post Pfizer executive “admits” vaccine was never tested for preventing transmission. By Jeff Cercone • October 13, 2022 "Woman who came in contact with ‘escaping monkeys’ gets quarantined, comes down with pink eye and a cough," the post says. News reports did say that Fallon later developed a cough, runny nose, and something like pink eye, but she later clarified to the Daily Item, a Pennsylvania newspaper, that she wasn’t sick from her monkey exposure. She attended a party the night of the accident and later discovered that she had been exposed to COVID-19, the paper said. "I want people to know I am not sick regardless of what they are reading that has been put out there in the media," she said. Cynomolgus monkeys are often used for medical studies, and the New York Times reported that they were in such high demand for coronavirus vaccine research at the start of the pandemic that some scientists discussed needing to create a monkey reserve, or emergency stockpile. It’s not clear whether these monkeys were part of that effort. Claims that the CDC staged this crash to release a bioweapon are unfounded, and we rate it False.

Says Voltaire said, “To learn who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to criticize. Rep. Thomas Massie, R-Ky., attempted to take a swipe at Dr. Anthony Fauci, the White House’s chief medical adviser, with a quote appearing to come from a deep thinker. "To learn who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to criticize," said the quote, which was credited to Voltaire, the French writer and philosopher, in the image Massie shared. "You mustn’t question Fauci, for he is science," Massie wrote above the quote. The same quote and citation are also circulating on Facebook. But Voltaire didn’t say this. The original speaker is Kevin Alfred Strom, a white nationalist and Holocaust denier who founded the neo-Nazi group National Vanguard in 2005, according to the Southern Poverty Law Center. He pleaded guilty in 2008 to possession of child pornography and was sentenced to 23 months in prison. The posts were flagged as part of Facebook’s efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about our partnership with Facebook.) The quote does not appear in Voltaire’s writings or correspondence, but it is widely passed off as something he said. An Australian politician misattributed the line to the Enlightenment-era thinker in 2015. Actor John Cusack made the same error four years later. Strom’s original quote was worded slightly differently. He was specifically talking about Jewish people when he said it during a 1993 broadcast on an alt-right radio program. Featured Fact-check Facebook posts stated on October 9, 2022 in a Facebook post “Donald Trump is back on Twitter,” thanks to Elon Musk. By Sara Swann • October 10, 2022 "To determine the true rulers of any society, all you must do is ask yourself this question: Who is it that I am not permitted to criticize?" Strom said. Etymologist Barry Popik noticed the misattribution to Voltaire happening in 2012 and traced the quote back to Strom. Strom lamented in a 2009 blog post that what he said was commonly misquoted. Strom claimed credit for the quote in 2017, noting that the one-liner was "almost always attributed" to Voltaire but was actually his. Strom said he found it "kind of flattering" for his thoughts to be attached to Voltaire’s name. Massie’s tweet was shared thousands of times, including by Fox News contributor Sara A. Carter. The post was panned by many others, who pointed out the quote’s origin. "This quote is from neo-Nazi, Holocaust-denier, and convicted pedophile Kevin Alfred Strom, not Voltaire," tweeted the American Jewish Committee, a Jewish advocacy group. "We expect better of our representatives in Congress." The University of Western Australia's Paul Gibbard, a leading expert on Voltaire, told the Guardian in 2015 that the quote from Strom was "not un-Voltarian" in its "spirit" because it captured his resistance to authority. But Gibbard added: "There are lots of quotations that are attributed to Voltaire that aren’t actually by him, and that’s one of them." The University of Oxford’s Voltaire Foundation has said the same. Still, the misattributed quote has required debunking by various fact-checkers, again and again. Massie’s office did not respond to a request for comment. We rate his tweet Fals

“Clarence Thomas is about to become the only member of the current Supreme Court who was nominated by a president of one party and confirmed by a Senate controlled by the other party. When Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer announced in January that he would be retiring, it gave President Joe Biden his first opportunity to appoint a justice to the nation’s highest court. Once Biden makes his nomination, he’ll have a Senate majority, but a thin one — enough Democrats to meet the simple majority threshold required for confirmation as long as the party remains unified. During a discussion of who might succeed Breyer on NBC’s "Meet the Press," host Chuck Todd offered a statistic showing how unusual it has been in recent years to have a Senate of one party confirm a nominee from a president of the other party. "Clarence Thomas is about to become the only member of the current Supreme Court who was nominated by a president of one party and confirmed by a Senate controlled by the other party," Todd said on Jan. 30. A review of the confirmation history of the current justices confirms that this is correct. After a divisive confirmation process that included allegations of sexual harassment against the nominee, Thomas was confirmed by a relatively narrow margin of 52-48. Thomas was appointed by President George H.W. Bush, a Republican, but confirmed by a Democratic-majority Senate. (Biden, then a senator, voted against confirming Thomas.) Every other current justice was either appointed by a Republican president and confirmed by a Republican Senate (John Roberts, Samuel Alito, Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh, and Amy Coney Barrett) or appointed by a Democratic president and confirmed by a Democratic Senate (Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan). The only caveat we could find for Todd’s statement is that Thomas isn’t "about to become" the only current justice to have been confirmed by a Senate of the opposite party, since he already is the only one. Breyer, who was appointed by Democratic President Bill Clinton, was confirmed at a time when Democrats controlled the Senate, so his impending departure won’t change the math. !function(e,i,n,s){var t="InfogramEmbeds",d=e.getElementsByTagName("script")[0];if(window[t]&&window[t].initialized)window[t].process&&window[t].process();else if(!e.getElementById(n)){var o=e.createElement("script");o.async=1,o.id=n,o.src="https://e.infogram.com/js/dist/embed-loader-min.js",d.parentNode.insertBefore(o,d)}}(document,0,"infogram-async"); Of the six former justices who have been confirmed since 1980, four were appointed and confirmed by the same party and two were not. The outliers, Anthony Kennedy and David Souter, were both appointed by Republican presidents and confirmed by Democratic-controlled Senates. Featured Fact-check Facebook posts stated on October 14, 2022 in an Instagram post Video footage showing Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi hiding on Jan. 6, 2021, shows the U.S. Capitol attack “was a setup.” By Madison Czopek • October 17, 2022 Experts say this pattern stems from growing partisan polarization both in the country at large and within the Senate itself. "There’s been a specific cycle of escalating reprisals that’s been going on with judicial appointments," said Kermit Roosevelt, a University of Pennsylvania law professor. For instance, when Antonin Scalia died during his tenure on the court, Barack Obama, a Democrat, was president but Republicans controlled the Senate. Obama nominated Merrick Garland to fill the seat, but Senate Republicans blocked his nomination for the better part of a year, until Donald Trump won the presidency. Senate Republicans proceeded to fill Scalia’s seat with Neil Gorsuch, a Trump nominee. Then, when Ruth Bader Ginsburg died while serving on the bench, Senate Republicans rushed to confirm Barrett just weeks before the 2020 election that would ultimately be won by Biden, a Democrat. (This maneuver earned a Full Flop for then-Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky.) "This is one of the reasons I favor term limits for justices, as part of a package that would make clear that each president is entitled to two appointments per four-year term," Roosevelt said. "I think the appointment process has been degraded to the extent that no president in the foreseeable future will get a nomination through a Senate controlled by the opposite party." John J. Pitney Jr., a Claremont McKenna College political scientist, expressed slightly more optimism about a cross-party confirmation, but only slightly. "An opposing-party Senate might approve a nominee in the next several years, provided that the nominee is a moderate who would not shift the ideological makeup of the court," Pitney said. "But the key word is ‘might.’ It would be no sure thing, and it is very hard to see an opposing-party Senate approving a nominee who would tilt the balance against its preferred side." Our ruling Todd said, "Clarence Thomas is about to become the only member of the current Supreme Court who was nominated by a president of one party and confirmed by a Senate controlled by the other party." Thomas is the only current member of the Supreme Court to be nominated by a president of one party and confirmed by a Senate of the other. All told, 12 of the 15 successful nominees since 1980 have been nominated by a president of one party and confirmed by a Senate of the same party. However, Todd’s phrasing suggests that Thomas’ status as the only justice confirmed by the opposite party would be new, when it’s actually the case now. We rate the statement Mostly Tru

Image shows a patient experiencing claustrophobia and having a panic attack during a CT scan A startling photo is going around social media with claims that it shows what it looks like when X-ray imagery captures someone in the middle of a panic attack. "A patient experiencing claustrophobia and having a panic attack during a CT scan," the caption of a Facebook post that shared the image says. But this is not what the photo shows. The post was flagged as part of Facebook’s efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about our partnership with Facebook.) The image, which was originally shared to show how hoaxes are created on the internet, became the subject of a hoax itself. Featured Fact-check Instagram posts stated on October 10, 2022 in a post “Premature babies are at a much higher risk of injury from immunizations than full-term babies.” By Andy Nguyen • October 13, 2022 HoaxEye, a website that monitors fake and distorted images, noted on Twitter that the image was initially posted online Jan. 20 by Miguel Angel De la Cámara, a radiographer in Spain. De la Cámara explained in a Twitter thread that he was sharing the image to show how it could be taken out of context and turned into a hoax in today’s internet environment. He said that people tend to assign their own beliefs when they encounter an image like this divorced from context. In the absence of a factual explanation, people tend to distort the image’s meaning. De la Cámara said a religious person, for example, might surmise that the image shows a soul leaving its body. But the image doesn’t show this, nor does it show someone who suffers from claustrophobia having a panic attack. It simply shows a person waking up. "The image is a CT scan," De la Cámara concludes. "It is the first image of the positioning of the patient to apply the test protocol. That image lasted 3 seconds, but the patient woke up to the movement and raised his head: motion blur. Simple." We rate this Fals

Military data from 2021 show military members experienced spikes of 300% in miscarriages, almost 300% in cancer diagnoses and 1,000% in neurological issues U.S. military members experienced concerning spikes in miscarriages, cancer and other serious health issues in 2021, according to an Instagram post that grabbed attention with a big red "SOS" image attached. The Jan. 28 post referenced the Defense Medical Epidemiology Database, or DMED, saying, "there has been a 300% increase in DMED codes registered for miscarriages in the military in 2021 over the five-year average." The five-year average was 1,499 codes for miscarriages per year, the post said, and there were 4,182 such codes for the first 10 months of 2021. There was an almost 300% increase in cancer diagnoses and a 1,000% increase in neurological issues, the post says. But these figures are wrong. They resulted from a glitch in the database, a military spokesperson said. The post was flagged as part of Facebook’s efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about our partnership with Facebook.) The Defense Medical Epidemiology Database provides authorized users access to "epidemiologic data on active component service members" and is contained within the Defense Medical Surveillance System. The database was cited by Ohio attorney Thomas Renz on Jan. 24 during a COVID-19 panel discussion led by U.S. Rep. Ron Johnson of Wisconsin. During the five-hour hearing, titled "COVID-19: A second opinion," Renz said that three "whistleblowers" he represents provided him with these figures based on medical codes from the Defense Medical Epidemiology Database. Those figures were then shared in news articles in conservative media, such as The Blaze and Just the News. Featured Fact-check Facebook posts stated on October 17, 2022 in una publicación en Facebook "Ministros de Defensa de OTAN deciden invadir a RUSIA para prevenir ataque de Putin”. By Maria Ramirez Uribe • October 17, 2022 But Peter Graves, spokesperson for the Defense Health Agency’s Armed Forces Surveillance Division, told PolitiFact by email that "in response to concerns mentioned in news reports" the division reviewed data in the DMED "and found that the data was incorrect for the years 2016-2020." Officials compared numbers in the DMED with source data in the DMSS and found that the total number of medical diagnoses from those years "represented only a small fraction of actual medical diagnoses." The 2021 numbers, however, were up-to-date, giving the "appearance of significant increased occurrence of all medical diagnoses in 2021 because of the underreported data for 2016-2020," Graves said. The DMED system has been taken offline to "identify and correct the root-cause of the data corruption," Graves said. Our ruling An Instagram post said that miscarriages among military members were up 300% in 2021 over a five-year average, and that cancer diagnoses were up 300% and neurological disorders were up 1000%. However, the numbers used to compute the five-year average were greatly underreported, giving the false impression of a significant increase in 2021, a spokesperson for the Armed Forces Surveillance Division said. The database has been taken down to identify and correct the problem. We rate this claim Fals

Photo shows Amish who drove 2.5 hours with the “Freedom Convoy” to cook them food at their next stop The "Freedom Convoy" truckers who drove to Ottawa to protest vaccine mandates in Canada were greeted by supporters along their routes, but an image being shared on social media wrongly claims that it shows Amish who went to great literal lengths to cook the protesters a meal. "Great story about the Amish," reads the text alongside an image of about a dozen horse-drawn buggies on a road. "When the convoy came through my home town of Winnipeg Manitoba Canada..the Amish were there to greet the truckers with a full BBQ supper for 800 people..but when the Winnipeg police would not let the convoy stop at the desired location the Amish packed up their barbecues and food and hopped in their trucks and drove 2.5 hours with the convoy to cook them food at the next stop…all in -30 degree weather..true Patriots of freedom…just thought I would share that." This post was flagged as part of Facebook’s efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about our partnership with Facebook.) The photo was taken in Ontario by photographer Michelle Graham. It, among other similar images, appears on Graham’s website and was shared on Graham’s Instagram and Facebook accounts on Jan. 17. But the caption on the Facebook post was edited to call out misinformation about the image now being shared by other people online. Featured Fact-check Instagram posts stated on October 12, 2022 in an Instagram post Pfizer executive “admits” vaccine was never tested for preventing transmission. By Jeff Cercone • October 13, 2022 "These photos are of Old Order Mennonites headed to church," Graham wrote. "Anyone stealing these photos for other purposes would be best served to NOT do it. … My pics are being stolen to post false news on other sites for political purposes." The original description of the photos says that "all the wagons were headed to the building just down the road." Graham also told the Associated Press that what was happening in the photos had "zero relation to any political protest or movement. Just going to church." RELATED VIDEO We looked for reports to corroborate the story that Amish followed and fed convoy participants but only found more cases of Graham’s photo being misused. One post said it showed "Mennonites from St-Jacobs … uniting to join the freedom convoy" while another said it showed "Amish people in St Jacobs Canada (joining) the Canadian truckers convoy!" What we do know: that’s not what this photo shows, and we rate claims to the contrary False. RELATED LINK: Looking at how many trucks are participating in the "Freedom Convoy" in Canada

American taxpayer dollars provide “free housing, free medical, free state identification” to immigrants in the country illegally Ahead of the tax filing season, a Facebook post sarcastically told taxpayers to file on time because immigrants illegally in the country "are counting on you." "Monday, tax season starts…" the Jan. 23 post said. "So, please be mindful to file your taxes timely. Remember, 4.3 million of ILLEGALS are counting on you! We need to make sure they receive: Free housing, free medical, free state identification, free college, free daycare, free social security, free EBT cards, free month (sic) checks." It continued: "If this doesn’t piss you off as a taxpayer and an American citizen? Then I don’t know what to tell you. All these things AREN’T government funded.... IT (sic) FUNDED BY YOU! THE TAXPAYERS!" The post was flagged as part of Facebook’s efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about our partnership with Facebook.) Overall, we found that immigrants in the country illegally are ineligible to receive most of the benefits mentioned in the post. They are eligible for emergency medical care, and some women and children may qualify for food assistance. U.S. citizens and lawful permanent residents aren’t the only ones covering the costs of those programs, either. Some immigrants living in the country illegally pay taxes. Estimates vary, but research indicates that immigrants in the country illegally pay billions in federal, state and local taxes each year. Benefits mentioned in the Facebook post Generally, immigrants illegally in the country are ineligible to receive benefits from most federal programs. But they may be eligible for assistance deemed necessary to protect life or guarantee safety in dire situations, such as access to treatment in hospital emergency rooms and to health care and nutrition programs. Let’s take a closer look at their eligibility for the specific benefits mentioned in the post. Our findings come from a variety of sources, including the National Immigration Forum, the National Immigrant Law Center and federal agencies. "Free housing." Typically ineligible for federal Department of Housing and Urban Development housing programs. To qualify for public housing or HUD-subsidized housing, a person "must be a U.S. citizen or a non-citizen with an eligible immigration status," an agency spokesperson said. An immigrant who was a trafficking victim is an example of someone with an eligible immigration status who may qualify for a housing program. (A 2000 law made victims of trafficking eligible for benefits and services under any federal or state program.) "Free medical." Eligible for emergency Medicaid, if they are eligible for their state’s Medicaid program. Medicaid will cover the treatment of an emergency medical condition, including labor and delivery. "Free state identification." It is unclear if any states specifically allow immigrants living in the country illegally to get state IDs for free. Some states waive ID fees for certain groups of people, including seniors and people with low income. Some states allow immigrants living in the U.S. illegally to obtain driver’s licenses. "Free college." We found no evidence of free college specifically for this group. Washington D.C. and 17 states offer in-state tuition to immigrants living in the U.S. illegally, and some offer state financial aid. "Free daycare." Ineligible in most cases. Victims of trafficking who are in the U.S. illegally may qualify for benefits from the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families program. In some cases, funds from that program can be used to pay for childcare. Featured Fact-check Instagram posts stated on October 10, 2022 in a post “Premature babies are at a much higher risk of injury from immunizations than full-term babies.” By Andy Nguyen • October 13, 2022 "Free Social Security." Generally, ineligible to receive social security benefits.Federal law requires that a person be a U.S. citizen or meet applicable immigration status rules to receive benefits under the programs for retirement, disability, survivors of eligible workers, Supplemental Security Income, or Medicare, a spokesperson for the Social Security Administration said. "Free EBT cards." Electronic Benefit Transfer cards’ most well-known use is for buying food, under the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP. Immigrants illegally in the country are not eligible for the federal SNAP benefits. There is another federal food assistance program for which states can set eligibility requirements, and immigrants illegally in the country could apply for that assistance. That program is the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants and Children, commonly called WIC. Many state agencies have started issuing WIC benefits via EBT cards, said a spokesperson for the U.S. Department of Agriculture. "Free month (sic) checks." It is unclear exactly what this refers to, but immigrants in the U.S. illegally are not eligible for cash payments or federal unemployment benefits. The federal government sets "strict residency requirements for federal welfare programs," said Andrew Lim, director of research for the American Immigration Council, a non-profit group that advocates for immigrants. "There are some instances where undocumented parents of U.S.-born children may benefit from aid that their children are eligible for, but this is never in their own right, only through their children," Lim said. Lim also said that there are "innumerable individual immigration situations, so it is hard to be absolute in saying that there are absolutely zero undocumented immigrants accessing federal aid." But a valid Social Security number is needed for nearly all federal benefits, and usually immigrants are not issued one if they are in the country illegally, he said. Eligibility is also different for state and local welfare and public assistance programs, Lim said. Some programs "may be immigration status-blind" or have different eligibility criteria from the federal government, which would allow immigrants in the country illegally to access some state-funded assistance. Immigrants living in the U.S. illegally would not generally be considered eligible for the things listed in the Facebook post "as far as the federal government is concerned, but they may be eligible at a state-level," Lim said. Immigrants who emigrated to the U.S. legally are also generally ineligible for assistance until they’ve been a legal resident for at least five years. Our ruling A Facebook post claimed American taxpayer dollars provide "free housing, free medical, free state identification, free college, free daycare, free Social Security, free EBT cards, free month (sic) checks" to immigrants in the country illegally. In some instances, adults may benefit from assistance granted to their U.S.-born children who meet citizenship requirements. Also, states can set eligibility rules requirements for some programs, which may allow immigrants in the country illegally to apply for that assistance. However, the post makes a sweeping generalization, and immigrants illegally in the country are typically not eligible to receive federal public benefits. The post also gives the impression that only U.S. citizens and others here legally pay taxes. It ignores that some immigrants living in the country illegally also pay taxes. We rate this claim Fals

In the U.S., myocarditis cases among ages 12 to 20 numbered four in 2019; four in 2020; and 2,236 in 2021 A social media post that says heart inflammation in young people in the U.S. skyrocketed in 2021 is missing context and misleading. The claim is written in marker on a T-shirt pictured in a Jan. 22 post on Facebook. The shirt says in the U.S., myocarditis cases among those ages 12 to 20 numbered four in 2019; four in 2020; and 2,236 in 2021. "I cannot tell my kids I did nothing!" is written on top of the numbers. The post was flagged as part of Facebook’s efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about our partnership with Facebook.) The numbers in the Facebook post appear to be loosely based on data from the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System, the federal database that has become a breeding ground for misinformation. The VAERS data does reflect an increased number of reports of myocarditis among young people after COVID-19 vaccination — and the post’s estimate of annual myocarditis report numbers is not far off the mark. In 2019, there were 16 reports after all types of vaccination; in 2020 there were nine reports; and in 2021, there were 2,301, according to a Centers for Disease Control and Prevention spokesperson. But the raw report numbers do not tell the entire story. For starters, VAERS is an open system where anyone can submit a report, and the reports are not verified. "VAERS does not determine if the vaccine caused the adverse reaction," the CDC spokesperson said. "Increased awareness of VAERS and mandatory reporting of adverse reactions by healthcare providers has contributed to the huge number of reports VAERS is receiving after COVID vaccination." But even knowing that the data comes from VAERS, the claim still misses this important context: The risk of myocarditis from COVID-19 vaccines is small and symptoms are normally mild. And contracting COVID-19 is "a strong and significant risk factor for myocarditis," especially among children under 16 years old, according to the CDC. Professional medical groups and federal public health agencies have said the benefits of the vaccine far outweigh the risks. Featured Fact-check Instagram posts stated on October 12, 2022 in an Instagram post Pfizer executive “admits” vaccine was never tested for preventing transmission. By Jeff Cercone • October 13, 2022 There is a small but increased risk for myocarditis after receiving COVID-19 vaccines made by Pfizer and Moderna, which use mRNA technology, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The risk is highest after the second dose in adolescent males and young men. The CDC told Reuters that of the myocarditis or pericarditis VAERS reports it received through Nov. 11, 2021, 1,969 reports concerned people aged 30 and younger who received COVID-19 vaccines. That is only where the process of determining a link begins, not where it ends. "The CDC and FDA investigated the reports and, through interviews with medical providers and medical record reviews, confirmed 1,005 cases met the criteria for myocarditis, pericarditis, or myopericarditis," according to Reuters. The CDC also has said that for males ages 12 through 17, for every 1 million COVID-19 vaccine doses administered through June 11, 2021, there were between 56 and 69 reports of myocarditis. "The facts are clear: this is an extremely rare side effect, and only an exceedingly small number of people will experience it after vaccination," according to a June 23 statement co-signed by more than a dozen major medical professional associations, the CDC and the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. The statement continues, "Most cases are mild, and individuals recover often on their own or with minimal treatment. In addition, we know that myocarditis and pericarditis are much more common if you get COVID-19, and the risks to the heart from COVID-19 infection can be more severe." For children under 16, the risk of myocarditis is 37 times higher for those who contract COVID-19 compared with those who do not have the virus, according to a CDC study. That’s in keeping with what experts know: that viral infection is the most common cause of myocarditis in children. Our ruling A Facebook post says in the U.S., myocarditis cases among ages 12 to 20 numbered four in 2019; four in 2020; and 2,236 in 2021. The post’s numbers are not far off: In 2019, there were 16 reports after all types of vaccinations; in 2020 there were nine reports; and in 2021, there were 2,301. Of the reports among people under 30 who had received COVID-19 vaccines, 1,005 met the criteria for myocarditis, pericarditis, or myopericarditis. The VAERS data does reflect an increase in reports of myocarditis among young people, and there is a small but increased risk for myocarditis after receiving COVID-19 vaccines made by Pfizer and Moderna. However, the risk of myocarditis is small, symptoms are normally mild and professional medical groups and federal public health agencies have said the benefits of the vaccine far outweigh the risks. What’s more, myocarditis is more common following a COVID-19 infection. We rate this claim Mostly False

Vaccine makers “are shipping lots of jabs with varying ingredients, potency & EVEN placebo lots. The ingredients of COVID-19 vaccines are safe, publicly available, and scrutinized by regulators. Yet, in some corners of social media, they are claimed to be "secret," "illegal," and "toxic." Now, they are said to be ever-changing. "Growing mountains of evidence show that PHARMA (Pfizer, Moderna, J&J) are shipping lots of jabs with varying ingredients, potency & EVEN placebo lots," says a post shared recently on Facebook. The post was flagged as part of Facebook’s efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about our partnership with Facebook.) It links to a video featuring German conspiracy theorist Reiner Fuellmich, who has repeatedly spread misinformation during the pandemic. He has previously claimed that COVID-19 is less dangerous than the common flu, that the pandemic was schemed by global elites to control people, that PCR tests are fabricated evidence to justify coercive measures, and that residents of a nursing home in Germany died because of the vaccine, not the virus. His claims about ingredients, potency, and placebos are as baseless as his previous allegations, according to the Food and Drug Administration, the federal agency that regulates vaccines in the United States. "These claims are false," the FDA told PolitiFact. "We are confident in the safety, effectiveness and manufacturing data behind each COVID-19 vaccine emergency use authorization." Featured Fact-check Instagram posts stated on October 12, 2022 in an Instagram post Pfizer executive “admits” vaccine was never tested for preventing transmission. By Jeff Cercone • October 13, 2022 The FDA demands that vaccines go through quality-control tests that evaluate "critical vaccine qualities" like purity and potency to determine their safety and effectiveness. It also checks any changes made to the formula or dosage of vaccines. Pfizer did modify the composition of its vaccine recently, adding an ingredient that allows the product to be stored for longer. But the core ingredients of the shot have remained the same, and the new one is not dangerous and is commonly used in vaccines, according to a fact-check of a similar claim by USA Today. The change was checked and approved by the FDA, which said in a press release that the new formula "does not present safety or effectiveness concerns." A spokesperson for Pfizer told PolitiFact that it does not ship vaccines with varying ingredients or potency and that "the approved vaccine is the only one shipped." The company also said that placebo injections are only sent to health facilities that are doing trials. "Otherwise, no placebos are shipped to recipients." Moderna did not answer a request for comment, and Johnson & Johnson did not answer specific questions about ingredients, potency, and placebos, but there is no credible evidence to support the idea that they are shipping varying batches of vaccines. Health professionals have previously given saline injections instead of the proper COVID-19 vaccine to patients in Canada, Scotland, Germany, and Australia, but those accidents were the result of mix-ups by health professionals. Our ruling A Facebook post claims that vaccine manufacturers are shipping COVID-19 shots with different formulas and strengths, and that some lots are coming with placebos. The FDA said that the claims are wrong, and Pfizer said that it does not change the composition or strength of its vaccines between lots, and that it does not ship placebo injections widely. The claim was originally made by a conspiracy theorist who has repeatedly spread falsehoods during the pandemic. We rate the post Fals

“Biden won’t allow Delta-variant COVID patients to get proven and effective monoclonal treatments even though there are 50,000-100,000 Americans infected by Delta EVERY DAY. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration removed a pair of monoclonal antibody therapies from the list of COVID-19 treatments after they were found to be ineffective against the omicron variant. The federal government notified states Jan. 24 that the medications, made by Regeneron Pharmaceuticals and Eli Lilly, would no longer be distributed. Some Republican governors, like Florida Gov. Ron Desantis, rebuked the move, claiming that the therapies were "lifesaving" and could still help patients with other variants, like delta. Former Democratic congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard, who ran for the Democratic presidential nomination in 2020, took up a similar position on social media. "Biden won’t allow Delta-variant COVID patients to get proven and effective monoclonal treatments even though there are 50,000-100,000 Americans infected by Delta EVERY DAY— many of whom will be hospitalized or die without such access," Gabbard wrote in a Jan. 26 Facebook post. "Bottom line is, Biden should stop undermining the health of the American people by interfering with our access to proven therapeutics like monoclonals, and stop your cruel joke of telling us we can take the highly effective therapeutic Paxlovid when you know it isn’t really available." A spokesperson for Gabbard told us that delta patients will not be able to get monoclonal treatment, like Regeneron, because COVID-19 tests don’t make the distinction whether a person has the delta or omicron variant. But the therapies were pulled because they are ineffective against omicron, which currently makes up more than 99% of cases in the U.S. The FDA still allows four other drugs that remain effective for both variants, including another monoclonal antibody treatment called sotromivab. We wanted to check Gabbard’s numbers. Is the delta variant still infecting between 50,000 and 100,000 people per day? Her team told us she got her estimate from a CNN article that cited data from Dec. 19. It said 95% of cases in the Southern region of the U.S. were omicron. Approximately 700,000 new COVID-19 cases were being reported per day at the time, but Gabbard’s spokesperson said case numbers were likely "much higher," and estimated 1 million per day with 5% being the delta variant and got to at least 50,000 Americans. This is way off the reported numbers and exaggerates outdated data from a portion of the country. RELATED VIDEO Why the therapies were pulled back Some health systems, including ones in New York City, stopped using the antibody treatments weeks before the FDA’s announcement. The drugmakers Regeneron and Eli Lilly had announced in December that the treatments had "diminished potency" against the omicron variant. Several other approved treatments remain effective against both omicron and delta, including sotrovimab, a monoclonal antibody made by GlaxosSmithKline and Vir Biotechnology; paxlovid, an antiviral pill by Pfizer; molnupriavir, an antiviral pill by Merck, and the antiviral drug remdesivir, which is given by infusion. As of now, they are harder to get. A recommendation from the National Institutes of Health said health providers can use the restricted monoclonal treatments if others are unavailable in a region where delta is still prevalent. "If we knew we had a delta case, there’s no reason that we couldn't use it," said Dr. Marissa Levine, a health professor at the University of South Florida. "It’s not an all or nothing, it’s just that there really isn’t any delta in the U.S." FDA spokesperson Chanapa Tantibanchachai told PolitiFact that the NIH panel recommended against the treatments’ use because of "markedly reduced activity" against omicron and because real-time testing to identify less-common variants like delta isn’t routinely available. Featured Fact-check Instagram posts stated on October 12, 2022 in an Instagram post Pfizer executive “admits” vaccine was never tested for preventing transmission. By Jeff Cercone • October 13, 2022 "CDC data indicate that the omicron variant of SARS-CoV-2 is estimated to account for more than 99% of cases in the United States as of Jan. 15," Tantibanchachai said. "Therefore, it’s highly unlikely that COVID-19 patients seeking care in the U.S. at this time are infected with or were exposed to a variant other than omicron." Some medical providers have complained that some of the other COVID-19 treatments, like Pfizer’s paxlovid pill, are in short supply and proving difficult to get for patients. But multiple medical experts said that they believed the supply tides were turning, and they agreed with the FDA’s pivot. "Why would you use something that doesn’t work?" said Dr. Aileen Marty, an infectious disease and disaster medicine specialist at Florida International University. "You don’t want to give something that causes no benefit, and then there's economic costs, there’s stress to the individual, and with a monoclonal antibody — it’s invasive, and although minor, there’s always a risk of an infection or complications." Monoclonal antibodies are laboratory-made molecules that act as substitute antibodies that can mimic the immune system's ability to fight off pathogens such as viruses. The therapy, typically given via IV infusion, has helped eligible patients fend off the virus and avoid hospitalization. These therapies were issued in late 2020 and early 2021 under the FDA’s emergency use authorization, which stipulates that a given treatment’s benefits outweigh any risks it may pose. The use by anyone with COVID-19 was revoked once it was determined that the benefit no longer existed. Monoclonal antibodies can cause stress on the body and, while rare, can cause infections or other side effects like shortness of breath, nausea and vomiting. Medical experts told us that most run-of-the-mill COVID-19 tests cannot differentiate between variants. More sophisticated testing, such as gene sequencing, can give more clear answers. Delta cases are low We couldn't find any evidence for Gabbard’s estimate of 50,000 to 100,000 Americans being infected with the delta variant "every day." The current projection is that only 0.1% to 0.2% of sequenced variants in the U.S. are delta, said Cindy Prins, a clinical associate professor of epidemiology at the University of Florida. If you take the daily average of U.S. COVID-19 cases on Jan. 26 — which was 618,231 — and use the higher end 0.2% delta estimate, then only 1,236 of those cases that day were delta, she added. "Even though I’m using an estimated percentage for the current proportion of variants that are delta, it’s very reasonable to believe this is accurate because omicron has quickly outcompeted delta to become the dominant variant," Prins concluded. Nicholas Spinelli, a spokesperson at the CDC, also said that national estimates for delta appear to be much lower than Gabbard’s figures. "SARS-CoV-2 sequencing does not occur for every positive case," Spinelli wrote in an email. "However, based on the surveillance data, in the cases tested the week ending Jan. 22, 0.1 - 0.2% were projected to be delta, and 4,852,998 new cases (were reported) nationally over the same time period. That levels out to approximately 4,853 delta cases for that week, or about 693 per day on average. Case numbers fluctuate, so using figures from another week would result in a different answer." Others agreed, saying that omicron is, by far, the dominant strain. "In Florida, we monitor the concentrations of SARS-Cov-2 RNA in wastewater," Marty said. "Back in December, we did have some delta circulating, but the only thing they are finding in the sewers now is omicron." Our ruling Gabbard said, "Biden won’t allow Delta-variant COVID patients to get proven and effective monoclonal treatments even though there are 50,000-100,000 Americans infected by Delta EVERY DAY." Gabbard’s estimate of daily delta patients appears to be way off, with national surveillance data putting the average estimate closer to 1,000 cases a day. While the Biden administration has limited two monoclonal antibody treatments over their ineffectiveness against omicron,the FDA still allows four other drugs that remain effective for both variants, including another monoclonal antibody treatment called sotromivab. A person with the delta variant has a harder time now finding treatments for the disease; but the best data show that the number isn’t nearly as high as Gabbard said. Because this claim contains an element of truth but ignores critical facts that would give a different impression, we rate it Mostly Fals

"Large, peer-reviewed research study proves ivermectin works” as a COVID-19 preventative Ivermectin is not FDA-approved for use against COVID-19 and there’s no scientific consensus yet of its effectiveness in treating or preventing the virus. But a new study out of Brazil has advocates of the drug again proclaiming the drug’s effectiveness on social media and beyond. "Large, peer-reviewed research study proves ivermectin works," read the headline of a Jan. 25 article shared widely on Facebook. The article was flagged as part of Facebook’s efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about our partnership with Facebook.) We wanted to know more about whether the study might indeed be a course-changer in the ongoing debate about using ivermectin for COVID-19. But experts in the field criticized the study as having critical flaws involving methodology and incomplete data that detract from what, if anything, it adds to the research. The article was written by a group called the Front Line COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance, also called FLCCC, which described itself as a nonprofit organization of critical care specialists dedicated to developing prevention and treatment protocols for COVID-19. According to the group’s website, it advocates for the use of ivermectin in treating COVID-19. One of the study’s co-authors told PolitiFact that he could not say that the research "proved" ivermectin is effective. And he said nothing replaces vaccines. Rather, the manuscript urges ivermectin as an additional tool. Neither FDA nor WHO acknowledge ivermectin for COVID-19 Ivermectin tablets and topical forms of the drug are FDA-approved for use in humans to treat parasites and certain skin conditions, but not COVID-19. There are also animal-only formulations of the drug used to treat and prevent heartworms and other parasites. Asked specifically about this Facebook claim, a spokesperson for the FDA said the agency doesn’t generally comment on third-party research, but evaluates it as part of a body of evidence when forming their guidance. And nothing about its stance has changed. "Currently, FDA has not authorized or approved ivermectin for use in preventing or treating COVID-19 in humans," Chanapa Tantibanchachai, an FDA spokesperson wrote in an email to PolitiFact. "To date, published clinical trials have shown mixed results." Tantibanchachai said that while ivermectin can be prescribed by doctors for COVID-19 if they deem it appropriate, "the safety and efficacy" hasn’t been established for that use and warned that the drug could negatively interact with other drugs. The World Health Organization also still recommends against using ivermectin to treat COVID-19 outside of clinical trials. A WHO spokesperson said the organization is following the research on ivermectin. "As of today, there is no plan to review our guidelines on ivermectin in the immediate future, but that could change," the spokesperson said. The Brazil study The FLCCC story shared on Facebook links to a study published on Jan. 15 in the scientific journal Cureus. Its authors, two of whom are members of the FLCCC, concluded that "regular use of ivermectin as a prophylactic agent was associated with significantly reduced COVID-19 infection, hospitalization, and mortality rates," based on an observational study of 159,561 residents ages 18 and over in Itajaí, Brazil. According to the study, between July 7, 2020, and Dec. 2, 2020, 113,845 participants of a citywide program took the drug, while 45,716 did not. Those who took ivermectin caught COVID-19 at a rate of 3.7%, while those who did not had a 6.6% infection rate. After adjusting for variables, the authors said, they found a 67% reduction in hospitalization rate and a 70% reduction in mortality rate for ivermectin users. It sounds promising, but two experts not associated with the study pointed out serious research flaws, including leaving questions about whether those identified as having taken the ivermectin actually did as prescribed. They also raised questions about conflict of interest by some of its authors. Concerns about methodology Dr. Nikolas Wada, an epidemiologist with the Novel Coronavirus Research Compendium at Johns Hopkins, raised concerns about the study's uncertainty over who was "truly taking ivermectin and vice versa" and poor control for factors that may predispose someone to catch COVID-19, among other issues. "My primary takeaway," Wada said, "is that this paper adds nearly nothing to the knowledge base regarding ivermectin and COVID-19, and certainly does not prove its effectiveness as a prophylaxis." Featured Fact-check Instagram posts stated on October 12, 2022 in an Instagram post Pfizer executive “admits” vaccine was never tested for preventing transmission. By Jeff Cercone • October 13, 2022 Gideon Meyerowitz-Katz, an epidemiologist and Ph.D student from the University of Wollongong in Australia who often writes about COVID-19, said the research lacks critical information about the study’s participants, including how many Itajaí residents were already taking ivermectin before the program began and how many continued to take the full doses of the drug as prescribed. "This sort of epidemiological study is very prone to biases resulting from characteristics that are inherently different between the intervention and control groups," Meyerowitz-Katz said. "There is essentially no information on how many people in either the intervention or control group actually took ivermectin, which is a fairly important consideration if that's what the authors were trying to investigate." Meyerowitz-Katz detailed some of his concerns about the study in a long Twitter thread in December, when the study was in preprint, a draft version that has not been peer-reviewed. He said not much has changed in the published version. The Municipal Health Department of Itajaí said in January of 2021 — a year before the study was published — that 138,216 residents took the first dose of ivermectin when it started distributing the drug as part of a citywide program. That number fell to 93,970 people taking the second and third doses, and 8,312 taking the fourth and fifth doses, the department said. What the study’s authors say The study’s authors acknowledged the uncertainty about the drug regimen in the "discussion" section of the publication. Dr. Flavio Cadegiani, corresponding author of the study, also addressed it in an email to PolitiFact, arguing the results would be even better in a controlled study if all users had taken the drug regularly. But Cadegiani defended the study’s methodology. "Limitations of the study are those inherent to any populational, observational studies," said Cadegiani, who said they used a method called propensity score matching "to increase the level of certainty of the findings." Cadegiani said that in addition to showing positive results for ivermectin, the study explicitly states that "nothing replaces the vaccines." Dr. Lucy Kerr, the study’s lead author, responded to criticism in the comment section below the study, writing that the data was complete and that "the most relevant clinical variables that affected mortality from COVID-19 were considered. She said that the study was "strong, robust, precise" and "very high quality." We reached out to Kerr via email but didn’t hear back. As for whether the headline of the article’s assertion that the study "proves" that ivermectin works, even Cadegiani isn’t so sure, despite being a member of the FLCCC, the group promoting the study. "Our work was to check whether in that population ivermectin would be effective or not, in terms of protection from COVID-19 infection, hospitalizations, or deaths. At least from what we received, it seemed to work. And I was not a believer at all," he told PolitiFact. "Now, the concept of being 'proven' is scientifically hard to tell — even a precise definition lacks," he said. "I have never said it was proven anywhere. How people interpret and claim, that is not under my control." Conflicts of interest concerns Wada and Meyerowitz-Katz, who were not involved with the study, each pointed out potential conflicts of interest with the study’s authors. They noted that although the preprint version of the study mentions that two of its authors received money from a pharmaceutical company that manufactures ivermectin, the published version leaves that detail out. The preprint study said that Kerr received funding from Vitamedic "unrelated to this study" and that Cadegiani was paid for consulting services by the firm, also unrelated to the study, and that he donated it all for COVID-19 patient care and research. In an email to PolitiFact, Cadegiani also said he did not have any conflicts and reiterated that he had donated his payment. The published version of the study simply stated that "all authors have declared that they have no financial relationships at present or within the previous three years with any organizations that might have an interest in the submitted work." The National Research Ethics Commission in Brazil, meanwhile, is investigating another clinical trial of an experimental COVID-19 drug in which Cadegiani was the lead author for possible violation of ethics, according to The BMJ and the publication Science. Our ruling An article shared on Facebook about an ivermectin study out of Brazil states that the "large, peer-reviewed research study proves ivermectin works." The article is being promoted by the Front Line COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance, a group that promotes the use of ivermectin to treat COVID-19. Two of the study’s authors are members of the group. The study, one of its authors said, does not definitively prove that ivermectin works as a prevention or treatment for COVID-19. Experts not involved in the study pointed out serious flaws in the study and conflicts of interest with its authors. The FDA and WHO have not changed their positions on the use of ivermectin outside of clinical trials. We rate this claim Fals

“All these athletes are dropping dead on the field” after receiving the COVID-19 vaccination U.S. Sen. Ron Johnson. R-Wisconsin, is once again making waves with his false claims about COVID-19 This time, Johnson, who recently announced his re-election campaign, took to the Charlie Kirk Show on Jan. 26, 2022 to talk about COVID-19 vaccines. "We’ve heard story after story. All these athletes dropping dead on the field," he said during a conversation on the radio show about adverse effects of the vaccine. "But we’re supposed to ignore that. Nothing happening here, nothing to see. This is a travesty, this is a scandal." That was a real jaw-dropper for us. All sorts of athletes dropping dead on the field because of the vaccine? Is Johnson right? No. Let’s take a closer look. Fact-checks, doctors say claim is false When asked for backup for the claim, Johnson spokeswoman Vanessa Ambrosini told us the senator has been alarmed by stories he has heard of athletes dying on the field. "The Senator’s point in raising these issues," she said via email, "has always been that our federal health agencies should be concerned about reports on adverse reactions related to COVID-19 vaccines and they should fully investigate and make their findings available to the American people." Fair enough. But the claim was that there are stories about all sorts of athletes dying in the midst of competition, or at least while practicing. Patrick Remington, director of the University of Wisconsin-Madison’s preventive medicine residency program and a former epidemiologist for the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, said the agency is already monitoring such things. Johnson frequently cites a federal database of adverse events that people – from patients to doctors – report to the agency as possibly connected to various drugs. But the database itself notes the claims are not vetted to establish a cause between them. Remington said the CDC is looking for causation, not just coincidence of two events happening in proximity to each other, such as cardiac episode and getting a vaccine. "The burden is on credible scientists to study whether vaccination could be associated with this outcome, and no credible science exists to say it is," he said. "We continue to do ongoing surveillance, the vaccine surveillance system is in place to study any possible associations that come up. But to date, I am not aware of any studies or any credible research that suggests that vaccines cause death in young athletes." Featured Fact-check Instagram posts stated on October 12, 2022 in an Instagram post Pfizer executive “admits” vaccine was never tested for preventing transmission. By Jeff Cercone • October 13, 2022 Ambrosini also shared an article from goodsciencing.com which purports to list hundreds of young athletes who have died from the vaccine. The article was previously debunked in a Dec. 17, 2021 fact-check by FactCheck.org. "We found no proof of a causal relationship in any of the cases between the vaccines and the injuries or deaths," the fact-check said. Johnson’s team also cited a Dec. 23, 2021 article from the Daily Mail, which suggested that the heart problems of two Premier League soccer players – who did not die – were related to the COVID vaccine. But those claims have also been debunked. A June 2021 fact check by Reuters found that Christian Ericksen’s collapse during a game was not a result of a vaccine. At the time of the collapse, Erickson was not vaccinated and was not sick with COVID. As for Sergio Aguero, the other soccer player, his cardiologist said the cardiac episode the player experienced was likely caused by a small scar on his heart, according to a Dec. 17, 2021 article in the Irish Post. The scar, he said, was likely caused by another virus at some point in the player’s life, but was in no way related to COVID or the vaccine. In addition, other fact-checks have looked at similar claims. Days before Johnson took to the Charlie Kirk Show, former NBA All-Star John Stockton on Jan. 23 2022 claimed more than 100 professional athletes who were vaccinated have dropped dead "right on the pitch, right on the field, right on the court." PolitiFact National rated this False in a Jan. 26, 2022 fact-check. In it, Matthew Martinez, a sports cardiologist with the National Football League, National Basketball Association, National Hockey League and Major League Soccer and who is director of sports cardiology at Morristown Medical Center in New Jersey said he was not aware of a single COVID vaccine-related cardiac complication in professional sports. Other doctors made similar statements. The item went on to explain that a rare risk of myocarditis appears to be higher following a COVID-19 infection, citing a study that found that boys and young men infected with the virus are up to six times more likely to develop the heart condition than those who have received the vaccine. In other words, being vaccinated reduces this risk. The CDC says that it has not detected unusual or unexpected patterns for deaths following immunizations that would indicate vaccines are causing or contributing to deaths, outside of nine confirmed deaths following the Janssen vaccine from Johnson & Johnson. Those deaths resulted from a rare and serious adverse reaction involving blood clots, called thrombosis. But that is far from hundreds, and is far different than Johnson’s claim of "all these athletes" dying on the playing field. Our ruling Johnson claimed that "all these athletes are dropping dead on the field" after receiving the COVID-19 vaccination. But similar claims have repeatedly been debunked – doctors have not encountered athletes dropping dead from the vaccine. And doctors for the two European soccer players Johnson’s staff cited have said those cardiac episodes were not caused by the vaccine. There is also the obvious problem with those cases, as they relate to supporting Johnson’s claim, so far as that the two athletes are not, well, dead. Finally, health experts have also said that no research shows the link between sudden death incidents in sports players and vaccines. We rate this claim as False. RELATED VIDEO: window.gciAnalyticsUAID = 'PMJS-TEALIUM-COBRAND'; window.gciAnalyticsLoadEvents = false; window.gciAnalytics.view({ 'event-type': 'pageview', 'content-type': 'interactives', 'content-ssts-section': 'news', 'content-ssts-subsection': 'news:politics', 'content-ssts-topic': 'news:politics:politifactwisconsin', 'content-ssts-subtopic': ' news:politics:politifactwisconsin' });

“There's never been a president (before Joe Biden) that has made race and gender the defining factor” for a Supreme Court nomination Fox News host Sean Hannity misleadingly claimed that President Joe Biden was venturing into unprecedented territory with his pledge to nominate a Black woman as a replacement for U.S. Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer, who is retiring after 28 years. "I'm saying this fully acknowledging that there are definitely qualified people in all backgrounds, all races, all religions, etc., etc.," Hannity said Jan. 27 during a conversation on his radio show. "But there's never been a president that has made race and gender the defining factor. That's the difference here." Biden, who promised during his campaign to nominate the first Black woman to the nation’s highest court, said he plans to settle on a nominee before the end of February. Only two Black men, the late Justice Thurgood Marshall and Justice Clarence Thomas, and only one woman of color, Justice Sonia Sotomayor, who is Hispanic, have ever served on the Supreme Court. But Hannity’s claim that Biden did what’s never been done before when he announced his intent to fill Breyer’s seat with a Black woman — a move some conservatives have cast as affirmative action — runs counter to the long history of Supreme Court nominations. A spokesperson for Hannity’s radio program did not respond to a request for comment. Less than two years ago, President Donald Trump vowed to nominate a woman to replace the late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg. He then appointed Justice Amy Coney Barrett to the vacancy. President Donald Trump watches as Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas administers the Constitutional Oath to Amy Coney Barrett on Oct. 26, 2020. (AP) "I will be putting forth a nominee next week. It will be a woman," Trump said Sept. 19, 2020, during a rally in Fayetteville, North Carolina. He later added: "It will be a woman, a very talented, very brilliant woman. I haven’t chosen yet, but we have numerous women on the list." Decades earlier, President Ronald Reagan said that if he were elected, he would nominate the first woman to the Supreme Court. "It is time for a woman to sit among our highest jurists," he said at a news conference weeks before the 1980 election, according to the Washington Post. A year later, Reagan followed through, nominating Justice Sandra Day O’Connor. President Ronald Reagan presents his Supreme Court nominee Sandra Day O'Connor to members of the press in the White House Rose Garden on July 15, 1981. (AP) Race, and also religion, played a role in other Supreme Court nominations, as well. Featured Fact-check Instagram posts stated on October 12, 2022 in an Instagram post Pfizer executive “admits” vaccine was never tested for preventing transmission. By Jeff Cercone • October 13, 2022 Nikolas Bowie, assistant professor of law at Harvard Law School, said Hannity’s claim "ignores the reality that from 1789 through 1967, every president made race and gender a defining factor in their selection process by refusing to nominate anyone other than a white man." Tomiko Brown-Nagin, another professor of constitutional law and history at Harvard University, said the late Justice Antonin Scalia’s Italian background was a "defining, positive factor in Ronald Reagan’s selection of him," citing a report in Slate, a progressive online magazine. In a 2003 interview with the University of Virginia’s Miller Center, Peter Wallison, Reagan’s White House counsel at the time of Scalia’s appointment in 1986, said that Reagan "wanted to be sure that he could appoint the first Italian-American … he felt that it would be great to put an Italian-American on the Supreme Court." "Reagan had asked me whether Scalia was of Italian extraction," Wallison said, according to the Miller Center’s interview transcript. "I think he used the word ‘extraction,’ and I said, ‘Yes, he’s of Italian extraction.’ Reagan said, ‘That’s the man I want to nominate, so I want to meet him.’" President Ronald Reagan speaks at a news briefing at the White House in Washington, where he announced the nomination of Antonin Scalia to the Supreme Court on June 17, 1986. (AP) In 1955, President Dwight D. Eisenhower told his attorney general, "I still want the name of some fine, prominent Catholic to nominate to the bench," according to books by historian David A. Nichols, a former professor at Southwestern College, and Sheldon Goldman, a professor of political science at the University of Massachusetts at Amherst. The late Justice William Brennan Jr., the Catholic whom Eisenhower appointed in 1956, acknowledged this during an interview with Irish America magazine. "I have seen the record that President Eisenhower, when this vacancy arose, gave instructions to the Attorney General that he would like consideration of a Catholic," Brennan said. President Dwight D. Eisenhower shakes the hand of Justice William J. Brennan Jr. in the White House on Sept. 29, 1956, after selecting Brennan to the U.S. Supreme Court. (AP) Contemporary reporting also indicated that President George H. W. Bush concentrated the search that ended with Thomas’ swearing-in in 1991 mostly on minority and female candidates, though Bush denied that he was trying to satisfy a "quota" by replacing one Black justice with another. Thomas replaced Marshall, a former civil rights attorney and the court’s first Black justice, who retired due to health issues. Our ruling Hannity said that before Biden’s recent pledge to nominate a Black woman to the Supreme Court, "there's never been a president that has made race and gender the defining factor." The claim ignored that both Trump and Reagan made similar vows to nominate women to the Supreme Court, then followed through on those promises. Other presidents in history have also considered race and religion as they have made their picks. We rate Hannity’s claim False. CORRECTION: A previous version of this fact-check mistakenly named George W. Bush as the president who appointed Justice Clarence Thomas to the Supreme Court. The president who appointed Thomas was George H. W. Bus

"BIDEN: 'I'm not gonna take any questions because I think it's inappropriate.' The Republican National Committee posted a selectively edited video of President Joe Biden to give the misleading impression that Biden said taking questions from reporters is inappropriate. "BIDEN: 'I'm not gonna take any questions because I think it's inappropriate,'" said the Jan. 27 tweet from the RNC Research account, which received a few hundred retweets and likes. The tweet showed a 3-second clip from Biden’s event honoring the retiring Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer, a Clinton administration appointee who spent 28 years on the bench. But the video and tweet took Biden’s comments out of context and cut him off mid-sentence. What’s left is an abbreviated, misleading quote that doesn’t accurately capture what Biden said. The president’s full remarks, as seen on video and in the White House’s official transcript, show that he was not speaking about taking questions in absolute terms. Biden reiterated his commitment to nominate a Black woman as Breyer’s replacement during his speech. Then, after Breyer spoke, Biden wrapped up the event and said that it would be inappropriate to take questions in front of Breyer, since the justice is "still sitting on the bench." Biden went on to say that there would soon be other opportunities for reporters to ask him questions. Featured Fact-check Facebook posts stated on October 14, 2022 in an Instagram post Video footage showing Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi hiding on Jan. 6, 2021, shows the U.S. Capitol attack “was a setup.” By Madison Czopek • October 17, 2022 Here’s what Biden said to close the Jan. 27 event, with the comment the RNC plucked out in its deceptive tweet highlighted in bold for emphasis: "That you all so very, very much for being here. And I’m not going to take any questions because I think it’s inappropriate to take questions with the justice here. He’s still sitting on the bench and — I’ll give you your mask back — and, but you’ll have plenty of opportunities to get me later today and for the rest of the week, and next week too. So thank you very much. Thank you." The Associated Press reported on Jan. 9 that Biden held fewer news conferences and participated in fewer media interviews during his first year in office than his recent predecessors had — although the outlet also reported that Biden more frequently fielded questions during his public appearances than those same predecessors, citing research from a Towson University professor. But Biden did not say Jan. 27 that he thinks taking questions in general is inappropriate. The RNC tweet abbreviated Biden’s remarks to leave that misleading impression. The tweet contained an element of truth — the words it highlighted did indeed come out of Biden’s mouth — but its editing and presentation omitted what Biden said next, critical information that would give a different impression. We rate the tweet Mostly Fals

When asked if she supports the Build Back Better bill, Abby Finkenauer said that she didn’t know what was in it The Republican Party of Iowa wrote in a press release on Jan. 24 that Democratic U.S. Senate candidate Abby Finkenauer said, "Well heck, I don’t even know what’s in it . . ." when asked if she supports President Biden’s Build Back Better plan. "While Finkenauer botched her answer, Iowa Democrat candidates Liz Mathis and Christina Bohannan have yet to say whether or not they support Biden’s legislation. "It shouldn’t surprise Iowans that Finkenauer doesn’t know what’s in the bill even though she supports it. She is saying the quiet part out loud – she will be a rubber stamp for Joe Biden’s agenda," Republican Party of Iowa Communications Director Kollin Crompton is quoted as saying in the news release. "Iowans deserve to know if Bohannan and Mathis stand with their party’s leaders on this disastrous legislation." Additionally, a tweet by Crompton showed a video of Finkenauer that is clipped immediately after the quote distributed in the press release. "@Abby4Iowa when asked about her support on BBB: "Well heck, I don’t even know what’s in it." #IASen," Crompton tweeted with the video clip. We looked at the full video to see what else she said. In it, Finkenauer is speaking on 4 the Record, a news show on the Rock Island, Ill-Quad Cities television station WHBF in response to a question by anchor Jim Niedelman. He asked whether she supports The Build Back Better plan, noting that the plan’s price tag has changed over the past several months and does not have full Senate support. Finkenauer says, "Well heck, I don’t even know what’s in it at this point, they keep going back and forth. I will say, look, I am not for giving tax breaks to folks in California or New York, but I am for making sure that 3- and 4-year-olds have universal preschool in this country." She also said she supports the plan expanding universal, publicly-funded pre-K education but not expanding state and local (SALT) tax deductions. Featured Fact-check Facebook posts stated on October 14, 2022 in an Instagram post Video footage showing Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi hiding on Jan. 6, 2021, shows the U.S. Capitol attack “was a setup.” By Madison Czopek • October 17, 2022 Finkenauer is seeking the Democratic nomination to run against Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, in the 2022 general election. She served as U.S. representative for Iowa’s 1st Congressional District from 2019 to 2021. Michael Franken of Sioux City, Glenn Hurst of Minden and Bob Krause of Burlington also are seeking the Democratic nomination. Bohannan and Mathis are seeking Democratic nominations for U.S. House seats from Iowa. "This video was not edited in any way," Crompton wrote in an email. "Finkenauer said what she said, she doesn’t know what is in Biden’s Build Back Broke bill. Just because she is embarrassed of her poor response, doesn’t mean she didn’t say it." Finkenauer’s campaign said she has not announced support for this Build Back Better plan because what’s in it isn’t clear. Campaign advisor Megan Simpson wrote in an email provided to PolitiFact Iowa by the Finkenauer campaign: "Abby Finkenauer has been very clear about what she supports, and it’s all about lowering costs for Iowa families. She’s said time and time again that she supports allowing Medicare to negotiate directly with drug companies to lower costs, that Medicare benefits should be expanded to cover dental, vision, and hearing, and that paid family and medical leave, universal preschool, and accessible, affordable, and high-quality child care should be guaranteed for every Iowa family." Our ruling The Iowa Republican Party said in a press release and a tweet that Abby Finkenauer, who is running for a U.S. Senate seat did not know what was in President Biden’s proposed Build Back Better plan. Finkenauer said in a television interview she didn’t know what was in the plan because it is changing. She then stated things she’d like the bill to accomplish. The Republican Party’s press release and Crompton’s tweet eliminated the full context of Finkenauer’s statement when it had the complete statement. Some truth exists when saying Finkenauer doesn’t know what’s in the bill but critical facts, such as the bill is in flux and Finkenauer has a wish list for it, are missing in the press release and tweet. We rate this claim Mostly Fals

"Right now, in the average Texas fourth grade classroom, 7 out of 10 kids cannot read at grade level. Democratic gubernatorial candidate Beto O'Rourke has made improving education one of his campaign priorities. He wants to expand full-day pre-K, increase per-pupil spending, keep teachers in the workforce and reduce Texas' emphasis on standardized testing. In place of that emphasis, the campaign's director of policy and research Gina Hinojosa wrote, Texas could develop strategies "that better allow teachers to teach to the student, not to a standardized test." At a November rally, O'Rourke released a startling statistic while speaking about increasing teacher pay. "Right now, in the average Texas fourth grade classroom, seven out of 10 kids cannot read at grade level," O'Rourke said. That would mean most fourth grade students in Texas are reading below grade level. We took a look at this claim. The Nation's Report Card O'Rourke's campaign pointed to data from the National Center for Education Statistics, which falls under the U.S. Department of Education and the Institute of Education Sciences. The center tracks the performance of U.S. students through the National Assessment of Educational Progress. The results are presented in The Nation's Report Card. The assessment is the longest running assessment nationally that gauges students' knowledge and skills. The assessment is administered to a sample of students nationally. Students, teachers, and administrators also complete survey questionnaires for contextual information on students' classroom experiences. The most recent data is from 2019. The 2019 reading assessment was given to approximately 150,600 Grade 4 students nationally, according to the National Assessment of Educational Progress website. For Texas, 7,400 fourth grade students participated in mathematics and 7,400 Texas fourth grade students participated in reading. The 2019 data indicates 30% of fourth-graders in Texas are at or above the "proficient" level, meaning 70% are below that level. For context, the Texas fourth-grade reading data are similar to the national rate: 34% of fourth-graders nationally read at or above the proficient level in 2019. "Proficient" means students can interpret texts and apply their understanding of the text. It "represents the goal for what all students should know," according to the governing board for the national assessment. The national assessment has three ranges in its scoring system: basic, proficient, and advanced. Scoring basic on the assessment means students can make simple inferences and understand the main idea of a text, and 61% of Texas fourth-grade students scored at or above basic in reading. Overall, that 30% would seem to match O'Rourke's numbers. However, how the federal government defines "proficient" does not mean that's how Texas education officials define it. Featured Fact-check Joe Biden stated on October 23, 2022 in a forum with Now This Student loan forgiveness is “passed. I got it passed by a vote or two. And it’s in effect.” By Louis Jacobson • October 25, 2022 Grady Wilburn, a statistician for the National Center for Education Statistics, noted in an email that states have their own definition on what it means to read at grade level. How Texas tests compare to the national assessment The National Assessment of Educational Progress conducted an analysis in 2019 on how the proficiency criteria used by states compares to the national assessment, Catherine Lammert, assistant professor of reading methods at Texas Tech University's Teacher Education Department, wrote in a Jan. 5 email. "Texas was listed as one of the states where grade-level proficiency standards exceeded the 'basic' standards of NAEP but does not surpass the 'proficient' level," Lammert wrote. In 2019, most states' definitions of "proficient" actually fall within the "basic" category of the national assessment. Only four states — Illinois, Rhode Island, Tennessee, and Oklahoma — had standards on par with the national proficient level. Virginia's standards were below the basic level. In Texas, a student could simultaneously read at grade level by the state's definition and not be proficient by the national definition. "Every state has their own curricular standards, and every state uses assessments aligned to those standards," Lammert wrote. "NAEP has been used for decades as a tool to compare rates of reading achievement across states. This is valuable. Since each state defines proficiency differently, by nature NAEP is a harder measure than some states’ assessments and an easier measure than others." The results of the 2021 State of Texas Assessments of Academic Readiness, the Texas standardized tests, indicate 36% of Texas fourth grade students scored at or above grade level for reading. The percentage of fourth-grade students reading at or above grade level declined from 2019 to 2021. In 2019, 43% of students were reading at or above grade level. Lammert cautioned that statewide averages can hide that some classrooms face steeper challenges and inequalities in funding, access and support compared to others. Virtually all students in better-resourced, higher-income communities may read at grade level. Lammert gave an example: at Casis Elementary School in the affluent Tarrytown neighborhood of West Austin, 97% of the students passed the STAAR reading exam, but in East Austin at Oak Springs, the average was 59%. "In Texas, ZIP code determines opportunity," Lammert wrote. Our ruling In a series of criticisms against Gov. Greg Abbott, Democratic gubernatorial candidate Beto O'Rourke said, "Right now, in the average Texas fourth grade classroom, 7 out of 10 kids cannot read at grade level." This matches data from the national assessment standard for proficient, as defined by the National Center for Education Statistics. To get a different view, it's important to note that Texas has its own definition of reading at grade level. Texas, alongside many other states, has lower standards than the national assessment. But the state's own assessment results indicate 64% of fourth grade students did not meet grade level for reading in 2021, not far off from the national data. We rate this claim Mostly True, meaning the statement is accurate but needs additional information or contex

“National Guard doctors find hospitals empty of COVID patients. Some Facebook users are sharing a headline of what looks like a news article, but it comes from a self-described satire site with a history of publishing fabricated stories. "National guard doctors find hospitals empty of COVID patients," the Jan. 18, 2022, headline says. This post was flagged as part of Facebook’s efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about our partnership with Facebook.) The headline appeared with a story written by "Mike Baxter" on the website Real Raw News. We’ve previously investigated and written about both the site and Baxter, which is a pseudonym, and we’ve fact-checked and found false multiple claims from stories published on Real Raw News. This particular story has two supposed sources: Lt. Michael McKenzie, a physician assistant with the New Jersey Army National Guard and Beth Johnson, a member of the administrative staff at Hudson Regional Hospital in Secaucus, New Jersey. According to the story, McKenzie was among the military medical workers dispatched to hospitals grappling with a surge of COVID-19 cases. He was attached to "Task Force Secaucus," which was assigned to Hudson Regional Hospital. It was there that he found not "a single COVID patient," the story says. Featured Fact-check Instagram posts stated on October 12, 2022 in an Instagram post Pfizer executive “admits” vaccine was never tested for preventing transmission. By Jeff Cercone • October 13, 2022 "Four of the hospital’s 14 ICU beds were occupied, but none with COVID patients," McKenzie allegedly told Real Raw News. But we reached out to the National Guard, and a spokesperson told us that there is no such task force, and no Lt. Michael McKenzie. "Nor are there any New Jersey National Guard service members assigned to Hudson Regional Hospital," Capt. Amelia Thatcher said. "No one from the New Jersey National Guard has received any communication from Mike Baxter or ‘Real Raw News.’ From our review the referenced story contains no factual information." The purported hospital administrative employee quoted in the story also is not a real person, the hospital told us. RELATED VIDEO A "Beth Johnson" is quoted in the story as saying that "7 of 14 ICU beds are in use" but that policy prohibited her from saying who was hospitalized there or why. On Jan. 27, the hospital’s vice president and chief legal officer, Harry Kapralos, sent a cease-and-desist letter to Real Raw News, writing that claims including that the National Guard was assigned to the hospital were "false, defamatory, and misrepresentative of the truth." We rate this post Pants on Fire!

“In New York state, if you’re white, you have to go to the back of the line to get medical help. At an Arizona rally, former President Donald J. Trump stirred up the crowd with inaccurate claims about how white people are being put at a disadvantage when seeking health care during the pandemic. "The left is now rationing life-saving therapeutics based on race, discriminating against and denigrating, just denegrating white people to determine who lives and who dies. If you’re white, you don’t get the vaccine, or if you’re white you don’t get therapeutics," he said. "In fact, in New York State, if you’re white, you have to go to the back of the line to get medical help. Think of it. If you’re white you go right to the back of the line." New York State’s guidance for distribution of Covid-19 treatments has been a hot topic in conservative media and also the subject of lawsuits by a Cornell University law professor and a pro-Trump advocacy group. So, what is Trump talking about? Do whites have to "go to the back of the line to get medical help" in New York State? State memo The context for Trump's remarks is a state Department of Health memo from Dec. 27, sent to health care providers and facilities about treatments meant to prevent worsening conditions in people already sick with the virus. The memo addressed the recent authorization of Covid-19 oral antiviral treatments, such as Paxlovid, as well as a severe shortage of those treatments and monoclonal antibodies. It warned that supplies of oral antivirals "will be extremely limited initially," and that only one monoclonal antibody product is effective against the omicron variant, the dominant variant in New York. The state told health care providers to prioritize the therapies for people who are moderately to severely immunocompromised regardless of their vaccination status, or those 65 and older and not fully vaccinated with at least one risk factor for severe illness. Patients have to meet other criteria for oral antiviral treatment, including being at least 12 years old, testing positive for SARS-CoV-2, having mild to moderate symptoms, not being hospitalized for those symptoms, and being able to start the treatment within five days of starting symptoms. Other criteria include having a medical condition or other factors that increase their risk for severe illness. "Non-white race or Hispanic/Latino ethnicity should be considered a risk factor, as longstanding systemic health and social inequities have contributed to an increased risk of severe illness and death from Covid-19." We asked the state Department of Health about Trump’s statement that white people have to go to the back of the line to get treatment. "No one in New York who is otherwise qualified based on their individual risk factors will be turned away from life-saving treatment because of their race or any demographic identifier," said spokesperson Erin Silk. The Department of Health is advising health care providers to consider a number of health-based risk factors when providing this treatment, Silk said. "These are neither qualifications nor requirements for treatments," she said. These risk factors include medical conditions, age, and vaccination status. The state included non-white race or Hispanic/Latino ethnicity based on guidance from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, she said. The CDC has recognized that Covid-19 mortality rates are higher among certain demographic groups, including senior citizens, immunocompromised individuals and non-white/Hispanic communities. What the experts say CDC data show that compared to white people, the risk of death from Covid-19 is nearly twice as high for Black people and twice as high for Hispanic and Latino populations. Adjusted for age, those who are Hispanic, Black, or American Indian and Alaska Native are at least twice as likely to die from Covid-19 as their white counterparts, according to the health care research organization KFF. Featured Fact-check Instagram posts stated on October 12, 2022 in an Instagram post Pfizer executive “admits” vaccine was never tested for preventing transmission. By Jeff Cercone • October 13, 2022 White people who are immunocompromised still receive treatment under the guidance, said S. Matthew Liao, director of the Center for Bioethics in the School of Global Public Health at New York University. The policy acknowledges that Black and Hispanic people are twice as likely to die from COVID-19 as white people, he said. To get the treatment, you already have to be sick and have other risk factors. Race and ethnicity is one risk factor under this guidance, Liao said. David Larsen, a public health professor at Syracuse University, said New York considers being Black and Hispanic a pre-existing condition. But that does not mean the state is withholding treatment from white New Yorkers. Erika Martin, an associate professor and applied health policy researcher at the University at Albany, said health care providers already account for risk factors for severe Covid-19, such as chemotherapy treatment. This guidance reminds them that race and ethnicity can put someone at risk of severe infection. When health authorities talk about scarce resources, such as these Covid treatments, they want to distribute them in a way that will provide the most benefit, Martin said. In this instance, the way to do that is to distribute them to people at the highest risk for severe disease. A CDC report released on Jan. 21 found that distribution of monoclonal antibody treatments were not equitable along racial and ethnic lines, according to data from 41 health care systems. We reached out to Trump’s office for any additional supporting information but did not hear back. Other fact-checkers have found no evidence for Trump’s statement and that he wrongly interpreted New York’s policy. Our ruling Trump said white people in New York State have to go to the back of the line for medical care. He makes a nonsensical claim that "if you’re white, you don’t get the vaccine." There's plenty of vaccine. There's no need to withhold it from anybody. There is no evidence that white New Yorkers who are sick with COVID-19 and have other risk factors are being denied treatment because patients of other races are receiving it. The Department of Health memo instructs health care providers to consider several factors when distributing Covid-19 treatments that are in short supply. Race and ethnicity are factors to consider because the risk of death for Black and Hispanic Covid-19 patients is twice as much as for their white peers. Trump did not acknowledge the ways that white New Yorkers qualify for these treatments, nor did he say that race and ethnicity is only one risk factor on a list of many others that health care providers should consider. He distorted a state health guidance to make a ridiculous claim. We rate this claim Pants on Fire.

“Biden announces Medicare stimulus that provides free dental work to all Seniors who need it! Crowns and implants included. Open enrollment is underway for certain private Medicare plans, and it has brought an onslaught of misinformation about what benefits are available from the traditional federal health insurance program for senior citizens and those with disabilities. "Biden announces Medicare stimulus that provides free dental work to all Seniors who need it! Crowns and implants included," says a Jan. 6 post on Facebook. The post links to a website that says senior citizens can receive free dental work if they apply by Jan. 31. The website also says, "Thanks to this new Medicare update, those aged 64+ are able to take advantage of no-cost dental work. This includes crowns, implants, x-rays, fillings, cleanings, and more!" The post was flagged as part of Facebook’s efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about our partnership with Facebook.) The claim is wrong. Biden did not announce a Medicare stimulus for dental work; footage in the post of him speaking is from before he was elected president. And free dental work is not available through traditional Medicare insurance. Some private insurance companies sell certain Medicare plans, called Medicare Advantage, that are allowed to offer coverage for dental work. The plans must be purchased and coverage varies. Video footage in the post shows Biden saying, in part, "So here’s the bottom line. My plan lowers healthcare costs, gets us universal coverage quickly, when Americans desperately need it, now." But the clip is from a June 25, 2020, campaign appearance, when Biden spoke about "the Affordable Care Act and his plan to make it available to every American," according to C-SPAN. By law, Medicare cannot cover most dental care or dental procedures, according to a spokesperson for the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. That includes cleanings, fillings, tooth extractions, dentures and dental plates. There are some limited exceptions, such as certain dental services provided in a hospital setting as part of another covered procedure, the spokesperson said. An example would be reconstruction of a jaw following an accidental injury. Featured Fact-check Instagram posts stated on October 10, 2022 in a post “Premature babies are at a much higher risk of injury from immunizations than full-term babies.” By Andy Nguyen • October 13, 2022 Biden’s stalled Build Back Better social-spending bill originally included a proposal to add dental, hearing and vision coverage to the traditional Medicare program. But the dental portion of the proposal was scrapped during early negotiations. Medicare Advantage plans from private insurance companies are allowed to offer coverage for things that aren't covered by original Medicare, including dental care. But unlike the post’s claim that dental work will be free to all seniors, the Medicare Advantage plans must be purchased, and coverage varies by plan. The Facebook post, on a Facebook page called Latest Medicare, links to a website called LatestMedi.com, which is a single webpage with a question asking users whether they are older than 64. Whether users click yes or no, the link leads to the same place, a website called Medicareplan.com, which indicates it is owned and operated by Assurance IQ, an insurance company. Media inquiries regarding Assurance IQ are directed to Prudential, which purchased the company in 2019. We contacted Prudential for comment but have not received a reply. Our ruling A Facebook post says, "Biden announces Medicare stimulus that provides free dental work to all Seniors who need it! Crowns and implants included." Biden did not make such an announcement; footage in the post of him speaking is from before he was elected president. Free dental work is not available through traditional Medicare insurance. By law, the federal insurance program cannot cover most dental care or dental procedures. Some private insurance companies sell Medicare Advantage plans that are allowed to offer coverage for dental work. The plans must be purchased and coverage varies. We rate this claim False

Quotes show Joseph Stalin and Joe Biden expressed similar views about counting votes Though divided by countries, decades and ideologies, former Soviet leader Joseph Stalin and President Joe Biden are being compared in a recent Facebook post that looks at the purported words of both men. "It’s not who votes that counts," Stalin supposedly said. "It’s who counts the votes." Biden, meanwhile, is quoted as saying: "The struggle’s no longer just who gets to vote. It’s about who gets to count the vote." This post was flagged as part of Facebook’s efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about our partnership with Facebook.) Let’s start with Stalin, who ruled the Soviet Union for nearly three decades. In 2019, we checked a similar claim that he said: "It is enough that the people know there was an election. The people who cast the votes decide nothing. The people who count the votes decide everything." We rated that attribution false because there’s no authoritative source that proves Stalin said it. The abbreviated version that appears in this Facebook post also lacks a credible citation. Members of an editorial board for the Stalin Digital Archive, a database of documents and images that resulted from a collaboration between the Russian State Archive of Social and Political History and Yale University Press, have told us that they don’t think Stalin said this, or anything close to it. J. Arch Getty, a history professor at UCLA, said he wasn’t aware of any original source for the quote. "In my extensive archival research in Stalin’s personal archive, I found nothing like this," Getty said. "There are many apocryphal quotes wrongly attributed to Stalin and I think this is one of them." "Almost certainly apocryphal," agreed James Harris, a senior lecturer in modern European history at the University of Leeds in England. "Many things that are attributed to Stalin are false," warned Ron Suny, a professor of social and political history at the University of Michigan. But Mark Kramer, director of the Cold War studies program at Harvard University, pointed us to something close to the various voting statements that have been attributed to Stalin. In memoirs written after his retirement, Stalin’s former personal secretary, Boris Bazhanov, claimed Stalin said: "Я считаю, что совершенно неважно, кто и как будет в партии голосовать; но вот что чрезвычайно важно, это кто и как будет считать голоса." It translates to: "I regard it as completely unimportant who in the party will vote and how, but it is extremely important who will count the votes and how." Featured Fact-check Facebook posts stated on October 8, 2022 in a Facebook post There’s “evidence of a massive transfer of completed, curated ballots” that are fraudulent in the 2022 election. By Ciara O'Rourke • October 11, 2022 Bazhanov said Stalin was talking about the voting procedures for higher organs of the Communist Party, according to Kramer. "There is no way to know for sure whether he is accurately recounting Stalin’s words, if Stalin in fact said such a thing," Kramer said. "Hence, I regard this as a statement attributed to Stalin by his former secretary Boris Bazhanov." David Brandenberger, a history professor at the University of Richmond, said Bazhanov fled the Soviet Union in 1928 and then published his "rather unreliable muckraking memoir in 1930." "Most experts consider Bazhanov’s Stalin quotation to be apocryphal," he said. Now for Biden. The White House did not respond to PolitiFact’s questions about the post, and searching for the exact quote that appears in it, we found only one hit: a Reddit post. But Biden has made similar remarks on several occasions, referring to his concerns about the threat of election subversion. In July, for example, Biden said: "It’s no longer just who gets to vote or making it easier for eligible voters to vote. It’s about who gets to count the vote — who gets to count whether or not your vote counted at all. It’s about moving from independent election administrators who work for the people to polarized state legislatures and partisan actors who work for political parties. To me, this is simple. This is election subversion. It’s the most dangerous threat to voting and the integrity of free and fair elections in our history. Never before have they decided who gets to count — count — what votes count." "This struggle is no longer just over who gets to vote, or making it easier for eligible people to vote," Biden said in a video his account tweeted in October. "It’s about who gets to count the votes — whether they should count at all. Jim Crow in the 21st century is now a sinister combination of voter suppression and election subversion." In December he said: "Today, the right to vote and the rule of law are under unrelenting assault from Republican governors, attorney generals, secretaries of state, state legislators. They’re following my predecessor deep into the abyss. The struggle is no longer just who gets to vote or making it easier for eligible people to vote. It’s about who gets to count the vote and whether your vote counts at all. It’s a sinister combination of voter suppression and election subversion. It’s un-American, it’s un-democratic, it’s unpatriotic. And, sadly, it is not unprecedented now." And speaking to reporters on Jan. 13 after meeting the Senate Democratic Caucus, Biden said: "State legislative bodies continue to change the law not as to who can vote, but who gets to count the vote — count the vote. Count the vote! It’s about election subversion, not just whether or not people get to vote. Who counts the vote? That’s what this is about. That’s what makes this so different than anything else we’ve ever done." We sought some insight from the Brennan Center for Justice, a nonprofit law and public policy institute at the New York University’s law school. Wendy Weiser, vice president of the group’s democracy program, said there’s been a push in some states to "politicize the election administration process and to put partisans in a position where they might be able to engage in election sabotage." In other words: Legislation like a bill in Arizona that would have empowered state legislatures to reject the results of an election, or a Texas bill that would have granted that power to an elected, partisan judge, according to the center. RELATED VIDEO But Biden’s comments were criticizing these efforts, Weiser said — not endorsing them. And suggesting that what he said is similar to a Russian dictator’s election policies "seems very implausible as an interpretation, and just not remotely believable." Even if Stalin said the words about counting votes that have been attributed to him — and experts have told us they don’t think he did — context matters. Stalin consolidated power and oversaw an election that only allowed uncontested candidates. Biden, who is lobbying for the passage of voting rights legislation backed by Democrats, has been speaking out against efforts he says will give non-neutral parties control over election outcomes. We rate this post False. CORRECTION: This story was updated to correct the title of David Brandenberger. He is a history professor at the University of Richmond, not an associate history professo

“The CDC admits that natural immunity from prior infections is superior to vaccinated immunity alone. A blog post claims that according to a study, people who are unvaccinated and previously infected with COVID-19 have better protection against the coronavirus than some fully vaccinated people. "BOMBSHELL: The CDC admits that natural immunity from prior infections is superior to vaccinated immunity alone," the Jan. 19 post claims, citing a study from the federal health agency Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The post was flagged as part of Facebook’s efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about our partnership with Facebook.) The blog post gives the impression that COVID-19 vaccination is not helpful for people who have had the virus, and that previously infected people will be able to avoid hospitalization and death if they get COVID-19 again. But that ignores the limited scope of the study and dismisses the conclusion made by researchers — that vaccination can help prevent serious illness, hospitalization and death. A previous COVID-19 infection does not guarantee that a person will not need medical care if they get the virus again. CDC study The blog post cites a CDC study that looked at how people fared against the COVID-19 delta variant between May and November 2021. The delta variant was first reported in India before making its way to the United States in March 2021, according to the CDC. Researchers looked at infection and hospitalization rates among four groups of people in New York and California: Vaccinated people who had previously been infected with the virus Vaccinated people who had not previously been infected Unvaccinated people who had previously been infected Unvaccinated people who had not previously been infected Researchers found that people who had a natural immunity from a previous COVID-19 infection were better protected against the virus during the delta-fueled surge than vaccinated people who had never been infected. But the CDC offered several caveats about its analysis. The CDC said it completed its study before the extensive spread of the more infectious omicron variant, "for which vaccine or infection-derived immunity might be diminished." The study also happened when most people didn’t have access to a booster dose of the COVID-19 vaccine, which would provide additional protection against the virus. Featured Fact-check Instagram posts stated on October 12, 2022 in an Instagram post Pfizer executive “admits” vaccine was never tested for preventing transmission. By Jeff Cercone • October 13, 2022 The study also had a limited sample size and did not include information about the severity of previous infections or factor in deaths from the virus. COVID-19 vaccination remains important The CDC study’s main takeaway "clearly shows" that vaccination is the safest form of protection against COVID-19, and it provides additional protection for people who have already been infected, Dr. Erica Pan, state epidemiologist for the California Department of Public Health, told PolitiFact. "It shows that people who remain unvaccinated are at the greatest risk of hospitalization and death," she said. "Outside of this (CDC) study, recent data on the highly contagious omicron variant shows that getting a booster provides significant additional protection against infection, hospitalization and death." Another CDC report, from October 2021, affirmed that people who have been infected with the virus should still get vaccinated. Vaccinations coupled with a prior infection provide stronger protections against severe disease, hospitalization and death related to the virus than natural immunity alone. A study from the Mayo Clinic found that unvaccinated people who have previously been infected are twice as likely to get the virus again as those who are fully vaccinated. Meanwhile, a Johns Hopkins Medicine study shows that a fully vaccinated person who has been previously infected will have higher levels of antibodies that can help stave off another COVID-19 infection than an unvaccinated person who has had the virus. Our ruling A blog post claims, "the CDC admits that natural immunity from prior infections is superior to vaccinated immunity alone." The post is misleading and omits key details. CDC researchers found that during the COVID-19 surge driven by the delta variant, unvaccinated people who had already had the virus were less likely to get COVID-19 than fully vaccinated people who never had the disease. However, the study concluded that unvaccinated people are still at a high risk of reinfection and that the best defense against the virus remains being fully vaccinated. The study was done prior to the surge from the omicron variant and before COVID-19 vaccine booster shots became widely available. The statement contains an element of truth but ignores critical facts that would give a different impression. We rate it Mostly Fals

In Iowa, “since we have put a number of the voting laws into place over the last several years — voter ID is one of those — we've actually seen voter participation increase, even in off-election years. U.S. Sen. Joni Ernst, R-Iowa, spent time this past week defending Republican-led efforts to beat back Democrat-led proposals for how elections are handled in the United States. Speaking on ABC News’ "This Week" Sunday morning news program, Ernst told co-anchor Martha Raddatz: "I would also say, since we have put a number of the voting laws into place over the last several years — voter ID is one of those — we've actually seen voter participation increase, even in off-election years." She was talking about Iowa when making the comment. And, indeed, Iowa’s 2020 election attracted record-high turnout of 1.7 million voters, with a little more than 1 million voting by absentee ballot. In 2018, when state offices were on the non-presidential year ballot in Iowa, 1.3 million people voted, 547,200 by absentee ballot, state election records show. Iowa turnout hit a record for off-year voting in 2021, when 425,000 Iowans cast ballots for school board and local elections, the Iowa Secretary of State Paul Pate’s office reported. Voter turnout in the off-year 2019 election reached 359,000. The 2021 total amounted to a little fewer than 20% of eligible voters — not great for elections Pate says are important because of their local impact, but an improvement from when city and school elections were held separately, Kevin Hall, Pate’s spokesperson, wrote in an email to PolitiFact Iowa. Before a change in Iowa law, effected in 2019, Iowa school board elections were held in September during odd-numbered years. Some context is needed for the 2020 election turnout, because Iowans had more options for casting votes than in previous years because of the COVID-19 pandemic. For example, election officials sent absentee ballot request forms to every active registered voter in Iowa that year for what Pate said were safety concerns during the pandemic. County election officials used drop-box guidelines to ensure that absentee votes were cast. Rules for drop-offs varied county to county before the 2021 law enacted uniform rules. Presidential election years traditionally draw more voters, but Iowa’s 2020 efforts to get more to vote absentee affected that turnout, state election officials said. "I believe Secretary Pate’s mailing of absentee ballot request forms to every active registered voter ahead of the June 2020 primary election unquestionably helped propel that to record turnout due to the uncertainty of COVID and many Iowans choosing to vote absentee," Hall wrote to PolitiFact Iowa. The ABC News appearance wasn’t the first time Ernst, who ran Montgomery County’s elections as auditor from 2005 to 2011, had made her point about Iowa’s election laws not negatively affecting turnout. She wrote in her Jan. 14, 2022, newsletter: "In 2017, when the Iowa legislature modernized our state’s election laws — which included requiring voter ID — many Democrats warned the law was ‘dangerous,’ an ‘unnecessary hurdle,’ and a ‘significant barrier’ for anyone who is not a white male. They could not have been further from the truth. Hall said Iowa does not have statewide data on people turned away for failing to have an identification card. The state gives registered voters who don't have an Iowa driver’s license or other picture identification free Voter ID PIN cards and allows another person to attest to the voter’s identity, he said. The law began with a soft rollout in 2018, when voters who didn’t have a photo ID signed an oath attesting to their identity, before it was implemented fully in 2019. Iowans could vote as far out as 29 days before Election Day in 2020, which was fewer than the 40 days allowed in elections up to 2017, the year to which Ernst refers in her newsletter. The national average for early voting in person is 23 days, up one day from what it was nationally in 2021. Featured Fact-check Facebook posts stated on October 8, 2022 in a Facebook post There’s “evidence of a massive transfer of completed, curated ballots” that are fraudulent in the 2022 election. By Ciara O'Rourke • October 11, 2022 The time to cast an absentee ballot in Iowa was shortened by the 2021 election law to 20 days and those ballots now must arrive at the county auditor’s office by 8 p.m. on Election Day. Before the new law, ballots could be counted if postmarked on or before Election Day and arriving at county auditors’ offices by noon the following Monday. County auditors in Iowa reported receiving more than 6,000 Iowa absentee ballots after Election Day in 2020 that counted then but would not under the 2021 law. Other changes were made, too, in 2021. Voters wanting absentee ballots need to request them and no longer can rely on county auditors sending one unsolicited. On Election Day, Iowa’s polls close at 8 p.m. instead of 9 p.m., as had been the case. We reported previously that Republican and Democratic party leaders said Iowa’s election laws before and after the 2020 election promoted election integrity and were sound. But Republicans lawmakers said when approving the GOP-backed 2021 law that Iowans wanted changes to ensure that elections were secure. Democrats said elections were secure and the new law would drive some voters from the polls. The American Civil Liberties Union in Iowa disputes Republican claims that voter ID laws like Iowa’s are fair. Having an ID requires drivers’ licenses or some other form of registration with a photo, having another person in the voting district attest to the person’s identity or filing Election Day registration documents. About 11% of Iowa’s adults didn’t have a drivers’ license, according to a 2014 congressional report, and those wanting a picture ID for voting have to endure bureaucracy, take off work during business hours, get child care and someone to drive them to get the ID, the ACLU says. Registered voters in Iowa without a driver's license or non-operator ID are automatically mailed a voter ID card from the Secretary of State's office, and people with IDs can request them for free. Photos are not required on the cards. Our ruling Ernst said voter turnout has gone up in Iowa since the state’s Republican-led Legislature enacted tighter voting laws. The numbers confirm the claim. Voting in 2018 was done in Iowa with less time than in previous years for absentee ballots and a required picture ID because of a 2017 state law. The same was true in 2019. The 2021 off-year turnout was a record after more changes that reduced the time for casting absentee ballots from 29 days to 20 days. Turnout reached records for off-year elections, thanks in large part to combining school and local elections, elections officials say. Turnout reached an all-time record with the 2020 presidential election, too, although special efforts to get voters to cast absentee ballots during the pandemic in 2020 figure into that year’s turnout. We rate this claim True. EDITOR'S NOTE: We updated this story Jan. 27 to clarify information about Iowa's voter ID requirements

“There’s 150 I believe now – it’s over 100 professional athletes dead, professional athletes, the prime of their life, dropping dead that are vaccinated, right on the pitch, right on the field, right on the court. NBA All-Star John Stockton made headlines after he revealed in a recent interview that his alma mater, Gonzaga University, suspended his basketball season tickets after he refused to comply with the school’s mask mandate for sporting events. Masks aren’t Stockton’s only issue. The former Utah Jazz player has detailed his stance against COVID-19 vaccines and lockdowns for some time and appeared in a 2021 documentary called "Covid and the Vaccine: Truth, Lies and Misconceptions Revealed." Now, he’s made a series of false claims about the pandemic in an interview with his hometown newspaper the Spokesman-Review in Spokane, Washington, and notably repeated a persistent myth about professional athletes abruptly dying from the vaccines. "And I think it’s highly recorded now, there’s 150 I believe now — it’s over 100 professional athletes dead, professional athletes, the prime of their life, dropping dead that are vaccinated, right on the pitch, right on the field, right on the court," Stockton told the newspaper on Jan. 23. PolitiFact could not reach Stockton to ask him about his evidence. But we have debunked similar claims that said professional athletes were supposedly collapsing due to heart issues brought on by the COVID-19 vaccines, and while the narrative continues to be spread by critics of the pandemic like Stockton, there is still no credible evidence to support it. Previous lists of athletes who purportedly died from the COVID-19 vaccines have included people who hadn’t died or hadn’t gotten the vaccine. There have been no official reports linking the vaccines to heart issues in athletes, and multiple sports cardiologists have called the claims unfounded. "To date, I am not aware of a single COVID vaccine-related cardiac complication in the professional sports," said Matthew Martinez, a sports cardiologist who works with the National Football League, National Basketball Association, National Hockey League and Major League Soccer and who is the director of sports cardiology at Morristown Medical Center in New Jersey. The same goes for Jonathan Kim, an associate professor of medicine and chief of sports cardiology at Emory University in Atlanta. "I am not aware of any reports that vaccines in athletes are causing cardiac issues," he said. While the safety and effectiveness of the COVID-19 vaccines have been well documented, the shots have been associated with inflammation of the heart muscle, called myocarditis, with teenage boys and young men most likely to be affected. But the risk is very low, and most cases are mild with a quick recovery. Doctors say the benefits of vaccination outweigh the risk of myocarditis. While still rare, the risk of myocarditis also appears to be higher following a COVID-19 infection, with one study finding that boys and young men infected with the virus are up to six times more likely to develop the heart condition than those who have received the vaccine. The CDC says it has not detected any unusual or unexpected patterns for deaths following immunization that would indicate that the COVID-19 vaccines are causing or contributing to deaths, outside of nine confirmed deaths following the Janssen vaccine from Johnson & Johnson. These deaths resulted from complications of thrombosis, a rare and serious adverse reaction involving blood clots, the agency said. Examples of prominent athletes abruptly dying from vaccine, and why they’re wrong One person who appeared in previous lists about athletes who died while playing is Italian soccer player Giuseppe Perrino. But Perrino’s death hasn’t been linked to the COVID-19 vaccines. Featured Fact-check Instagram posts stated on October 12, 2022 in an Instagram post Pfizer executive “admits” vaccine was never tested for preventing transmission. By Jeff Cercone • October 13, 2022 He died of a heart attack on June 2 while playing in a soccer game honoring his brother, who had died of a heart attack while cycling in 2018. A headline on a news story about Perrino’s death reads, "Heart attack kills Giuseppe Perrino like brother Rocco." Stories about his death do not mention COVID-19 vaccination. Another person cited, Dutch speed skater Kjeld Nuis, 32, did have a heart problem in July 2021 a week after he received the COVID-19 vaccine, according to news coverage at the time, but he didn’t die. Nuis posted on Instagram later that month saying that he was fine and that he was at training camp. He did not say whether he believed his COVID-19 vaccination contributed to his heart problem or whether it was linked to his athletic activity. Nuis had tested positive for COVID-19 in October 2020. Other examples include: Danish soccer player Christian Eriksen, 29, collapsed during a match on June 12, and his team director said he wasn’t vaccinated for COVID-19. He is still alive. Former French soccer player, Franck Berrier, 37, died of a heart attack in August while playing tennis — two years after retiring from soccer because of heart problems. Stories about his death do not mention any link to COVID-19 vaccination. Keyontae Johnson, a 22-year-old University of Florida basketball player, collapsed on Dec. 12, 2020, days before the COVID-19 vaccine was made available to people in the U.S. His collapse wasn’t related to COVID-19, according to a Feb. 3, 2021, statement from his family. A young athlete experiencing cardiac arrest is not common, but it’s also not unprecedented. And there are different reasons an athlete might collapse. Michael Emery, co-director of the Cleveland Clinic Sports Cardiology Center, said that dehydration, heat stroke and genetic heart conditions, among other factors, can lead to collapse. NBA star Kareem Abdul-Jabbar criticized Stockton over his remarks. "I think John’s reaction to the vaccine is extreme and not based on reality or facts," Abdul-Jabbar told CNN. "If John could just check the facts out, he would understand that this vaccine is saving lives and preventing people from having serious reactions to the virus. It won’t eliminate the virus overnight, but it will stop people from dying and will stop people from becoming seriously ill." Our ruling Stockton claimed over 100 professional athletes who are vaccinated are "dropping dead, right on the pitch, right on the field, right on the court." This is not backed up by any science or actual data. There have been no official reports linking the vaccines to heart issues in athletes and sports cardiologists said they haven’t seen athletes collapse after getting vaccinated against the virus. Lists of athletes this has supposedly happened to have included people who didn’t die, didn’t get the vaccine, or had a family history of heart issues. We rate this Fals

The Biden-Harris administration "wants to hand out $450,000 to illegal immigrants. Businessman Jim Lamon is seeking to win a GOP Senate primary in Arizona, defeat Democratic incumbent Sen. Mark Kelly and possibly help Republicans retake control of the Senate. One path he sees is through immigration rhetoric. The political newcomer is running one ad that says Kelly "supports an open border" and another that says Kelly "admits there is no plan to address (the) border crisis." Perhaps the most explosive claim, however, attacks President Joe Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris. A Lamon ad that’s running on Facebook and Instagram shows an image that resembles a bank check and bears the Biden-Harris 2020 campaign logo. The purported check is written to "Illegal Immigrants" for $450,000. Text around the check says: "Do you support giving illegal immigrants $450,000 checks?" Together, they give the impression that this was something Biden wants to do. The ad, which started running Jan. 11 and was still active as of Jan. 26, links to a page that solicits donations to Lamon’s campaign. But the claim is inaccurate, and the basis for it is several weeks out of date. $450,000 was floated, rejected The claim relates to the aftermath of a Trump administration policy that led to thousands of children, including infants, being separated from their parents upon their arrival at the southern border. The policy was a key component of the Trump administration’s crackdown on illegal immigration, aimed at deterring people from coming to the U.S. without permission. But it also affected families who were seeking asylum due to persecution or security fears in their home countries. In those cases, they were following the protocols for seeking asylum. Amid a public outcry, Trump in June 2018 issued an executive order to keep children and parents together in detention. Federal authorities have since struggled to reunite all the families who were separated because of poor recordkeeping when the policy was in place, and trouble locating parents who had been deported. Featured Fact-check Blake Masters stated on October 15, 2022 in a tweet Immigrants illegally in the country are treated “better than military veterans.” By Jon Greenberg • October 21, 2022 Biden denounced the policy as a "moral and national shame" and set up a task force to coordinate reunification of families. In late October, news reports said the Biden administration was in talks to settle lawsuits filed on behalf of parents and children who were separated. "Many of the lawsuits describe lasting mental-health problems for the children from the trauma of the months without their parents in harsh conditions, including anxiety, a fear of strangers and nightmares," the Wall Street Journal reported. The settlement offers being discussed were up to $450,000 a person, the reports said. On Nov. 3, a few days after the news reports, Biden was asked by a reporter about the prospect of $450,000 payments. "That’s not going to happen," Biden replied. The next day, White House principal deputy press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre told reporters that Biden had reacted to "the dollar figure," but that he was "perfectly comfortable" with the Justice Department trying to settle the cases. She said the department "made clear to the plaintiffs that the reported figures are higher than anywhere that a settlement can land." On Dec. 16, news reports said the Justice Department had pulled out of the settlement talks. We emailed Lamon’s campaign asking for information to back up the statement in his ad. A reply referred to a fact-check we did on a claim about Biden and the talks that was made in October — before Biden’s remark and before the settlement talks ended. But even that fact-check cited reporting that Biden had "​​seemingly expressed disagreement with the $450,000 figure." Lamon gained attention earlier this month with another ad that attacked Biden with a phrase that has become a proxy for an anti-Biden epithet. Yahoo said it refused to run the ad because the phrase is "overly inflammatory and offensive," according to news reports. Our ruling Lamon said the Biden-Harris administration "wants to hand out $450,000 to illegal immigrants." It was reported in October that the Biden administration was in talks to potentially offer settlements of up to $450,000 a person to resolve lawsuits filed on behalf of parents and children who were separated at the border under the Trump administration’s immigration enforcement policy. The families included people who were legally seeking asylum in the U.S. When asked a few days later about the $450,000 figure, Biden said, "That’s not going to happen." By Dec. 16, settlement talks ended. We found no evidence to support the claim that the Biden administration wants to hand out $450,000 to any group of immigrants. We rate the statement Fals

American citizens “pay $155 billion annually to make sure illegal immigrants are taken care of better than American citizens Another year, another false claim about the cost of illegal immigration going viral. Although former President Donald Trump is no longer in office trying to rally support for his border wall, the debate about illegal immigration continues, and one old immigration post is regaining traction on Facebook. "Chuck Schumer: ‘why should American citizens be responsible to pay 5 billion to fund the wall?’" asks a screenshot of a Tweet that was shared on Facebook. "Better question. Why should American citizens be responsible to pay $155 billion annually to make sure illegal immigrants are taken care of better than American citizens?" The 2019 post, which people were sharing and commenting on as recently as Jan. 20, was flagged as part of Facebook’s efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about our partnership with Facebook.) The original tweet came from an account that has since been suspended and we could not find the date it was first posted, but Sen. Chuck Schumer was frequently at odds in 2018 and 2019 with then-President Donald Trump over the president’s plan to build a wall at the southern U.S. border. In years past, PolitiFact has debunked claims that illegal immigration costs taxpayers $113 billion, $130 billion and even $250 billion annually. We searched news clips and asked experts, but PolitiFact was unable to find a report that estimated illegal immigration costs American taxpayers $155 billion annually. "The internet is full of a wide range of estimates of the costs of unauthorized immigrants and also of the benefits they bring to the United States," said Julia Gelatt, a senior policy analyst with the Migration Policy Institute. "These estimates all focus on different types of costs and contributions, and many do not give a clear explanation of their methods." She said she was not aware of "any good, well-researched and well-documented estimates" of the costs and benefits of immigrants illegally in the U.S. that she could recommend. Even so, she said that the claim seemed far-fetched: "$155 billion sounds high for the estimated costs, but it is difficult to assess this claim without knowing what data and information was used to generate that estimate." Regardless of the cost, that doesn’t mean immigrants in the country illegally are "taken care of better than American citizens." In many cases, immigrants in the country illegally are ineligble for the assistance programs available to U.S. citizens. Determining the exact cost of illegal immigration is difficult, but some analysts have tried. The Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank, produced a 2013 report that estimated that immigrants living in the U.S. illegally "impose a net fiscal burden of around $54.5 billion per year." But that estimate, which is now eight years old, is still more than $100 million off from the post’s claim. Featured Fact-check Blake Masters stated on October 15, 2022 in a tweet Immigrants illegally in the country are treated “better than military veterans.” By Jon Greenberg • October 21, 2022 One of the highest more recent estimates available comes from a 2017 report from the Federation for American Immigration Reform or FAIR, a group that advocates for reducing legal and illegal immigration. Its report concluded that "In 2017, the total cost of illegal immigration for the United States – at the federal, state, and local levels – was approximately $116 billion." The authors of the report said they estimated the total cost of illegal immigration by subtracting the tax revenue paid by immigrants here illegally from "the total economic impact of illegal migration," though there is no clear consensus on the overall economic impact. Critics of FAIR’s 2017 report said the organization vastly overestimated the net cost of illegal immigration. The Cato Institute, a libertarian public policy think tank, called the report "fatally flawed" and published a detailed critique of FAIR’s work: "FAIR’s report reaches that conclusion by vastly overstating the costs of illegal immigration, undercounting the tax revenue they generate, inflating the number of illegal immigrants, counting millions of U.S. citizens as illegal immigrants, and by concocting a method of estimating the fiscal costs that is rejected by all economists who work on this subject." Steven Camarota of the Center for Immigration Studies, a group that uses data to argue for low levels of immigration, said he conducted his most comprehensive analysis of the cost of immigrants in the U.S. illegally in 2017. He said he tried "to take into account all their taxes and all the services they use in their lifetime, while excluding U.S. born descendants." Camarota noted that his lifetime estimate heavily discounts future costs and more heavily weights current costs. In 2018, he adjusted that estimate to 2018 dollars, suggesting that each immigrant in the U.S. illegally costs nearly $70,000 during their lifetime. "The numbers are large, but remember it is over a lifetime," he said. When asked what immigrants in the country illegally cost each year, on average, Camarota said "​​a back of the envelope estimate" based on his lifetime cost analysis would fall somewhere between about $24 billion and $48 billion annually, depending on the methodology used. That’s significantly below the $116 billion estimate reached in the FAIR report and the $155 billion claimed in the Facebook post. Our ruling A Facebook post claimed American citizens "pay $155 billion annually to make sure illegal immigrants are taken care of better than American citizens." We couldn’t find evidence suggesting illegal immigration costs $155 billion annually. Determining the exact cost of illegal immigration is complex and a source of ongoing debate among experts. Available reports estimate that immigrants in the U.S. illegally cost less than $155 billion annually — with one of the highest totals estimating a cost of $116 billion annually. Regardless of the cost, that doesn’t mean immigrants in the country illegally are "taken care of better than American citizens." We rate this claim Fals

COVID-19-induced pneumonia is "is actually mast cell degranulation of the lungs," a type of allergic reaction It's well known that a severe case of COVID-19 can cause a series of complications, including pneumonia, an infection that causes inflammation of the air sacs in the lung. But according to a claim spreading on social media, pneumonia triggered by COVID-19 isn't pneumonia at all, but rather a type of fast-occurring allergic reaction to the virus. Multiple Facebook users reposted a message claiming that the condition occurring in COVID-19 patients is really "mast cell degranulation" of the lungs. "Put simply, it's an allergic reaction occurring after the viral phase ends, most likely to something in the viral particles left over after the body deals with the virus," the post says. "The reason you can't tell it's an allergic reaction is because it's happening in the lungs, so you experience only symptoms of chest tightness and fatigue!" The posts were flagged as part of Facebook’s efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about our partnership with Facebook.) The Facebook posts cite a doctor's findings as evidence. However, doctors we spoke to disputed the theory, and reiterated that COVID-19 pneumonia is just that — pneumonia. A closer look at the claim and its source For clarification on the term "mast cell degranulation," we turned to the American Academy of Allergy, Asthma and Immunology. It describes mast cells as allergy cells responsible for immediate allergic reactions. During an allergic reaction, these cells are triggered to release "mediators," which can bring on symptoms of an allergy, such as swelling or shortness of breath. The release of these mediators is called degranulation. The Facebook post cites the findings of Dr. Shankara Chetty, who is described as a natural science biologist and general family practitioner in South Africa. Chetty has become known for his belief that COVID-19 is "allergic in nature." He has promoted alternative treatments on platforms like YouTube. Other interviews with Chetty have also been published to social media platforms such as Twitter. The posts claim that Chetty had treated thousands of patients and monitored differences in the progression of symptoms between people with regular pneumonia and those with COVID-19 pneumonia. Chetty noticed that patients with COVID-19 pneumonia symptoms suddenly got worse after several days, "unlike" regular pneumonia, the posts say. And he observed that the patients’ flow of oxygen wasn’t restricted, but that they faced a rapid restriction in lung expansion, "unlike pneumonia." "It was then that he recognized the similarity this condition had with an allergic reaction," the posts read. "The second an allergic reaction happens, inflammation creates instant symptoms." COVID-19 pneumonia vs. an allergic reaction The claim is "unintelligible nonsense," said Dr. Mark Schleiss, a pediatrics professor and faculty member in the Division of Pediatric Infectious Diseases at the University of Minnesota. COVID-19 pneumonia is not an allergic reaction, Schleiss said, but mast cell activation — the triggering of the release of mediators — is one of the body’s reactions to COVID-19 pneumonia. "Mast cell activation is just a part of the myriad of downstream phenomena that occur with viral pneumonia," Schleiss said. Featured Fact-check Instagram posts stated on October 12, 2022 in an Instagram post Pfizer executive “admits” vaccine was never tested for preventing transmission. By Jeff Cercone • October 13, 2022 Many things other than allergies can trigger mast cell activation, said Schleiss, including eczema, swelling from an injury, or an infection like pneumonia. It’s a part of the reaction to something — not the cause. He likened the Facebook claim to a person suffering a broken nose from a fistfight, and blaming the redness and swelling on mast cell activation, rather than the punch or the fracture. Dr. Pranatharthi Chandrasekar, division chief of infectious diseases at Wayne State University in Detroit, said people shouldn’t even use the word "allergy" in describing COVID-19 pneumonia. That’s not how the illness works. "It’s wrong to say. It gives the wrong representation that … the person may be allergic to the virus," Chandrasekar said. "This is (a) virus attacking the body, and in return, the immune system is reacting." Chandrasekar explained how COVID-19 can turn into pneumonia: Within seven to 10 days, the virus first attacks the throat, and then begins descending into the lungs. It attacks the lungs, which causes viral pneumonia. "The immune system is triggered because of the viral illness, so the immune system (goes) astray," he said. Dr. Meilan King Han, professor of medicine in the division of pulmonary and critical care at the University of Michigan, pointed to a published study in the open-access journal Nature. It showed that COVID-19 has triggered mast cell degranulation, which resulted in hyper-inflammation and injury to the lung. But, Han said, this certainly isn’t the only thing that the virus does to our lungs. Symptoms of COVID-19 induced pneumonia include shortness of breath, increased heart rate and low blood pressure. Houston Methodist, the big hospital and health system, says that COVID-19 pneumonia can occur in both lungs, and recovery can take from several weeks up to many months. Healthline reports that treatment for COVID-19 pneumonia often requires oxygen therapy, and antibiotics if the viral pneumonia causes a bacterial infection. "After severe pneumonia, lung capacity is reduced, and muscles may be weak from being so ill," Houston Methodist says on its website. Both Chandrasekar and Schleiss agree that COVID-19 induced pneumonia is unlike other forms of pneumonia. But just because it can strike quickly, that doesn’t mean it’s similar to allergies. "I have been at the bedside of children who died of COVID pneumonia, I’m sad to say," said Schleiss. "It comes on pretty fast." Our ruling A widespread Facebook claim states that COVID-19 pneumonia is "actually mast cell degranulation of the lungs," which is an allergic reaction. Doctors we spoke to said there is no basis for the claim. They said mast cell activation is a part of the body’s reaction to COVID-19 pneumonia. It’s an immune response that can be caused by pneumonia or other triggers, such as an injury or skin condition. We rate the claim Fals

“All communications to families from the US Navy have been halted. A web show host set off alarms on Facebook by posting that the U.S. Navy had suddenly cut off communications between military members and their families. Brad Barton, who hosts a pro-Trump show called "The Lil’ Talk Show with Brad," wrote a brief post on Jan. 21: "Hearing rumblings that all communications to families from the US Navy have been halted. Something may very well be about to go down y'all!!" This post was flagged as part of Facebook’s efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about our partnership with Facebook.) We found no evidence to substantiate it. PolitiFact reached out to Barton for more information regarding this claim, but he did not respond. Some Facebook users commented on his post that they had, in fact, heard from their family members in the Navy. Featured Fact-check Viral image stated on October 27, 2022 in an Instagram post Video shows “military robots ready for war.” By Ciara O'Rourke • October 31, 2022 Neither the Navy nor the Pentagon would comment on whether any communication blackout between service members and their families had occurred. A Navy spokesperson, Lt. Cmdr. Devin Arneson, said the Navy makes every effort to maintain open communication between sailors and their families. The Navy’s ombudsman program "plays a vital role in establishing and maintaining current and accurate communication between the command and its family members," Arneson said. Communication between military personnel and their families or loved ones can be difficult or restricted at times, the news site Military.com reports. Internet or phone connections can be hindered depending on where the service member is stationed, or if their schedule has changed. Missions could also hinder communication. But we found no evidence for Barton’s claim that the Navy cut off all communication with families of service members. We rate his statement Fals

President Joe Biden gave Congress an exemption from vaccine mandat Since President Joe Biden first issued an executive order in September requiring federal workers to be vaccinated against COVID-19, some have expressed outrage at what they wrongly assumed was an exemption given to elected officials. "Why are elected officials exempt?" read the caption on a Jan. 22 Facebook post that showed a meme depicting White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki standing in the White House press briefing room. "Does President Biden’s mandate include Congress?" read words on the image. Then, below Psaki, a caption explained the supposed answer: "No, members of Congress are exempt from the vaccine mandate." Underneath, Morgan Freeman looked off to the side in apparent puzzlement: "This sh-- right here is why people know the vaccine mandate is a hoax." This post was flagged as part of Facebook’s efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about our partnership with Facebook.) Biden instituted his mandate on Sept. 9, 2021, as the delta variant was raging through the U.S. He ordered that healthcare workers, executive branch workers and contractors who do business with the federal government be vaccinated. He also ordered private businesses with more than 100 employees to require vaccination or weekly tests for their workers. The U.S. Supreme Court rejected that part of the mandate on Jan. 13, saying that Biden overstepped his authority by targeting private businesses. But the court did allow the mandate on health care workers to continue. The mandate for federal contractors is on hold after being blocked by a federal court in December, and a federal judge in Texas on Jan. 21 blocked Biden’s mandate that federal workers be vaccinated. Neither case has been heard by the Supreme Court. While the question of whether Biden’s vaccine mandate for federal workers and contractors can be enforced is for the courts to ultimately decide, the question of why members of Congress are exempt is a simple one: Biden doesn’t have the authority to impose a vaccine mandate on them. Featured Fact-check Instagram posts stated on October 12, 2022 in an Instagram post Pfizer executive “admits” vaccine was never tested for preventing transmission. By Jeff Cercone • October 13, 2022 "Another way to think about it is that members of Congress work directly for the people, not for President Biden," said David Super, a professor of law and economics at Georgetown Law. "He therefore has no power to give them orders. The same is true of federal judges." The U.S. government is divided into three separate, but equal branches of power: the executive, the legislative and judicial branches. Congress makes up the legislative branch, which passes the laws that the executive branch must then enforce. As the name implies, Biden’s executive order only applies to workers in the executive branch of government. It states that "each agency shall implement, to the extent consistent with applicable law, a program to require COVID-19 vaccination for all of its federal employees, with exceptions only as required by law." It also defines an agency as an "executive agency" under title 5 of the U.S. code, which reads "for the purpose of this title, "executive agency" means an executive department, a government corporation, and an independent establishment. Members of Congress and their staff are not subject. Our ruling A Facebook post says that Biden gave an exemption to his COVID-19 vaccine mandate to members of Congress. That is not true. Congress belongs to the legislative branch of government, and therefore was never subject to the president’s executive order, which applies only to the executive branch. Biden did not have the authority to mandate vaccines for members of Congress. We rate this claim Fals

Says Chuck Norris recorded a video in response to the Biden administration saying, “Our great country and freedom are under attack. "You f----- up now Joe!" reads the description of a video featuring actor Chuck Norris. "You done pissed Chuck Norris off!" In the video, Norris is standing with his wife and says, "We are here to talk about a growing concern we all share. If we look at history, our great country and freedom are under attack. We are at a tipping point and quite possibly our country as we know it may be lost forever if we don’t change the course our country is headed." He goes on to say they can no longer stand by and watch the country "go to socialism or something much worse." This Jan. 22, 2022, post was flagged as part of Facebook’s efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about our partnership with Facebook.) Featured Fact-check Instagram posts stated on October 10, 2022 in a post “Premature babies are at a much higher risk of injury from immunizations than full-term babies.” By Andy Nguyen • October 13, 2022 That’s because it wasn’t filmed in response to President Joe Biden, as the post suggests. Rather, Norris and his wife recorded this in 2012 to urge Americans to vote against then-President Barack Obama, who was up for re-election against Sen. Mitt Romney. Of course, Biden was Obama’s running mate at the time, but the video is now being presented in a way that suggests it was created recently in response to the current administration. That’s not accurate. We rate claims that this a video in response to the Biden administration False.

"Total deaths from COVID MUCH LOWER than reported. Since the COVID-19 pandemic began, some critics of measures to control the virus have downplayed its seriousness, suggesting the real death toll is much lower than what is being reported. Numbers released in the U.K. last month showing deaths solely attributed to COVID-19 have prompted another such claim. The headline for a YouTube video from "The Jimmy Dore Show" reads, "Total deaths from COVID MUCH LOWER than reported." Dore shares his interpretation of another YouTube video from a Britain named John Campbell, whose bio describes him as a "a retired Nurse Teacher" and emergency nurse with a Ph.D focused on nurse education. He has more than 2 million subscribers to his channel, where he often discusses his views on the COVID-19 pandemic. "John Campbell’s gonna tell you what the real death rate is in the U.K., and the answer is going to surprise you," Dore tells his viewers near the start of the video. Campbell then shares information released recently by the U.K.’s Office for National Statistics that he says shows that COVID-19 deaths during the pandemic attributed solely to the virus "may be way lower than anyone had thought." He then said that such data would likely also apply to the U.S. and the rest of the world. According to the data Campbell shows in his Jan. 20 video, in 2020 and the first three quarters of 2021, there were 17,371 deaths in England and Wales where the sole cause of death listed on death certificates was COVID-19. Since his video was published, fourth quarter numbers were released, showing a total of 18,907 deaths from COVID-19 alone. "So you mean all the stuff that they’ve been saying for two years straight about the death rate has been bull—-?" said Dore, who said Americans have been "victims of a scaremongering campaign." No, that’s not what the numbers mean. According to the report cited in the video, there were 131,641 COVID-19 deaths overall in England and Wales at the time it was published and 140,776 in the most recent report. The numbers Campbell cites are those whose sole cause of death was listed as COVID-19. But that does not mean the other deaths attributed to the virus aren’t also legitimate — they simply show people whose deaths were attributed to COVID-19 and other conditions at the same time. Featured Fact-check Instagram posts stated on October 12, 2022 in an Instagram post Pfizer executive “admits” vaccine was never tested for preventing transmission. By Jeff Cercone • October 13, 2022 Separate numbers from the U.K. Health Security Agency show that 153,916 people died within 28 days of a COVID-19 diagnosis. It also reports 175,256 people have died with the virus mentioned as one of the causes of death. These figures include all of the U.K, including Northern Ireland and Scotland. "We use the term ‘due to COVID-19’ when referring only to deaths with an underlying cause of death of COVID-19. When taking into account all of the deaths that mentioned COVID-19 anywhere on the death certificate, whether as an underlying cause or not, we use the term ‘involving COVID-19,’" a spokesperson for the Office for National Statistics wrote in an email to PolitiFact. The spokesperson added that when doctors or coroners write death certificates, they only include health conditions that actually contributed to the cause of death. The certificate has two parts, one for the sequence of events leading directly to death and a second part for other health conditions that contributed, but were not part of the direct sequence leading to death. "So, if a person did have COVID-19 but there was no reason to think that was at least part of the reason they died, the doctor or coroner would not write it on the death certificate. In other words, if COVID-19 is mentioned on the death certificate, it is always part of the cause of death, either on its own or in combination with other health conditions," he said. The Office of National Statistics website references the World Health Organization definition of "underlying cause of death" as the disease or injury that started "the train of events directly leading to death." In December, of deaths where COVID-19 was listed anywhere on the death certificate, 83.8% of those deaths in England and 79.6% in Wales list COVID-19 as the underlying cause of death, ONS data shows. Claims that COVID-19 deaths are lower than reported have been common throughout the pandemic from critics who argue the virus is not as serious as we are being led to believe. In fact, however, researchers have found evidence that overall deaths from COVID-19 have been undercounted, not overcounted, since the start of the pandemic. Our rating The title of a YouTube video shared on Facebook read, "Total deaths from COVID MUCH LOWER than reported." As evidence, the video points to numbers from England and Wales showing that 17,371 deaths were attributed to COVID-19 alone. But that’s a misleading interpretation of the data. The U.K. report cited in the video clearly states that all 131,641 deaths — more than seven times what the video claims — were "due to COVID-19," meaning the virus was the underlying cause of death, even if the patients had preexisting health conditions that may have contributed. We rate this claim Pants on Fire. RELATED LINK: COVID-19 death toll has not been overcoun

A German doctor discovered the COVID-19 vaccines include graphene oxide or graphene hydroxide, and the full list of ingredients is secret because of the emergency use authorization A viral video includes a laundry list of previously debunked claims about COVID-19 vaccines, offered by people known for spreading misinformation. A Jan. 22 Facebook post has a caption that says, "What Is In The mRNA Vaccines? You need to watch this video!," with a link to a 14-minute-long video. The Facebook post was shared by Ben Swann, a self-described journalist who has spread pandemic-related misinformation in the past. Those speaking in the video say a German doctor discovered that the COVID-19 vaccines include graphene oxide or graphene hydroxide. One of the speakers also says, "Because these injections are experimental and they're only being used under the EUA, we do not know the full list of ingredients that's in them. No one knows." The post was flagged as part of Facebook’s efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about our partnership with Facebook.) All of the claims have been thoroughly debunked. COVID-19 vaccines do not contain any form of graphene, according to multiple fact-checks. The vaccines are not experimental. They have undergone months of clinical testing; data shows they are both safe and effective; and they have been safely administered to hundreds of millions of Americans. And the full list of ingredients for all three vaccines approved for use in the U.S. — Pfizer, Moderna and Johnson & Johnson — has been shared by manufacturers. Graphene oxide claims In the video, Jeremy Slayden, a former professional baseball player, makes several false statements, including around the 20-second mark when he says there was "a German doctor, Andreas Noack, who was murdered last week after he reported that graphene oxide was actually in the vaccines" — a claim PolitiFact has rated False. Slayden ultimately asked the panel what is in the vaccines. At the 2:17 mark, Dr. Larry Pavlevsky, a pediatrician who has opposed vaccines, addresses the question, saying that the German doctor, Noack, "found that it wasn’t graphene oxide that was in it, it was graphene hydroxide," which "breaks apart in the bloodstream and causes razor blade cuts" to the lining of blood vessels. Featured Fact-check Instagram posts stated on October 12, 2022 in an Instagram post Pfizer executive “admits” vaccine was never tested for preventing transmission. By Jeff Cercone • October 13, 2022 COVID-19 vaccines do not contain any form of graphene. A Pfizer spokesperson in October confirmed that while graphene oxide is used in some vaccines, it is not used at Pfizer and is not in its COVID-19 vaccine. A full list of ingredients for all the vaccines is available on the CDC website.. ‘Experimental’ vaccine and ingredients Regarding Slayden’s question about what is in the vaccines, Pavlevsky answered "Because these injections are experimental and they're only being used under the EUA, we do not know the full list of ingredients that's in them. No one knows." The vaccines are not experimental. They were tested in clinical trials with tens of thousands of participants, and drug makers submitted reports on the outcomes and effects on every participant, PolitFact reported. The vaccines have been safely administered to hundreds of millions of Americans. The U.S. Food & Drug Administration has granted full approval to the Pfizer vaccine for those 16 and older. Also, the Emergency Use Authorization that Pavlevsky referenced is only issued after a comprehensive review of the trial data. "Clinical trial results and other requirements for emergency use are little different from what is required for final approval," PolitiFact reported. Despite Pavlevsky’s assertion that "we do not know the full list of ingredients," those lists have been published by manufacturers. Our ruling A Facebook post links to a video that says a German doctor discovered the COVID-19 vaccines include graphene oxide or graphene hydroxide. A speaker in the video also says, "Because these injections are experimental and they're only being used under the EUA, we do not know the full list of ingredients that's in them. No one knows." COVID-19 vaccines do not contain any form of graphene. They are not experimental. And the full list of ingredients has been published by manufacturers. We rate this claim False.

“From 1917 to 1994, half of the bills that were successfully filibustered in the Senate were civil rights legislation. A North Carolina congresswoman says a tool for blocking legislation in the Senate has been used a significant number of times against civil rights measures. Democratic Rep. Alma Adams tweeted on Jan. 11: "From 1917 to 1994, half of the bills that were successfully filibustered in the Senate were Civil Rights legislation." Democrats have had trouble advancing their agenda in the U.S. Senate. Now many of them are calling on senators to eliminate the filibuster, a procedure that effectively raises the bar for bill approval from a simple majority to 60 votes. Former President Barack Obama has referred to the filibuster as a "Jim Crow relic" and PolitiFact has written about how it was used to thwart civil rights legislation. We wondered if Adams was right about how frequently the filibuster was used against civil rights measures. Adams’ quote comes from one expert’s article in the Washington Post. However, tracking the use of the filibuster isn’t simple. While Adams’ stat is based on a credible analysis, some scholars take issue with it, saying that much depends on how one defines a filibuster and measures its success. What is the filibuster? The filibuster is a term that generally refers to a rule allowing a minority of senators to hold up legislation. Lawmakers can delay consideration of a bill by speaking on the Senate floor for hours at a time to state their opposition or to try to influence other senators. In some cases, the speeches go down as merely performative, having no influence on legislation. These days, senators don’t actually need to speak for hours on the floor to effectively use the filibuster. They can simply say they object to the legislation under consideration. Then, to end debate on the bill, the Senate must trigger what’s known as "cloture," which requires 60 votes in favor of proceeding to a final vote. Republicans effectively used the tool last year to block Democrats’ voting rights legislation, known as the For The People Act. They also used it last week to defeat legislation that combined the Freedom to Vote Act and the John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act. There’s no official government tally for how many bills the filibuster has blocked. When it comes to civil rights, the U.S. Senate Historical Office says on its website: "Filibusters proved to be particularly useful to Southern senators who sought to block civil rights legislation, including anti-lynching bills. Not until 1964 did the Senate successfully overcome a filibuster to pass a major civil rights bill." The historical office has not tried to count the total number of filibusters used, said Daniel S. Holt, an assistant historian in the historical office. That is partly "because the definition of a filibuster and what constitutes a filibuster is a matter of interpretation," Holt said. Some bills have died under threat of filibuster, even if it wasn’t officially employed. Holt said scholars who have tried to count the total number of filibusters have used different criteria and come up with different counts over the years. What Adams cited When we reached Adams' office for comment, her spokesman cited an analysis published last year in The Washington Post. It was written by Sarah Binder, a professor of political science at George Washington University and a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution. Binder looked into how the filibuster was used against civil rights for a book she wrote with Steven Smith of Washington University in St. Louis titled, "Politics or Principle? Filibustering in the U.S. Senate." Binder said she and Smith used historical sources to try to generate the list of measures that were killed by filibuster despite having support from a majority of members in both the House and Senate, as well as the White House. "Of the 30 measures we identified between 1917 and 1994, exactly half addressed civil rights — including measures to authorize federal investigation and prosecution of lynching, to ban the imposition of poll taxes and to prohibit discrimination on the basis of race in housing sales and rentals," she wrote for The Post. Featured Fact-check Senate Leadership Fund stated on October 11, 2022 in a political ad Cheri Beasley “backs tax hikes — even on families making under $75,000.” By Paul Specht • October 31, 2022 Binder acknowledged that other scholars have reached different conclusions. "Ultimately, all these counts need an asterisk to make sure that readers understand the difficulty of recreating a comprehensive historical record," she said in an email to PolitiFact NC. Eric Schickler, a political science professor at the University of California, Berkeley, thinks Binder’s sentiment is generally accurate. Schickler co-authored the book, "Filibuster: Obstruction and Lawmaking in the U.S. Senate." "If you just say, ‘What were the measures that likely had the majority in favor of it, that were defeated because of minority instruction?’ I think it's right to say that about half of them, in that period, were civil rights-related bills," Schickler said. If Binder’s count of bills defeated by the filibuster seems low, Schickler notes that it was unusual for the tool to be used to permanently kill a bill until the 1970s. The exception was civil rights, he said. "The senators who were opposed to [a particular civil rights measure] tended to be much more committed than the senators in favor of it," he said. "So in other words, the Southern senators who opposed civil rights in, let’s say ’20s, ’30s, ’40s and ’50s, they were willing to pull out all the stops and use obstruction to the kill." Other opinion There’s not a consensus on Binder’s count. The percentage of filibusters that affected civil rights is probably lower than half, says Gregory Koger, chair of the University of Miami’s political science department. Koger wrote, "Filibustering: A Political History of Obstruction in the House and Senate." Koger said it may be easier to track the fate of civil rights bills because, between the 1930s and 1960s, senators were more likely to call for cloture votes on them than on other filibustered legislation. "This enabled them to create a public record of their position for the press and interest groups, knowing that the votes would fail," he told PolitiFact NC in an email. Koger says his thorough and "systematic" approach to finding defeated bills "identified many more instances of non-civil rights filibusters, so the overall proportion was much less than one-half." Gregory Wawro co-authored "Filibuster: Obstruction and Lawmaking in the U.S. Senate" with Schickler and has a slightly different opinion. "My sense is that (Binder’s) number is probably too high, but I don't know that we should get too hung up on that," said Wawro, chair of the political science department at Columbia University. "The general point that (Binder and Smith) are making still holds: the class of bills most successfully targeted during this period were civil rights bills. I don't think whether it was half or less than half really matters that much," Wawro said. Our ruling Adams said: "From 1917 to 1994, half of the bills that were successfully filibustered in the Senate were civil rights legislation." Her claim is supported by an analysis by a political scientist who has co-authored a book on the history of the filibuster. However, some scholars aren’t in agreement on this issue. At least two other experts say civil rights bills probably accounted for less than half of bills successfully filibustered during the highlighted time period. The statement is partially accurate: some experts do support Adams' claim. However, it leaves out important details: other experts say the stat is off. We rate this claim Half Tru

The CDC said that 75% of COVID-19 deaths have involved people with at least four comorbidities NFL quarterback Aaron Rodgers is in the headlines again, not only because his Green Bay Packers lost their divisional playoff game to the San Francisco 49ers on Jan. 22, but also because he’s making more false claims about the COVID-19 pandemic. Rodgers, who says he is unvaccinated, recently went on an anti-vaccine tirade in an interview with ESPN, criticizing President Joe Biden and his "fake White House." At one point, Rodgers brought up the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to claim that officials were sending mixed messages about the pandemic, saying: "Then you have the CDC, which, how do you even trust them, but then they come out and talk about 75% of the COVID deaths have at least four comorbidities. And you still have this fake White House set saying that this is the pandemic of the unvaccinated, that's not helping the conversation." Rodgers — who made false statements about the pandemic in November — has his facts wrong again. The CDC didn’t find that 75% of COVID-19 deaths occurred in individuals who had at least four other illnesses or diseases, known as comorbidities. The figure is based on a study of 1.2 million fully vaccinated people that found around 78% of deaths in the group occurred in people with multiple other illnesses, bolstering the argument that vaccines work. The claim, which PolitiFact and others have debunked, started circulating in mid-January after ABC News released a shortened version of a "Good Morning America" interview with CDC Director Dr. Rochelle Walensky. Featured Fact-check Instagram posts stated on October 12, 2022 in an Instagram post Pfizer executive “admits” vaccine was never tested for preventing transmission. By Jeff Cercone • October 13, 2022 The clip showed Walensky responding to a question from White House correspondent Cecilia Vega about how a recent CDC study seemed to show vaccines working to prevent severe illness. But the clip cut off the beginning of her response in which it was clear that she was referring to a study of only vaccinated people. Her full response: "A really important study — if I may just summarize it — a study of 1.2 million people who were vaccinated between December and October and demonstrated that severe disease occurred in about 0.015% of the people who receive their primary series. And death in 0.003% of those people. The overwhelming number of deaths — over 75% — occurred in people who had at least four comorbidities, so really these are people who were unwell to begin with. And yes, really encouraging news in the context of omicron. This means not only just to get your primary series, but to get your booster series. And yes, we’re really encouraged by these results." The study involved just over 1.2 million people who completed their primary vaccination series — two shots for mRNA vaccines — from December 2020 through October 2021. It found that severe COVID-19-associated outcomes or death were rare among the group: 36 died of COVID-19. Risk factors included being over 65 years old or having a suppressed immune system. All people who experienced severe disease had at least one risk factor, the report said, and 28 of the people who died, or 78%, had at least four. Our ruling Rodgers claimed that the CDC said that 75% of COVID-19 deaths involved people who had four or more comorbidities. This misrepresents the CDC’s findings. The figure is based on a study involving fully vaccinated individuals that found over 75% of deaths in that group occurred in people who had multiple other diseases and conditions. The statistic was cited by medical officials as evidence that the vaccines were effective in preventing severe disease. We rate his claim Fals

Richard von Coudenhove-Kalergi planned “the ethnocide of the peoples of Europe” through “the encouragement of mass non-white immigration. As the wounds from World War I were still festering in Europe, and as the continent prepared for an even bloodier war, a Japanese-Austrian politician proposed a peaceful federation in Europe. The plan by Richard von Coudenhove-Kalergi, published as a book in the 1920s, was surprisingly predictive of the European Union that would appear only decades later, after World War II. It described a bloc of 26 countries tied in a customs union, a single market, and a monetary zone, with a continental parliament, a single currency, and an anthem. The union would deal with other countries as one, but would also respect internal national differences. Despite its ingenuity, very little of that plan is remembered now. Instead, Kalergi is better known for an evil scheme that he never actually authored. According to distortions and fabrications first made by Nazis, repurposed by neo-Nazis, adopted by the European far-right and, more recently, referenced by American conservatives, Kalergi planned the destruction of white European civilization through migration and interracial marriage. A video shared recently on TikTok summarizes the conspiracy theory. It shows Nick Griffin, a far-right British politician and former member of the European Parliament, claiming that Kalergi "published the plan for a united Europe and the ethnocide of the peoples of Europe." According to Griffin, migrant groups like guest workers and refugees are being encouraged to come to Europe by an "unholy alliance" of leftists, Zionists, and capitalists "with the deliberate aim of breeding us out of existence in our own homelands." Other right-wing politicians and groups in Europe have mentioned Kalergi and his "plan," including in Bulgaria, the United Kingdom, Italy, and the Czech Republic. It has also generated interest online whenever tensions over migration were high in Europe. Searches for "Kalergi" rose during the migrant crisis in 2015, according to Google Trends, and spiked again when far-right parties in Germany and Italy made migration a central issue of electoral campaigns. Griffin’s video was shared on TikTok in 2021 with a reference to the Belarus-Poland border crisis, when the government of Belarus incentivized migrants to travel to the country and cross the border with Poland. The "Kalergi plan" conspiracy theory is a European variation of the conspiracy theories about "white genocide" that have been mentioned by mainstream American conservatives in recent years, and that inspired the gunman who killed 51 people at two mosques in New Zealand in 2019 and shooters in two synagogues in the United States. Featured Fact-check Blake Masters stated on October 15, 2022 in a tweet Immigrants illegally in the country are treated “better than military veterans.” By Jon Greenberg • October 21, 2022 "Gross misreading" The idea has remained popular despite the lack of evidence that European elites are carrying out such a plan of migrant invasion. When John Stuart Agnew, a right-wing British politician and former member of the European Parliament, asked the European Commission in 2019 about a "Kalergi plan," the commission answered that it was not aware of any "plan" and pointed to its migration policy, which has been updated multiple times over the past decade. It makes sense that a "Kalergi plan" is not being executed, since there is no evidence that Kalergi ever proposed one. According to Martyn Bond, the author of a recent biography of Kalergi, his writings mention the mixing of races, but as a description of what he was observing around him, and a prediction of something that would continue to happen in the future. "(Kalergi) objectively describes what was already occurring and would increasingly occur — racial mixing — as various factors of globalization became ever more apparent," Bond wrote. But they were descriptions, not prescriptions. The claim that he "aimed to eliminate the white race through racial mixing with immigrants from outside Europe" is a "gross misreading" of his work, according to Bond. Kalergi’s own writings show that he wanted to strengthen Europe believing that only a united continent would be able to face giants like the United States and the Soviet Union. He also thought that European culture was "striding victoriously ahead" and would eventually "absorb" other cultures. Bond told PolitiFact that despite his mixed heritage, Kalergi held an assumption of "white Christian superiority" — a view that his far-right detractors "might even approve." Although conspiracy theories about "white genocide" are older, the specific claims related to Kalergi have their origins in Nazi Germany, according to historians Roland Clark and Nikolaus Hagen. They were circulated, among others, by the newspaper of the Nazi Party, which used xenophobic, anti-Semitic, and racist language to describe Kalergi as "the commercial prophet of Pan-Europe" and "a dressed-up, nasty mongrel" who "dreams of a world of Eurasian-Negroid humans, subject to the God-given rule of the Jews." According to Clark and Hagen, the claims made by the Nazis were recovered decades later by Gerd Honsik, an Austrian neo-Nazi and convicted Holocaust denier. Honsik published a book in the early 2000s describing what he termed the "Kalergi plan" and promoted the conspiracy theory in Europe. "Honsik sent out hundreds of newsletters and open letters to politicians, and his books were translated in many different languages," Hagen told PolitiFact. "It's not surprising that his ideas were picked up in neo-Nazi and Holocaust-denial circles." What is more "puzzling and worrying," according to Hagen, "is how this fringe conspiracy theory recently penetrated the mainstream political discourse." Our ruling A post on TikTok shows a video claiming that an elite is carrying out a plan to replace white Europeans with non-white migrants, and that this plan was devised by Richard von Coudenhove-Kalergi, an early proponent of continental unification in Europe. There is no evidence that the plan exists. The idea that it does lies in distortions of Kalergi’s writings and fabrications by Nazis and neo-Nazis, according to information from historians, Kalergi’s biographer, the European Commission, and Kalergi’s own writings. We rate the post Fals

“Dyson is canceling their contract with Walmart and selling off Dyson Supersonic” hair dryers “only for $1! A Facebook post announcing a Dyson Supersonic hair dryer available for nearly nothing from Walmart is just so much hot air. Products in Dyson’s Supersonic hair dryer line typically sell for hundreds of dollars. But the Facebook post promotes a special opportunity. "Dyson is canceling their contract with Walmart and selling off Dyson Supersonic only for $1!" it says. "Follow the link to take advantage of the offer." The link leads to a Facebook page with various Walmart logos claiming that it is the "official Walmart contest page" and that you have to pay only $1 to receive the hair dryer. It contains multiple posts encouraging people to click yet another link for the hair dryer bargain. The post was flagged as part of Facebook’s efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about our partnership with Facebook.) A few other posts quote similar bargain prices of $9.95 or $99. The Facebook page it links to is not an official Walmart page. It’s from an unverified account claiming to be Walmart. Only 16 people have liked the page. Featured Fact-check Instagram posts stated on October 10, 2022 in a post “Premature babies are at a much higher risk of injury from immunizations than full-term babies.” By Andy Nguyen • October 13, 2022 Walmart said the post was fake. A spokesperson told PolitiFact in an email that Walmart offers Dyson products only through its third-party online marketplace, where outside sellers market products and set the price. Walmart’s website doesn’t list any available for $1. The least expensive model is listed for about $320, and the most expensive version is about $700. Our ruling A Facebook post claims Dyson is ending its partnership with Walmart and the retailer is selling off its stock of Supersonic hair dryers for $1. That’s not true. Walmart offers Dyson products only through its third-party marketplace. The hair dryers are available on Walmart.com through those sellers for hundreds of dollars, not $1. The Facebook page promoting the deals is not connected with Walmart, and the company said the post was fake. We rate this claim False

“Every 37 seconds, someone is arrested for possession of marijuana. Gary Chambers Jr., a Democrat who hopes to represent Louisiana in the U.S. Senate, made headlines by releasing a 37-second political ad in which he smokes marijuana while reciting a number of statistics about marijuana laws and how they’re enforced. "Every 37 seconds, someone is arrested for possession of marijuana," Chambers said, his narration playing over the sound of a ticking timer. "Since 2010, state and local police have arrested an estimated 7.3 million Americans for violating marijuana laws — over half of all drug arrests." He continued: "Black people are four times more likely to be arrested for marijuana laws than white people. States waste $3.7 billion enforcing marijuana laws every year. Most of the people police are arresting aren’t dealers, but rather people with small amounts of pot, just like me." My first campaign ad, ‘37 Seconds.’ #JustLikeMeI hope this ad works to not only destigmatize the use of marijuana, but also forces a new conversation that creates the pathway to legalize this beneficial drug, and forgive those who were arrested due to outdated ideology. pic.twitter.com/G0qKvmUGKD— Gary Chambers (@GaryChambersJr) January 18, 2022 While many news outlets focused on Chambers’ surprising use of marijuana in a political ad, PolitiFact wanted to dig into the data he cites. We found that Chamber’s claim was based on 2010 data that referred to marijuana arrests generally. But the 37 second figure doesn’t hold up when compared with recent figures specific to marijuana possession, which have slowed in recent years, due in part to state changes in legalization. Ad uses data from 2010 The ad cited the American Civil Liberties Union as a data source. A spokesperson for the Chambers campaign said the team primarily pulled its numbers from an ACLU report published in June 2013 and a slideshow that appeared to be based on the same report. "We additionally spoke with a variety of experts in the cannabis lobbying space to ensure we had industry-accepted numbers," added campaign spokesperson Katie Dolan. She pointed out that the ACLU’s landing page for the 2013 report and the slideshow both said that "cops made one pot bust every 37 seconds." The ACLU report said its annual marijuana arrest data was "obtained largely" from FBI Uniform Crime Reporting data. The FBI’s UCR program annually collects law enforcement data from various city, university and college, county, state, tribal, and federal law enforcement agencies. The data has its limitations: Participation in the UCR program is voluntary, definitions of crimes can vary among local jurisdictions, and the same information is not always reported year to year. The ACLU noted that some areas (Illinois, Florida, the District of Columbia, and the five boroughs of New York City) do not report data on marijuana possession arrests by race to the FBI, so records requests were filed to obtain that data. Within the report, the ACLU drilled into the specifics: "In 2010 alone, there were 889,133 marijuana arrests — 300,000 more than arrests for all violent crimes combined — or one every 37 seconds." The ACLU referenced "marijuana arrests" generally, meaning the number includes people arrested for crimes beyond just possession, such as dealing, so Chambers’ claim is off in that regard. In 2010, there were 784,021 marijuana possession arrests, according to the ACLU. Using that value, arrests occurred at a pace less frequent than once every 37 seconds. Featured Fact-check Republican Party of Florida stated on October 20, 2008 in a campaign mailer "Barack Obama has consistently voted against tougher penalties for criminals." By Robert Farley • October 27, 2008 In an updated report issued in 2020, the ACLU again relied on UCR data to examine marijuana arrests from 2010 to 2018. And though it did not include an updated figure about how frequently marijuana arrests occurred, PolitiFact reached out to experts about what more recent data indicates. Experts say that arrests now occur less frequently. Aaron Madrid Aksoz, an ACLU spokesperson, said data current through 2018 now shows there were "6.1 million marijuana-related arrests between 2010 and 2018." From there, he calculated that there was one marijuana-related arrest every 46.56 seconds. Paul Armentano, deputy director of the pro-marijuana legalization organization NORML, said annual state-level marijuana-related arrests have been trending downward since about 2009. Data from 2019 and 2020 showed significant drops in marijuana-related arrests. The decrease coincides with the increased legalization of marijuana. Colorado was the first state to legalize recreational marijuana with a 2012 ballot initiative, and since then, 17 other states, Washington, D.C., and Guam have decriminalized recreational marijuana. Jon Gettman, an associate professor of criminal justice at Shenandoah University, has extensively researched data on marijuana arrests and helped the ACLU compile its 2013 report. Gettman used 2019 FBI data to do his calculations and concluded there was one marijuana-related arrest every 58 seconds. Matt Sutton of Drug Policy Alliance used the FBI’s estimated number of arrests in 2020 to run the calculations using the most recent data available from UCR. It showed there were about 1.16 million "drug abuse violation" arrests in 2020. Of those arrests, 2.8% were for selling or manufacturing marijuana and 27.5% were for possession, for a total of about 350,150 marijuana-related arrests and 317,793 marijuana possession arrests. Those calculations, then, show that in 2020, there was one marijuana-related arrest every 90 seconds, and one marijuana possession arrest about every 99 seconds. The ad’s other marijuana claims Chambers’ other claims in the ad have varying degrees of accuracy. "Since 2010, state and local police have arrested an estimated 7.3 million Americans for violating marijuana laws — over half of all drug arrests." This could use a little more context. FBI data shows that about 7.35 million marijuana arrests have been made since 2010. But the proportion of drug arrests that were marijuana-related has been decreasing. In 2018, marijuana-related arrests accounted for 40% of all drug arrests in the U.S. In 2020, that share has fallen to 30.3%. "Black people are four times more likely to be arrested for marijuana laws than white people." That’s accurate when rounding up. The campaign drew that data from ACLU’s 2013 and 2020 reports. "States waste $3.7 billion enforcing marijuana laws every year." The figure seems to be based on very general figures about how much the U.S. spends on police protection. The U.S. spent $100 billion on police protection in 2017, according to a Bureau of Justice Statistics report. Marijuana arrests accounted for about 6.3% of all arrests that year. Assuming broadly that the percentage of arrests is equivalent to the percentage of costs, the U.S. seems to spend significantly more than $3.7 billion enforcing marijuana laws each year. Whether it’s a waste is a matter of opinion. "Most of the people police are arresting aren’t dealers, but rather people with small amounts of pot." That’s true. Using FBI data, the ACLU reports show that the vast majority of marijuana-related arrests are for possession. In 2020, FBI data indicated that about 91% of marijuana arrests were for possession. Our ruling Chambers said, "Every 37 seconds, someone is arrested for possession of marijuana." The claim was based on 2010 data that dealt with marijuana-related arrests, but it is outdated now. Experts, including a spokesperson for the ACLU, say that more recent data indicates that marijuana-related arrests now happen less frequently — at a rate of about one every 46 seconds, 58 seconds or 90 seconds, depending on how you approach the math problem. And 2020 data suggests an arrest for marijuana possession alone occurs every 99 seconds — still frequent, but a far slower rate than Chambers’ ad suggests. We rate this claim Mostly Fals

Estimated annual COVID-19 deaths in the U.S. totals 27,530, after you subtract those who died “with, not from” COVID-19, not in nursing homes and who didn't have four or more comorbidities An Instagram post imploring readers to use "simple math" asserts that U.S. deaths from COVID-19 are vastly overcounted. The viral post says the number of estimated annual COVID-19 deaths in the United States is 27,530. That’s a long way away from the 385,460 people who the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention says died from COVID-19 in 2020 and the 453,707 who died in 2021. The premise of the post is that a more factual number of deaths would subtract those who died "with COVID, not from," those who didn't die in nursing homes and those who didn't have four or more comorbidities. "It's just simple math," the caption says. "Even with these inflated numbers, is 28k deaths a year worth what we are doing (to) society and peoples lives? This is insane." But in this case, the post itself just doesn’t add up. It was flagged as part of Facebook’s efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about our partnership with Facebook.) Two of the post’s main premises — that the overall COVID-19 death count is inflated by people who died "with" rather than "from" the virus, and that 75% of COVID-19 deaths occurred in people with four or more comorbidities — have been previously debunked. And though nursing home residents are an already-vulnerable population, studies showed that their risk of dying increased during the pandemic. Dying ‘with, not from’ COVID-19 The false notion that the numbers of people dying from COVID-19 have been skewed because they include people who died "with" rather than "from" COVID-19 dates to August 2020. That’s when then-President Donald Trump retweeted several posts that claimed the CDC was adjusting coronavirus deaths downward. The claims were based on a federal report that indicated that of all Americans whose deaths were attributed to COVID-19 on their death certificates, only 6% did not also list other conditions as being factors. The vast majority of coronavirus-related deaths occur in patients who have other conditions, which are also listed on their death certificates, but that doesn’t mean COVID-19 was not a factor in their deaths. "Early in the pandemic, some of the answers provided by public officials — who were scrambling to track the disease as it overwhelmed health systems — fed skepticism," according to an article by the Association of American Medical Colleges. The article pointed to April 2020 comments by one White House official who was asked about people who have COVID-19 but die from preexisting conditions; she answered: "If someone dies with COVID-19, we are counting that as a COVID-19 death." Featured Fact-check Viral image stated on October 16, 2022 in an Instagram post “Covid vaccinations now prohibited in people under 50 in Denmark.” By Ciara O'Rourke • October 18, 2022 But "federal and state governments gradually altered such policies over the spring and summer to say that in order for a death to be counted as a COVID-19 death, the disease had to have played a role," AAMC reported. The CDC considers the underlying cause of death as "the condition that began the chain of events that ultimately led to the person’s death," Jeff Lancashire, acting associate director for communications at the NCHS told PolitiFact in August 2020. In 92% of death certificates that mention the virus, COVID-19 was the underlying cause of death. COVID-19 put nursing home residents more at risk The post’s claim about nursing home deaths appears to stem from the same logic — that the deaths occurred in an already-vulnerable population that often has comorbidities, so they should be excluded from the overall count. But we found nothing that would suggest a solid, scientific reason for backing those numbers out of the equation. One study found that for those in long-term care facilities, the risk of dying increased by 4.29% during the pandemic compared with before the pandemic. What’s more, research and news stories have found evidence that even with the official data collection processes, deaths from COVID-19 have been underreported in nursing homes. No evidence for comorbidities claim The claim that 75% of COVID-19 deaths occurred in people with four or more comorbidities is False. It originated when social media users skewed a Jan. 7 statement from CDC Director Dr. Rochelle Walensky pertaining to deaths of vaccinated people. She said in an interview that a study of COVID-19 deaths in people who had been vaccinated found that more than 75% of them occurred in those who had at least four other illnesses or diseases at the time they became infected with the virus. She cited it as evidence of the vaccines’ effectiveness. However, an edited clip of the interview that circulated heavily did not include the fact that the study only included vaccinated people, leaving a false impression that the 75% statistic reflected all COVID-19 deaths and that the pandemic’s severity had been exaggerated. One more note Contrary to the assertion of the post, researchers have found evidence that overall deaths from COVID-19 have been undercounted, not overcounted, since the start of the pandemic. The CDC tracks what it calls "excess deaths" — the difference in the observed numbers of deaths in a period of time compared with prior years. Deaths from all causes, not just COVID-19, have increased since the pandemic started. The CDC says undercounts could be attributed to a number of factors, including deaths being misclassified or those indirectly related to the pandemic, like health conditions that went untreated due to overburdened health care systems. USA Today analyzed that data and other research and in December found that public health experts believe the true death toll of the pandemic in the U.S. to be "upward of 20% or more higher than the official tally." Our ruling An Instagram post says the number of estimated annual COVID-19 deaths in the United States is 27,530, after you subtract those who died "with, not from" COVID-19, not in nursing homes and who didn't have four or more comorbidities. That’s bad math built on several false assumptions and arriving at a false conclusion. COVID-19 was found to be a cause of death for 385,460 people in 2020 and 452,707 people in 2021, according to the CDC. And research shows that, if anything, deaths resulting from COVID-19 have been undercounted, not overcounted, in the U.S. We rate this claim Pants on Fire!

“Ashli Babbitt Tried To Stop Antifa False Flag On Jan 6th In the year since Ashli Babbitt was fatally shot trying to force her way further inside the U.S. Capitol during the Jan. 6, 2021, insurrection, a chorus of conservative voices have cast her as a patriot and a martyr, and her death as an unjust assassination. A new narrative circulating online takes those claims further. "Ashli Babbitt tried to stop antifa false flag on Jan. 6," said the title of one video posted Jan. 19, 2022. "She was trying to stop those people from busting up the place, and then had to flee from them," the speaker in the video said. "That’s why she went through the window, and then got shot, got assassinated by that f------- rent-a-cop." The video offered a conspiratorial retelling of what transpired during one of day’s most scrutinized moments, when Babbitt attempted to climb through the shattered window of a door leading to the Speaker’s Lobby, where lawmakers were being evacuated. It relied on an interpretation of Jan. 6 footage from a right-wing outlet that made unsubstantiated claims about Babbitt’s words, actions and frame of mind in the moments before she died. In reality, there is no clear evidence that Babbitt was fighting to halt the mob — or that the attack was a false flag spurred on by antifa. The insurrection was carried out by supporters of then-President Donald Trump, many of them whipped up by his false claims of a stolen election. The officer who fired the bullet that killed Babbitt — Lt. Michael Byrd, a Capitol Police officer for 28 years — was cleared of wrongdoing in two investigations. A video spread on YouTube and other platforms wrongly claimed Ashli Babbitt tried to stop an antifa false flag on Jan. 6, 2021. This video spread widely anyway, racking up 200,000 views on YouTube and tens of thousands more on the alternative platforms like Rumble and Bitchute. It was flagged as part of Facebook’s efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about our partnership with Facebook.) A litany of false and conspiratorial claims The creator of the video is a self-described former Obama voter and special education teacher who now posts live-streams and other content under the persona "the Salty Cracker." His website has a disclaimer at the bottom of his website that reads, "These are the opinions and ramblings of a lunatic. They are for entertainment purposes only and are probably wrong." Many of his claims in the nearly 10-minute video were, as promised, wrong: He called the attack a "false flag hoax." It wasn’t. It was an effort to flip an election that left several people dead, more than 140 officers injured, and $1.5 million in property damage. He insisted that a man named Ray Epps instigated the siege as one of several "FBI assets." That’s not true. There is no evidence that the FBI orchestrated the attack, and Epps, a former Oath Keeper seen near the Capitol on videos, told the House committee investigating the attack that he has no ties to the FBI or law enforcement. He said that the rioters who supported Trump were sentenced to 40 years in prison for "staying in between the velvet lines." That’s false. Claims that Jan. 6 was a "normal tourist visit" are Pants on Fire, and the longest sentence handed down to date was for 63 months. No documented antifa presence Throughout his video, the Salty Cracker claimed that Babbitt was trying to stop antifa activists in disguise "who were breaking into the f------ Speaker’s Lobby over here, and then got shot." Here’s how he described what happened before her death: "All of the Trump supporters (were) trying to stop these people from breaking windows, trying to stop these people from setting the place on fire. Donald Trump supporters trying to extinguish the false flag, and apparently Ashli Babbitt was one of these individuals, and we got it on tape … As she’s trying to stop them, then they start chasing her. So then she’s got to climb through. She can’t go backwards, so she’s got to go forward." But several rioters denied the antifa rumors themselves in social media posts and messages. PolitiFact rated the claim that antifa provoked Babbitt’s shooting Pants on Fire, one of the many falsehoods about the Jan. 6 attack that merited PolitiFact’s 2021 Lie of the Year designation. RELATED VIDEO Featured Fact-check Facebook posts stated on October 14, 2022 in an Instagram post Video footage showing Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi hiding on Jan. 6, 2021, shows the U.S. Capitol attack “was a setup.” By Madison Czopek • October 17, 2022 "We have no cases of antifa in our database of individuals charged with breaking into the Capitol," said Roderick Cowan, the executive director of the University of Chicago Project on Security and Threats, which maintains a database on the more than 700 people facing charges. "Nor have we ever seen evidence of a named individual who supports antifa there." Among the rioters nearby when Babbitt died were Zachary Alam, the rioter wearing a red "Make America Great Again" hat who smashed the windows to the Speaker’s Lobby that Babbitt later climbed through; Chad Barrett Jones, who helped bust the glass with a rolled-up Trump flag; and Thomas Baranyi, who wore a Trump-Pence hat and left the Capitol with Babbitt’s blood smeared on his hand. A speculative video analysis But what about the pro-Trump mob? Was Babbitt trying to fend those rioters off? Throughout his video, the Salty Cracker read from an article in the Epoch Times, a pro-Trump outlet, with the headline: "Babbitt tried to stop attack on Capitol Speaker’s Lobby, video shows." The article largely ignored the actions that prompted Babbitt’s fatal shooting, when she tried to push through the window to the Speaker’s Lobby. In an interview after the riot, Baranyi said the police were warning her to stop, but that "she didn’t heed the call." The article instead focused on the buildup to that moment, claiming that the footage captured by those who were there, when slowed down, showed Babbitt trying "to prevent the attack, not join it." Some of that footage came from John Sullivan, an activist controversial on both sides of the political spectrum, whose presence fueled the antifa falsehood, and who faces several charges. The Epoch Times’ evidence for its assertion: that Babbitt had "looks of shock and concern" on her face; that she was "so distressed at the violence, she jumped up and down in frustration"; that she "confronted" Alam before he punched the window she later climbed through; that she winced at his punch; that and she at one point shouted, "Stop! No! Don’t! Wait!" Those claims are speculative and unsubstantiated. Videos of the incident do not clearly capture all that Babbitt was saying and doing, let alone feeling, at the time. Whether Babbitt was feeling shocked and concerned, and whether she was jumping because she was frustrated, is also a matter of interpretation. Other footage from Tayler Hansen, a self-described "independent journalist" whose Twitter account includes statements of support for conservative causes, shows Babbitt leaning toward Alam and appearing to say something. But it’s not clear that she was confronting him. Experts in multimedia forensics told PolitiFact it’s nearly impossible to discern from Sullivan’s video what Babbitt was saying. She’s far away from Sullivan’s microphone in a loud room with many people shouting, making it difficult to attribute speech directly to her. "This is a classic ‘cocktail party effect’ recording of an unknown number of speakers, overlapped, speaking loud," said Catalin Grigoras, director of the National Center for Media Forensics at the University of Colorado, Denver. Grigoras and other experts said the science available to experts would likely be unable to isolate Babbitt’s voice from Sullivan’s video. One rioter recalled for investigators that Babbitt said something along the lines of, "Just open the door. They’re not gonna stop." And another video recorded by Hansen showed Babbitt shouting at the officers. (It’s not clear what Babbitt is saying in that clip, either, experts said.) Trump supporters try to break through a police barrier on Jan. 6, 2021, at the Capitol in Washington. (AP) The Epoch Times article also quoted from Hansen and Babbitt’s husband, Aaron Babbitt. Hansen told the Epoch Times that Babbitt was "literally trapped" in a corner. Aaron Babbitt said she climbed through the window because she feared for her life and wanted to escape. But Hansen’s video shows that Babbitt was the first to reach the doors leading to the Speaker’s Lobby. Footage shows her not pinned but moving freely prior to the incident.. Our ruling A YouTube video claimed, "Ashli Babbitt tried to stop antifa false flag on Jan. 6." The video was posted by a creator whose website includes a disclaimer saying his opinions are meant "for entertainment purposes only and are probably wrong." In this case, the video’s central claim that Babbitt was fighting to thwart an antifa false flag is a ridiculous rewriting of what happened inside the Capitol. Babbitt was shot as she attempted to climb through the shattered window of a door leading to the Speaker’s Lobby. There was no documented trace of antifa involvement at the Capitol or in her shooting, and the suggestion that Babbitt was trying to stop the mob’s advances was based largely on speculation about what she was doing, saying and feeling in the moments leading up to her death. We rate this YouTube video Pants on Fire! CORRECTION, Jan. 29, 2022: Tayler Hansen's first name was misspelled in an earlier version of this post. It has been correcte

“Ashley Hinson voted against the bipartisan infrastructure bill that made this money (for Iowa's locks and dams) possible. Once again she’s taking credit for work she didn’t do. On Jan. 19, U.S. Rep. Ashley Hinson, R-Iowa, sent a press release that said $829 million in funding was allocated from the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act to repair and refurbish locks and dams on the upper Mississippi River. The press release served as an announcement by Hinson, Rep. Cheri Bustos, D-Ill., and Sens. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa; Dick Durbin, D-Ill., Tammy Duckworth, D-Ill., and Roy Blunt, R-Mo. Following the announcement, Hinson tweeted: "We secured $829 million in federal funding to upgrade locks & dams along the Upper Mississippi River. This is game-changing for Iowa’s agriculture industry & our Mississippi River communities!" The tweet garnered plenty of criticism from Democrats for her use of the word "we" in the statement, as she voted against the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act in July 2021 that is funding the program. Iowa state Sen. Liz Mathis, D-Hiawatha, responded to Hinson’s tweet, accusing Hinson of taking credit for work she didn’t do. "Ashley Hinson voted against the bipartisan infrastructure bill that made this money possible. Once again she’s taking credit for work she didn’t do," she said. Mathis is seeking the Democratic Party’s nomination to challenge Hinson in the 2022 election for Iowa’s reconfigured 2nd Congressional District. "This is yet another example of Ashley Hinson claiming that she supports investments that benefit Iowans, but voting along party lines against their best interests in Washington," Mathis wrote in an email to The Daily Iowan. The bill passed in the U.S. House on July 1 by a 221 to 201 vote, and then the U.S. Senate on Aug. 10 by a 69 to 30 vote. The only Iowans to vote in favor of the bill were Democrat Rep. Cindy Axne and Republican Sen. Chuck Grassley. In a Jan. 20 press call to Iowa reporters, Hinson said she opposed the act because it was tied to social spending. However, she said, the money was going to be spent regardless once the bill was signed into law and Iowa should get its share. "If there’s federal money on the table, do you think I’m going to sit back and let that go to states like California and New York? Hell no. I’m going to make sure as much of it comes back to Iowa," Hinson said. The $829 million allocated to fix parts of the Mississippi River came after Hinson, Bustos, Grassley, Durbin and Blunt requested in a Dec. 10 letter to the Corps of Engineers that projects in the upper Mississippi River area get priority for infrastructure bill money. Featured Fact-check Deidre DeJear stated on October 19, 2022 in a tweet "Kim Reynolds doesn’t think nurses are educated." By Liam Halawith • October 31, 2022 Sen. Joni Ernst, and Reps. Cindy Axne and Mariannette Miller-Meeks signed the letter as well. They did not spearhead the lobbying like the five lawmakers who worked together. Ernst and Miller-Meeks both opposed the infrastructure bill when it came to a vote. The only Iowa lawmaker who did not sign the letter was Rep. Randy Feenstra. In the January press release, which had statements from each member of the bipartisan Midwest congressional group, Hinson said the funds are necessary for fixing the river’s locks and dams to support supply chain movement in and out of Iowa’s 1st Congressional District. On Nov. 8, 2021, the day the infrastructure bill was presented to President Joe Biden for his signature, Hinson sent a press release condemning the bill, both because it was tied then to the Build Back Better Act, and because she said it contained unnecessary spending. The infrastructure bill reauthorized the $650 billion of existing spending that is usually allocated yearly for infrastructure needs, but added $550 billion in new spending. Hinson said in the press release that she would have voted for the bill if it only featured a reauthorization of the $650 billion to go to any infrastructure needs but opposed the addition of new funds. "Let me level with you, I think most Iowans would support reasonable spending on real, physical infrastructure. However, I believe this bill adds too much additional spending for items aside from the physical infrastructure Iowans care most about, without fully paying for them," the press release said. Grassley, who, like Hinson, opposed in September a partisan Democrat-led supplemental spending bill that allocated money for Mississippi River projects, supported the infrastructure bill. He signed the letter lobbying for the river funds, tweeting on Jan. 19 and Jan. 20 that the allocated funds, which also include money for the Missouri River valley, will be beneficial for Iowa’s agriculture. He also sent out a press release that highlighted how he supported the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act. While Grassley’s release did not mention Hinson by name, he said the funds were allocated after a bicameral, bipartisan group of lawmakers sent the letter. "When I voted for the bipartisan infrastructure bill, I was voting for exactly this type of federal support for critical infrastructure that Iowans depend on," Grassley’s press release said. Our ruling Liz Mathis has accused Ashley Hinson of taking undeserved credit for getting federal funding for Mississippi River locks and dams. The claim is based on the fact that Hinson voted against the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act that is funding the works project. Mathis ignores in her statement that Hinson lobbied the Army Corps of Engineers to spend funds from the bill on lock and dam repairs. Hinson says she wanted to make sure Iowa got its share of money made available by the bill. But, additional money Hinson voted against had to be available for the $829 billion worth of work to be done. Had her "no" vote prevailed, the additional money may not have been available in future bills. We rate Mathis’ claim to be Mostly Tru

A schedule proves Donald Trump was recently participating in presidential activities An image shared on social media appears to show former President Donald Trump’s schedule filled with events at the White House, presidential briefings, and meetings with advisers — a year after leaving office. On Jan. 20, 2022, for example, it looks like he was scheduled to receive the president’s daily brief at 9:30 a.m. The image is authentic, but it’s a glitch on a website that’s not associated with the government. What’s actually shown is President Joe Biden’s schedule, not Trump’s. This post was flagged as part of Facebook’s efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about our partnership with Facebook.) The schedule with Trump’s name appeared on Factba.se, a website that collects and publishes Biden’s interviews, speeches, tweets, schedules and more. Featured Fact-check Instagram posts stated on October 10, 2022 in a post “Premature babies are at a much higher risk of injury from immunizations than full-term babies.” By Andy Nguyen • October 13, 2022 When Trump was president, Factba.se did the same for him. His calendar is archived on the site but, as of noon on Jan. 20, 2021, Factba.se stopped tracking Trump, said Bill Frischling, Factba.se’s founder. RELATED VIDEO The page that shows a mashup of Biden’s current schedule with Trump’s name is a bug, Frischling said. It’s not linked on the Factba.se site but it was still accessible via a Google search when PolitiFact asked him about the Facebook post. Frischling said, "We’ve run into confusion in the past where folks think Factba.se IS the White House’s official website," he said. It’s not. And this isn’t Trump’s schedule — it’s Biden’s. We rate claims that it is Trump’s schedule Fals

“Moderna COVID vaccine is no longer recommended due to heart inflammation. A blog headline gives the impression that the Moderna COVID-19 vaccine has been widely discredited. It hasn’t. The headline on the article, which was published on a website called Newsbreak, reads, "Moderna COVID vaccine is no longer recommended due to heart inflammation." The article was shared on Facebook and was flagged as part of Facebook’s efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about our partnership with Facebook.) The headline, which lacks detail about who and where is affected by the recommendation, is misleading. The article links to another website that accurately references a Moderna policy change that applies only to those under age 31 in one European country, Belgium. The Newsbreak article is just a brief paragraph that says, in part, "There are all kinds of discussions about the potential side effects of the covid vaccine, and these include heart inflammation for younger people. Check out the latest reports involving Moderna vaccines below." It then links to a site called Health Thoroughfare, which more accurately reports the details of Belgium’s recommendation for Moderna use, saying "the very rare side effect among under-31s of the Moderna coronavirus vaccine" led Belgium to stop recommending it for that age group. Belgium announced it would stop using the Moderna vaccine as a first or second dose for 18- to 30-year-olds, because of a rare side effect of inflammation of the heart muscle, The Brussels Times reported. People in that age group can still receive Moderna as a booster shot, according to the newspaper. Featured Fact-check Instagram posts stated on October 12, 2022 in an Instagram post Pfizer executive “admits” vaccine was never tested for preventing transmission. By Jeff Cercone • October 13, 2022 "The decision for the basic vaccination of 18- to 30-year-olds is based on international knowledge of possible side effects that are very rare. We took this decision as a precaution," Gudrun Briat, the spokesperson for the Vaccination Task Force, told the newspaper. "Usually the inflammation is harmless and goes away without being noticed, but if there is an alternative vaccine available, it makes more sense not to take any risks," Briat said, according to the article. Other European nations have taken similar steps, PolitiFact reported. In the fall, Sweden temporarily suspended the use of Moderna for those under 30 years old; Finland stopped using Moderna for males under 30 years old; Norway recommended that people under age 18 and men under age 30 take the Pfizer vaccine instead of Moderna’s but did not require it; and Denmark said those under 18 can request Moderna if they wish. Our ruling The headline on a blog article reads, "Moderna COVID vaccine is no longer recommended due to heart inflammation." The headline is misleading; it gives the false impression that the Moderna COVID-19 vaccine has been widely discredited. A new recommendation about the Moderna vaccine applies only to those under the age of 31 in one European country, Belgium, and only to the two initial doses, not boosters. The statement contains an element of truth but ignores critical facts that would give a different impression. We rate this claim Mostly False.

Four players have dropped out of the Australian Open with “chest pains. The Australian Open is underway but some social media users are suggesting that the tennis competition has been marred by COVID-19 vaccine side effects. "Fourth player drops out of Australian Open with ‘chest pains,’" one Jan. 19 Facebook post said. It was flagged as part of Facebook’s efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about our partnership with Facebook.) Tennis Australia, which organizes the Australian Open, didn’t respond to PolitiFact’s questions about the claim. The post doesn’t specify which four players dropped out of the Australian Open with chest pains, but it shows a picture of Slovenian player Dalila Jakupovic hunched over on her knees next to a fallen tennis racket. Featured Fact-check Instagram posts stated on October 12, 2022 in an Instagram post Pfizer executive “admits” vaccine was never tested for preventing transmission. By Jeff Cercone • October 13, 2022 However, that image is from 2020, when she retired from her match after "she dropped to her knees with a coughing spell amid poor air quality," Sky News then reported. Wildfires were polluting the air in Australia at the time and the air quality was bad enough that residents were advised to stay indoors. Although some social media posts are sharing the footage of her collapsing as if it's current, Jakupovic isn’t even on the roster of players competing in this year’s Australian Open. On Jan. 12, she posted a photo from Dubai. Searching online, we found mentions of two other players allegedly quitting the Australian Open due to chest pains: Nikoloz Basilashvili of Georgia and Nick Kyrgios of Australia. On Jan. 5 — before the Australian Open — Basilashvili retired from a match in the ATP Cup in Sydney due to breathing difficulties. He and a doctor "had a conversation before another doctor joined as hand gestures suggested he was feeling tightness in his chest," the Sun reported. "He was overheard saying: ‘Every shot I’m out of breath.’" Basilashvili competed in the Australian Open, losing to Andy Murray on Jan. 18 in a "five-set thriller," ESPN reported. Kyrgios, meanwhile, withdrew from an Australian Open preparation tournament due to "a mystery illness that sparked his asthma" before testing positive for COVID-19, ESPN said. His participation in the Australian Open seemed in jeopardy, but he recovered and played, winning one game against Liam Broady of the United Kingdom before losing to Russia’s Daniil Medvedev. We don’t know who the supposed fourth player is that this post is referring to, but since allegations that three other players quit the tournament over chest pains is wrong, we’re rating this False.

Says the “NC appeals court” acknowledged the state’s election maps “are skewed,” but didn’t block them because they are “partisan hacks. A Democratic state legislator in North Carolina used social media to try to summarize a recent legal challenge to the state’s election maps. State Sen. Deb Butler of New Hanover County serves as the Democratic House whip. She has 20,000 followers on Twitter. On Jan. 12, she tweeted: "So the NC appeals court said… and I paraphrase, yeah, it is despicable, the maps are skewed, citizens will be deprived of their vote, we agree with the experts, democracy hangs in the balance, yada yada, but you know, we are partisan hacks so we gonna live with it." Is that an accurate description of what happened in court? Not exactly. Let’s go through the tweet. The court In North Carolina, the legislature draws the state’s election maps. Voting rights groups recently sued state lawmakers, saying the GOP majority drew the state’s new maps to give Republicans an advantage in an inordinate number of Congressional and legislative districts. The case was heard by a panel of judges in Wake County Superior Court, not the state Court of Appeals. The plaintiffs’ requests for relief were denied in a unanimous decision. The case is being appealed and is scheduled to be heard by the state Supreme Court on Feb. 2. Butler did not say why she called it an appeals court. "I believe, and I do not think there can be any argument, that free and fair elections are fundamental to the continued existence of our democracy," Butler wrote in an email to PolitiFact NC. "Given the findings that were made by the appellate court, I cannot fathom their decision." The judges Butler said the judges are "partisan hacks." The opinion of whether they are "hacks" isn’t suited for the Truth-O-Meter, but we can clarify some things about judges’ political affiliations and the manner of the court. Judges in North Carolina are elected. Each judicial candidate’s political party affiliation is listed on the ballot when they run for office. The races were nonpartisan from 2004 until about five years ago. GOP legislators restored partisan affiliations on the ballot for state Court of Appeals and Supreme Court candidates in 2016, and then for lower courts beginning in 2018. In her email to PolitiFact NC, Butler said her use of the word "partisan" referred to that change in the law and how judges now carry political party labels. "Regrettably, the NC Republican majority passed legislation restoring partisan labels on members of the judiciary and to me, this decision reflects their re-election fears rather than a fair, just and impartial review." Featured Fact-check Senate Leadership Fund stated on October 11, 2022 in a political ad Cheri Beasley “backs tax hikes — even on families making under $75,000.” By Paul Specht • October 31, 2022 Some Twitter users took Butler’s tweet to mean she believes the judges were all from the same party or ideology. That’s not the case. In the redistricting case, the three-judge panel included two Republicans and one Democrat. Judges Graham Shirley and Nathaniel Poovey are Republicans. Judge Dawn Layton was appointed by Democratic Gov. Roy Cooper in 2019. Layton is a registered Democrat who ran for her judicial seat as a Democrat in the 2020 election. Layton, Shirley and Poovey ruled unanimously on the case. In a Richmond Observer story about Layton’s appointment, colleagues and adversaries described her as someone who is fair. Shirley, for his part, hasn’t always ruled with Republicans. In 2017, he allowed the Watauga County Board of Elections to set up an early voting site on Appalachian State University’s campus — at the objection of the board’s Republican chairman and the local GOP’s vice chairman. The Watauga Democrat newspaper wrote about the case. What judges wrote Butler’s paraphrasing of the judges’ views on the GOP-drawn maps isn’t far off-base. The judges did state as fact in their ruling that "the Congressional map is the product of intentional, pro-Republican partisan redistricting" while calling the state House and Senate plans "extreme outliers." They echoed the comments of Duke University statistician Jonathan Mattingly, writing on page 54 of the opinion that the legislative districts "systematically favor the Republican Party to an extent which is rarely, if ever, seen in the non-partisan collection of maps." While the judges didn’t call the maps despicable, they did on page 246 express "disdain for having to deal with issues that potentially lead to results incompatible with democratic principles and subject our State to ridicule." The judges did allow the maps to remain law. Butler’s tweet gave people the impression she was referring to the judges having a common political ideology, which is not reflected in their party affiliations. Her email suggests they ruled the way they did because they’re worried about re-election. In their opinion, the judges offered a legal reasoning for their ruling. The state constitution gives the legislators the power to draw election maps. Judges wrote that the maps are "the result of a democratic process" and that the free elections clause of the state constitution "does not operate as a restraint on the General Assembly’s ability to redistrict for partisan advantage." Our ruling Butler said the "NC appeals court" confirmed the state’s election maps "are skewed" but didn’t block them because they are "partisan hacks." Butler, who acknowledged she was paraphrasing, generally captured the judges’ views on the election maps. Judges expressed "disdain" for having to deal with election maps that they acknowledged are "extreme outliers" that benefit Republicans. However, she got a basic fact wrong. The case was heard in superior court — not the state Court of Appeals. And there’s no apparent evidence that the judges ruled the way they did because of their partisan affiliation. She failed to capture the judges’ reasoning for their vote. And she gave some people the impression that the judges are affiliated with the same party, which isn’t the case. The tweet contains an element of truth: Superior court judges acknowledged the maps are skewed. However, it ignores critical facts about the judges and ruling that would give readers a different impression. That’s our definition of Mostly Fals

Virginia’s “education standards for math and reading are now the lowest in the nation. In his maiden speech to the General Assembly, Gov. Glenn Youngkin reaffirmed his campaign vow to stiffen academic standards in public schools. "Virginia schools have a lofty reputation but lately we’ve not lived up to that reputation," Youngkin, a Republican, said in a Jan. 17 address. "In fact, our educational standards for math and reading are now the lowest in the nation." We fact-checked Youngkin’s last-in-the nation claim during the campaign and think it bears repeating now that he’s in office. Federal research does show Virginia has the lowest baselines for student proficiency on its standardized tests of all measured states for fourth-grade math and reading and eighth-grade reading. This comparison only measures the rigor of various state standards, however, not how well students are learning. When it comes to performance on standardized national exams, Virginia’s fourth graders rank near the top and its eighth graders rank high in math and at the national average in reading. Youngkin does not offer this important perspective. Youngkin’s bottom-of-the-barrel claim is based on a 2021 report by the National Center for Education Statistics, a branch of the U.S. Department of Education. The center examined the proficiency standards in each state in 2019 and assigned them "equivalent scores" on a 0-to-500 scale. Higher scores mean higher standards. "The study is intended to help readers understand the myriad state assessment results that are otherwise difficult to compare and to serve a policy need for reliable information that compares state standards," the report says. "The study is not an evaluation of the various state assessments or of the quality of the states’ achievement standards, and the findings should not be interpreted as evidence of deficiencies in state assessments…" In other words, the study is not judging whether state proficiency standards on tests should be high, low or in the middle. It’s just offering data. The report focuses on reading and math tests in fourth and eighth grades. The equivalent score compares the percentage of students who are deemed proficient on state tests to the percentage that reach the proficiency standard on national tests. Virginia’s exams are called Standards of Learning tests, or SOLs, and are taken by all fourth and eighth graders, as well as some other grades. The national exam is taken by a representative sample of fourth and eight graders in each state. It’s called National Assessment of Education Progress but is better known as the "Nation’s Report Card." Virginia’s numbers In fourth grade reading, Virginia’s proficiency standards were the lowest among 49 states (excluding New Hampshire). The equivalent score was 200. The median score among states was 224. Tennessee had the highest score at 238. In fourth grade math, Virginia standards were again the lowest among 49 states. The equivalent score was 219. The median was 242. Colorado had the highest score at 257. In eighth grade reading, Virginia’s proficiency standards were lowest among 46 states measured. The equivalent score was 236. The median was 266. Kansas was highest, at 288. Featured Fact-check Joe Biden stated on October 23, 2022 in a forum with Now This Student loan forgiveness is “passed. I got it passed by a vote or two. And it’s in effect.” By Louis Jacobson • October 25, 2022 Virginia’s standards for eighth grade math were not measured, nor were those of 14 other states. The reason — according to Charles Pyle, director of media relations for the Virginia Department of Education — is that eighth graders take different math classes based on their abilities, so there is not a single standardized math exam for everyone. Experts stress that equivalent scores do not evaluate how well students are learning. "What Virginia considers proficient may not be at the same level of what other states consider proficient," Grady Wilburn, a statistician for the National Center for Education Statistics, told us last fall. "It doesn’t mean that the students know less than students in other states." Indeed, Virginia fourth graders in 2019 had the third-highest math score on the national test and the ninth-highest reading score. Virginia eighth graders ranked seventh in math and 30th in reading. Youngkin says Virginia’s public schools have strayed from basic instruction under the last two Democratic governors, Ralph Northam and Terry McAuliffe, who led the state from 2014 to 2022. Youngkin says the state’s standardized tests should require students to attain high, aspirational learning levels. Virginia’s proficiency standards for reading were set in 2013 by a state school board appointed by Republican Gov. Bob McDonnell. The math standards were set in 2019 by a state school board appointed by McAuliffe and Northam. McAuliffe deemphasized standardized testing when he was governor from 2014 to 2018, a move that was cheered by many local school boards and gained bipartisan support in the General Assembly. Dan Gecker, president of the state school board, said Virginia’s proficiency standards are set with a practical goal rather than an aspirational one. "We’re looking to set the cut level at a specific body of knowledge for a child to succeed at the next grade level," he said. Our ruling Youngkin said Virginia’s "education standards for math and reading are now the lowest in the nation." He is referring to a federal study that shows Virginia in 2019 had the lowest baselines for proficiency on its standardized tests for fourth grade math and reading and eighth grade reading. The National Center for Education Statistics does not compare test standards for other grades. Youngkin’s statement, however, skips important context. The NCES stresses that its equivalency ratings on standardized tests in states do not reflect how well students are learning in each state. Youngkin omits that Virginia students score near the top on standardized national tests for fourth grade math and reading and eight grade math. Eighth grade leading levels are at the national average. Youngkin’s claim, without elaboration, wrongly suggests that Virginia students are being taught less than their colleagues across the county. So we rate his statement Half True.

“People are 7% poorer now because of Biden inflation. With the highest inflation rates in decades weighing heavily on the minds of many Americans, both Republicans and Democrats have been waging a messaging war about how good, or bad, the economy really is. On the Jan. 16 edition of NBC’s "Meet the Press," Sen. Mitt Romney, R-Utah, took a shot at President Joe Biden’s stewardship of the economy and other matters of state. "He's had a bad year," Romney, the GOP’s 2012 presidential nominee, said of Biden. "He's had 52 weeks of bad weeks. I mean, people are 7% poorer now because of Biden inflation. Gasoline prices are, what, 50% higher than they were when he took office. The border is a mess. COVID was resurgent, but he didn't have in place the tests people needed to keep themselves safe. And then, of course, there was the disaster in Afghanistan. Russia's now threatening Ukraine. Things are not going well." Here, we’ll look at Romney’s assertion that "people are 7% poorer now because of Biden inflation." The inflation rate was 7% during 2021. However, Romney’s focus on inflation alone to claim that Americans are "7% poorer" leaves out half of the equation: rising incomes. An unusually rapid rise in wages erased a lot of, although not all of, the inflation bump last year. "The thought is incomplete," said Douglas Holtz-Eakin, president of the American Action Forum, a center-right think tank. "It leaves out important context." Romney’s office said that his comment was based on the recently released inflation numbers, and argued that wage growth varies across different industries, regions and income segments. Last year’s 7% rise in the Consumer Price Index, the government’s main inflation indicator, was the biggest increase since 1982, when President Ronald Reagan was still in his first term in office. Inflation on that scale can be a major economic problem, because it tends to make the typical individual or family poorer, all other things being equal. (There is some variation in who gets hit hardest by rising inflation.) However, all other things are not equal. Incomes go up, too. If someone’s salary or wages go up faster than the inflation rate, they’ll still come out ahead. If their pay keeps pace with inflation, they’ll be no worse off. If it doesn’t, then they will be poorer. The median American worker was indeed poorer in December 2021 than in December 2020. But Romney’s claim that they were "7% poorer" exaggerated the amount. Rising wages covered about two-thirds of the rise in prices. Featured Fact-check Joe Biden stated on October 8, 2022 in an Instagram post The Biden administration has “created” more than double the number of jobs per month, on average, than any other administration going back to George H.W. Bush. By Louis Jacobson • October 13, 2022 The best measure to evaluate this comparison, according to economists, is average hourly earnings for all private employees. This measurement is well suited for checking Romney’s assertion, because it’s reported monthly, like the inflation data. Between December 2020 and December 2021, average hourly earnings for private employees rose by 4.7%, which is a healthy increase by historical standards. That still meant the typical American fell behind by 2.3%, a notable and worrisome figure. But that’s a fraction of the 7% that Romney cited. Inflation-adjusted wages "have declined slightly, but by significantly less than 7%," said Molly Kinder, a fellow at the Brookings Institution. Other measures paint a similar picture. A private sector measure, the Payscale Index, provides data through the third quarter of 2021. It found that year-over-year wage growth, once adjusted for inflation, was negative 0.5%. And an analysis by the Brookings Institution of data reported by 13 large companies (including Amazon and McDonalds) through October 2021 found that workers at 10 of the companies saw wage gains even after accounting for inflation. Finally, some economists took issue with Romney’s term "Biden inflation." Presidents can have an impact on the economy through the policies they pursue, but a number of factors beyond the control of any president, including the status of the coronavirus pandemic globally and supply-chain difficulties, have played a significant role in accelerating inflation. By focusing only on the inflation rate and not rising wages, Romney "is attributing 100% of the blame for the negative impact of price change to the president, while assigning 0% of the credit for the income gains to Biden," said Gary Burtless, a Brookings Institution economist. Our ruling Romney said, "People are 7% poorer now because of Biden inflation." The inflation rate was 7% in the past year. However, a 4.7% increase in wages reduced the impact on the typical worker by about two-thirds, making Romney’s figure exaggerated. We rate the statement Mostly False. Jon Greenberg contributed to this articl

Omicron is “the fastest-spreading virus known to humankind. As the omicron variant of COVID-19 rapidly made its way around the world — infiltrating 89 countries within three weeks of first being identified in late November — it became the fastest-spreading variant since the start of the pandemic. Social media users attempted to quantify its place among viruses throughout history. "Omicron is now the fastest-spreading virus known to humankind," began one three-minute Facebook video. It was flagged as part of Facebook’s efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about our partnership with Facebook.) There is more than one way to quantify virus’ spread: One is to measure how easily a virus is transmitted from person to person, and another is to look at how quickly it spreads across the world. When it comes to the former, measles is the fastest. For the latter, it’s omicron. Measles is the most contagious virus when it comes to transmission between people, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Each person who contracts it can infect 12 to 18 other people, in a population not protected by vaccines and other preventative measures. The omicron variant ranks as a close second, though: Each person who contracts omicron can infect between 7 and 14 people in an unvaccinated, unprotected population, studies show. One term scientists use to quantify infectious disease outbreaks is R0, pronounced "R naught," and called the basic reproduction number. It indicates the average number of times one person will transmit the virus to someone else in a population where no one has been exposed to or vaccinated against the disease, and is therefore a more theoretical measure. The basic reproduction number for measles is between 12 and 18. For COVID-19, the basic reproduction number has increased with each strain of the virus. With the original strain, each sick person likely would infect between two and three others; with the delta variant, between five and seven; and with omicron, most estimates put it at 1.5 to 2 times more than delta. That means with omicron, each sick person infects between 7 and 14 people. Another mathematical measure for the spread of infection is called Rt, which is the effective reproduction number. It takes into account factors such as vaccination levels and immunity from prior exposure and "is likely lower than the basic reproduction number," according to the Health Lab. The Rt value is more of a real-time representation of what a virus’ infection rate is. Featured Fact-check Instagram posts stated on October 12, 2022 in an Instagram post Pfizer executive “admits” vaccine was never tested for preventing transmission. By Jeff Cercone • October 13, 2022 The effective reproduction number is measured during an ongoing pandemic, and for COVID-19, it also has varied for each strain of the virus. With the original strain, each sick person would infect around 2.5 others; with the delta variant, it was 3.5 to 4; and with omicron, scientists have estimated it between 3.7 and 4.2. When measuring how fast a virus spreads around the world, "Omicron is certainly the most rapidly spreading virus among the ones we have been able to investigate at this level of detail," William Hanage, an associate professor of epidemiology at Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, told El Pais, a newspaper in Spain, in an interview. Hanage told PolitiFact that’s because even though each measles infection causes more secondary infections in an unprotected population, it takes longer than omicron to do so. The time it takes one person infected with the omicron variant to infect another person — called the generation time — is shorter than with measles, in a non-immune population. The generation time is about 12 days for measles and four to five days for omicron, El Pais reported. "As a result of omicron's shorter generation time — and despite its lower R0 — the numbers of omicron cases climb more rapidly per unit of time than measles," Hanage said. Our ruling A Facebook video said, "Omicron is now the fastest-spreading virus known to humankind." When it comes to how quickly viruses spread across the world, omicron is the fastest, experts say. When it comes to how viruses are transmitted from person to person, measles is the most contagious. Each person who has measles can infect 12 to 18 other people, in a population not protected by vaccines and other preventative measures, according to the CDC. But the omicron variant of SARS-CoV-2 is a close second. Estimates put it at 1.5 to 2 times more transmissible than the delta variant, which saw each sick person infecting between five and seven others. So each person who contracts the omicron variant can infect between 7 and 14 people in an unvaccinated, unprotected population. We rate this claim Mostly True

“Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor tests positive for COVID-19 despite triple vaccination, diligent masking and working from home. Two U.S. Supreme Court justices recently made headlines when the court’s mask-wearing practices came under scrutiny, but a social media claim took the story one step further. "Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor tests positive for COVID-19 despite triple vaccination, diligent masking and working from home," an image shared in a Jan. 18 Facebook post says. The post is a screenshot of a Jan. 22 news headline, which bears a CNBC logo and the byline of CNBC reporter Kevin Breuninger. (Screenshot from Facebook shows a viral image that appears to have been doctored to include a fabricated headline.) We saw the post being shared by musician Ted Nugent, a vocal Trump supporter and gun rights advocate who has made statements amplifying the baseless claim that Democrats stole the 2020 presidential election. The post was flagged as part of Facebook’s efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about our partnership with Facebook.) The headline that the claim is based on appears to be fabricated. We did not find any news article with that headline in a search of a database of published news stories; on the CNBC website; on Breuninger’s Twitter account; or on Breuninger’s profile page on CNBC.com, which includes links to stories he authored. The headline in the Facebook image also appears in a different font than those used by CNBC’s website. Further, the Supreme Court has not released any information that says Sotomayor tested positive for COVID-19, and there are no media reports that include that news. The court issued a press release in October when Justice Brett ​​Kavanaugh tested positive for the virus. We contacted Breuninger, CNBC and the Supreme Court public information office for comment, but have not received replies. Our ruling A Facebook post says, "Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor tests positive for COVID-19 despite triple vaccination, diligent masking and working from home." The post looks like a screenshot of a Jan. 22 news headline, with a CNBC logo and CNBC reporter Breuninger’s byline. Featured Fact-check Instagram posts stated on October 10, 2022 in a post “Premature babies are at a much higher risk of injury from immunizations than full-term babies.” By Andy Nguyen • October 13, 2022 But the headline that appears in the screenshot is not authentic. The Supreme Court has not released any information that says Sotomayor tested positive for COVID-19, and there are no media reports that include that news. We rate this claim False

“This country’s working people actually got a raise. During his long session with reporters to mark his first year in office, President Joe Biden said he’d had both setbacks and wins. He counted wages as one of the wins. "For the first time in a long time, this country’s working people actually got a raise," Biden said Jan. 19. "The people of the bottom 40% saw their income go up, the most of all the categories." Here we focus on the heart of that statement, that "working people actually got a raise." In simple dollar amounts, yes, earnings went up. But with inflation at a 40-year high, the real value of people’s paychecks went down. (Sen. Mitt Romney, R-Utah, had a similar problem — but from the opposite direction — weighing inflation against wage gains in a claim we fact-checked.) Real vs. constant dollars Two different sets of government numbers tell the same story — inflation outpaced raises. The Bureau of Labor Statistics tracks median weekly earnings for each quarter. And it gives the numbers in both current dollars — what people see on their pay stubs — and real dollars — the buying power after inflation. In current dollars — unadjusted for inflation — the typical weekly paycheck was $1,008 in the fourth quarter of 2021, up from $982 a year earlier. But in inflation-adjusted dollars, pay went down over that period to $945 a week. !function(e,i,n,s){var t="InfogramEmbeds",d=e.getElementsByTagName("script")[0];if(window[t]&&window[t].initialized)window[t].process&&window[t].process();else if(!e.getElementById(n)){var o=e.createElement("script");o.async=1,o.id=n,o.src="https://e.infogram.com/js/dist/embed-loader-min.js",d.parentNode.insertBefore(o,d)}}(document,0,"infogram-async"); The Federal Reserve shows similar trends for average hourly earnings. Between December 2020 and December 2021, average hourly earnings for private employees rose by 4.7%, which is a healthy increase by historical standards. But inflation, as measured by the federal government’s Consumer Price Index, was 7% in that period. That was the biggest increase since 1982, when President Ronald Reagan was still in his first term in office. Featured Fact-check Facebook posts stated on October 9, 2022 in a Facebook post “Donald Trump is back on Twitter,” thanks to Elon Musk. By Sara Swann • October 10, 2022 "Wages have increased substantially, but less than inflation," said Molly Kinder, a fellow at the Brookings Institution, a Washington-based policy research center. "Thus real wages have declined slightly." The White House press office said Biden was talking about the nominal increase in wages. They noted that most economists expect inflation to ease, which would set the stage for real wage gains. The effect on low earners Biden also touted gains for lower-wage earners, "the bottom 40%." He said they did the best in terms of income gains. BLS data showed that workers at the bottom quarter of the earnings ladder saw their incomes rise by 6.6%, nearly keeping pace with inflation. But for the middle 50% of workers, earnings rose just about 2.6%. That lagged well behind inflation. The top 10% of earners saw a rise of 5.3%. Workers at large companies did better, one survey found. Brookings took data reported by 13 large companies (ranging from Amazon to McDonalds) and found that through October 2021, workers at 10 of them saw wage gains even after accounting for inflation. Our ruling Biden said that "this country’s working people actually got a raise." They did, with an overall increase of 4.7%. But with inflation at 7%, the average person lost ground in terms of real income. This was particularly true for the middle half of earners who saw a median wage increase of only about 2.5%. The picture was a bit better for low-wage earners, but not enough to shift the broader pattern for 2021: Inflation outpaced wage increases. We rate this claim Mostly False.

“There (are) over 800 prison camps in the United States, all fully operational and ready to receive prisoners. They are all staffed and even surrounded by full-time guards, but they are all empty. These camps are to be operated by FEMA. A nearly 8,000-word post circulating on social media claiming the U.S. government has hundreds of prison camps at the ready includes a hodgepodge of debunked conspiracy theories, some that are decades old. "There (are) over 800 prison camps in the United States, all fully operational and ready to receive prisoners," the Jan. 19 post on Facebook says. "They are all staffed and even surrounded by full-time guards, but they are all empty. These camps are to be operated by FEMA (Federal Emergency Management Agency)." The claim continues, saying the camps "all have railroad facilities as well as roads leading to and from the detention facilities. Many also have an airport nearby. The majority of the camps can house a population of 20,000 prisoners." The post was flagged as part of Facebook’s efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about our partnership with Facebook.) The claim is "absolutely false," a FEMA spokesperson told PolitiFact. We found no evidence, in media or government reports or anywhere else, to corroborate the claim. However, there are many reports that debunk false claims about FEMA camps. Information cited in the post as purported proof — including specific executive orders and alleged locations of camps — is misleading or false. None of the concepts in the claim are new; a post with nearly identical opening paragraphs was shared on a Yahoo message board in September 2000. The baseless idea that the U.S. government might try to imprison its citizens in FEMA-run concentration camps has a long history, but the COVID-19 pandemic brought it renewed attention. "Among certain right-wing conspiracy theorist circles, notably the militia movement, fears of government-imposed martial law, FEMA camps, gun confiscation, and depopulation have been prevalent for decades," according to a 2020 report from the Anti-Defamation League. "Many of these concerns have been updated and applied to the coronavirus, and they are spreading so rampantly that the Department of Defense and local law enforcement agencies have had to address them." PolitiFact also has debunked claims about FEMA prison camps or detention centers related to COVID-19. Featured Fact-check Instagram posts stated on October 10, 2022 in a post “Premature babies are at a much higher risk of injury from immunizations than full-term babies.” By Andy Nguyen • October 13, 2022 The Facebook post says FEMA is associated with specific executive orders which would allow the agency to "suspend the Constitution and the Bill of Rights," and lists the numbers of 15 executive orders. PolitiFact reported in 2014 on 14 of the same executive orders, which "allegedly usurp traditional executive powers, including things like seizing control of the media, railroads, waterways and correctional institutions." In reality, though, those order numbers matched up with executive orders on either entirely different topics or orders that were much more limited in scope. The executive orders in question originated in 1962, Popular Mechanics reported, when the U.S. was involved in conflicts in both Cuba and Vietnam and the prospect of a Cold War with the Soviet Union loomed. So "President John F. Kennedy signed a series of executive orders that outlined the basic framework for agency responsibilities during a national emergency." And rather than allowing the suspension of citizens’ rights, "safeguards were written into the current framework of responsibilities, declaring that any emergency preparation or actions ‘shall be consistent with the Constitution and laws of the United States,’" according to the 2014 article in Popular Mechanics. Almost all of the executive orders have since been revoked. The Facebook post also includes details about where the purported 800 prison camps are located, including Fort Chaffee in Arkansas and Camp Grayling in Michigan. But evidence does not corroborate those claims. For example, the post says that Fort Chaffee "has new runway for aircraft, new camp facility with cap of 40,000 prisoners." That same claim was debunked in a 2010 report called "Fear of FEMA" from the Southern Poverty Law Center, and there’s no evidence that anything has changed since. Our ruling A Facebook post says, "There (are) over 800 prison camps in the United States, all fully operational and ready to receive prisoners. They are all staffed and even surrounded by full-time guards, but they are all empty. These camps are to be operated by FEMA (Federal Emergency Management Agency)." A FEMA spokesperson said the claim is false. There is no evidence, such as media or government reports, to support the claim. Meanwhile, there are many reports that debunk false claims about FEMA camps. Information cited in the claim as purported proof — including specific executive orders and alleged locations of camps — is misleading or false. We rate this claim Pants on Fire

Rabbi taken hostage in Texas synagogue is “anti-Zionist” who may have known gunman Rabbi Charlie Cytron-Walker was hailed as a hero after news reports described him throwing a chair at an armed hostage-taker on Jan. 15, allowing himself and two others to escape after 11 hours being held captive in a Texas synagogue. But one conservative radio host raised questions about the rabbi, calling him an "anti-Zionist" who may have known the gunman because he had invited him inside for tea. A Facebook post by conservative radio host and author Michael Savage reads in all-caps: "TEXAS RABBI NOW POSING AS A HERO. 'THREW A CHAIR' and ran out? WHAT ABOUT THE FBI SWAT TEAM WHO FLASHBANGED & SHOT THE TERRORIST DEAD? (something does not add up? Rabbi was a leftist, anti-zionist. Why did he invite this terrorist in to have tea? Did he know him?)" This post was flagged as part of Facebook’s efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about our partnership with Facebook.) The investigation into what happened that day is ongoing, but police and news reports so far indicate the gunman was a stranger to Cytron-Walker — and we find nothing to suggest the rabbi was "anti-Zionist." On the morning of the incident, a British national named Malik Faisal Akram took the rabbi and three congregants hostage at Congregation Beth Israel in Colleyville, Texas, northeast of Fort Worth. In a Jan. 17 interview with CBS Mornings, Cytron-Walker said he let the man into the synagogue after he arrived during morning services. The two spoke while the rabbi made them a cup of tea. "Some of his story didn’t quite add up, so I was a little bit curious, but that’s not necessarily an uncommon thing," Cyrton-Walker said of the conversation he had with the man while preparing tea. In a separate interview with NPR on Jan. 19, the rabbi recounted the interaction again: "He had come in to get warm. I spoke with him one on one, quietly, that he was welcome to stay for the rest of the service if he had just come in to get warm. And while I was talking with him, he pulled out a gun. It was covered by his coat. And that's how that happened." Faisal Akram then threatened the hostages over the course of 11 hours, according to police and news reports. One hostage was released about 5 p.m., but things took a turn hours later, and Cytron-Walker decided he had to act. That’s when he threw the chair at the gunman and told the other hostages to run, according to news reports. We reached out to Savage for evidence of his claim but did not get a response; his post contained no information to undergird his assertions. Neither the FBI nor the Colleyville Police Department have made any comments to suggest that Faisal Akram was anything but a stranger to the rabbi. A spokesperson for the FBI told us the agency couldn’t comment specifically on this claim "due to the ongoing investigation." We also reached out to Colleyville Police and did not receive a response. Jennifer Farmer, a spokesperson for the rabbi, told PolitiFact that Cytron-Walker did not know the gunman before they met that day, nor is he anti-Israel. "The rabbi is not anti-Israel," Farmer told us in an email. "He answered a knock on the window because he thought a human being was in need. He did not know the intentions of this man’s heart." Since 2006, Cytron-Walker has been the rabbi at Congregation Beth Israel, which practices Reform Judaism. Its website states that "we believe in interfaith inclusion and transforming Jewish isolation through engagement, participation and volunteerism." Featured Fact-check Instagram posts stated on October 10, 2022 in a post “Premature babies are at a much higher risk of injury from immunizations than full-term babies.” By Andy Nguyen • October 13, 2022 Cytron-Walker had resigned from his job at the congregation this fall after its board voted to recommend not renewing his contract, according to a report published Jan. 19 in Forward, a nonprofit newspaper covering issues of interest to American Jews. Cytron-Walker will remain in his job until June, when his contract expires, the report said. The rabbi confirmed his resignation in an interview with the Jewish Telegraphic Agency, but said the focus should be on his congregation's healing from the hostage ordeal. Cytron-Walker did sign a letter in 2020 in which 10 progressive Jewish groups urged the Israeli government not to annex the West Bank and expressed "support of the pursuit of a negotiated two-state solution that respects the legitimate national rights and aspirations" of Israelis and Palestinians. The rabbi has expressed criticism of Israel’s treatment of Palestinians in sermons, while also defending Israel. Simply criticizing Israel on human rights, however, does not mean you are an anti-Zionist. The Anti-Defamation League defines an anti-Zionist as "someone who is opposed to the Jewish right to self-determination in the Jewish homeland of Israel," according to spokesman Jake Hyman. "Someone who criticizes annexation (which ADL has done) or is critical of Israeli government policies (which ADL has also done), is not an anti-Zionist," Hyman said. Faisal Akram, the gunman, arrived in New York from Britain two weeks before the attack and made his way to Texas, where he reportedly stayed at a homeless shelter in the days leading up to the incident, according to news reports. According to the BBC, he was the subject of an investigation by MI5, the British security agency, in 2020, but was no longer deemed a threat. His brother told the New York Times that Faisal Akram suffered from mental health issues. During the standoff in Colleyville, Faisal Akram demanded the release of Aafia Siddiqui, a Palestinian woman held in federal prison on terrorism charges in Fort Worth, The Associated Press and others reported. Savage in his Facebook post also falsely cast doubt on Cytron-Walker’s heroics, saying the rabbi is "posing as a hero," and asked "what about the FBI SWAT team who flashbanged & shot the terrorist dead?" Video from a local ABC station of the end of the standoff clearly shows the three hostages escaping through a side door, followed by the gunman, who quickly ducked back inside. Shortly after, FBI agents raided the building and fatally shot Faisal Akram, the Washington Post reported. Our ruling Savage described a Texas rabbi a "leftist, anti-Zionist" who may have known the gunman who took him and his congregants hostage on Jan. 15. Rabbi Cytron-Walker has made statements both critical and in support of the Israeli government. But there is no evidence that he meets the definition of an anti-Zionist, according to the ADL. Cytron-Walker indicated in interviews with CBS and NPR that he did not know the gunman — and a spokesperson for the rabbi said he let the man in the building because "he thought a human being was in need." Police and news reports so far also indicate the gunman was a stranger to Cytron-Walker. Authorities are still investigating the Jan. 15 event. Based on public information available at this time, we rate this claim False. PolitiFact researcher Caryn Baird contributed to this repor

Photo shows Jeffrey Epstein and Kamala Harris posing together An image being shared on social media appears to show Vice President Kamala Harris and disgraced financier and sex offender Jeffrey Epstein uncomfortably close. "Well, would you look at that, Jeffrey & Headboard Harris probably on their way to Pedo island?" reads a description of the image that shows the pair with their arms around each other and smiling for the camera. "I’ll bet she wouldn’t like that pic on Facebook." Maybe not, but what you should know is that this picture isn’t authentic — it’s been altered to show Harris and Epstein together, and they weren’t. This post was flagged as part of Facebook’s efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about our partnership with Facebook.) A reverse image search of the altered photo shows that in the original, Harris is posing with her husband, Doug Emhoff. Featured Fact-check Instagram posts stated on October 10, 2022 in a post “Premature babies are at a much higher risk of injury from immunizations than full-term babies.” By Andy Nguyen • October 13, 2022 The photo was taken by Jerod Harris, according to Getty Images, and shows the couple attending a dinner at the Broad Museum in Los Angeles in 2015. The image of Epstein that was transplanted onto Emhoff’s head appears to be a mugshot taken in 2006 after Epstein was indicted on charges of soliciting a prostitute. RELATED VIDEO Harris isn’t the first person to show up in a doctored photo with Epstein. She shares that distinction with President Joe Biden, former President Donald Trump, and CNN anchor Don Lemon. We rate claims that this picture is authentic Pants on Fire!

Novak Djokovic is the first professional athlete to be banned from a major sporting event for “not taking drugs. After an 11-day ordeal, tennis star Novak Djokovic was deported from Australia after he lost his final bid to stay in the country and play in the Australian Open despite being unvaccinated against COVID-19. Djokovic, the competition’s record-holder, was initially approved for a medical exemption by Tennis Australia and the state of Victoria because he tested positive for the coronavirus in December. But border officials rejected the exemption and revoked his visa. Djokovic’s challenge to remain in the country was unanimously dismissed in a court hearing on Jan. 16. The saga culminated in a flurry of social media posts claiming that Djokovic is the first athlete to be banned because he didn’t "take drugs." "Novak Djokovic becomes the first professional athlete in history to be banned from a major sporting competition for not taking drugs," reads one popular Twitter post. But he is not the first athlete to be prevented from participating in sporting events for not getting the COVID-19 vaccine, nor is he the first to be stopped from competition for refusing to take certain medications. It's also important to note that the tournament didn't ban Djokovic from playing. He was deported because of Australia's COVID-19 policies. The post was flagged as part of Facebook’s efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about our partnership with Facebook.) A high-profile example is Brooklyn Nets basketball player Kyrie Irving, who was told in October that he wouldn’t be able to practice or play for the team until he met New York’s COVID-19 vaccine requirement. The Nets reversed course about 35 games into the season after a COVID-19 outbreak shortened the roster. Under the new agreement, Irving serves as a part-time player who can participate in most road games but is barred from playing at home in Brooklyn or in away games against the New York Knicks in Madison Square Garden due to New York City’s mandate. Featured Fact-check Instagram posts stated on October 12, 2022 in an Instagram post Pfizer executive “admits” vaccine was never tested for preventing transmission. By Jeff Cercone • October 13, 2022 NBA players aren’t required to be vaccinated, but they face stringent testing and social restrictions. The league has said that unvaccinated players won’t be paid for games they miss due to their unvaccinated status. If nothing changes — such as Irving's unvaccinated status or NYC’s mandate — and the Nets make the playoffs, it will be the first team to ever try to win a title with a lead player only being allowed to play half of every playoff series. There are other athletes who have been prohibited from participating in a "major sporting competition" or event for not taking the vaccine or other medication. There’s professional golfer Charlie Beljan, who said in a now-deleted tweet that he was forced to withdraw from the Professional Golfers’ Association’s Bermuda Championship in October because he "didn’t take the jab." Beljan didn’t participate due to Bermuda’s COVID-19 policies, not the PGA’s. South African runner Caster Semenya was ruled ineligible from participating in the summer Olympics in Tokyo because she refused to take medication for a disorder of sexual development, or DSD, a condition that causes her to have naturally elevated levels of testosterone. "It’s taking the soul out of my body," Semenya told the Guardian in April 2021. "They want me to take my own system down. I’m not sick. I don’t need drugs. I will never do that." No major U.S. professional sports league has a vaccine requirement for its players, but some sporting organizations do. The most notable being the United States’ Olympic and Paralympic Committee, which announced in September that athletes hoping to compete at the 2022 Winter Olympics had to be fully vaccinated against COVID-19 by Dec.1, 2021. Canada’s committee made a similar announcement in October. Our ruling A tweet says that Djokovic is the first athlete to be banned from a major sporting event for "not taking drugs." This isn’t accurate. Multiple athletes have been banned, in one form or another, from competing in their sports for refusing to take medication or get the COVID-19 vaccine. Team USA and Team Canada both mandated that athletes be fully vaccinated against the virus for eligibility to compete in the upcoming Winter Olympics. We rate this Fals

“India has nearly 1.4 billion citizens. Nearly 800 million of them live in extreme poverty — less than $1.90 per day. Yet EVERY singly (sic) Indian citizen is required to have a valid form of ID to vote in national elections. As voting rights legislation has taken center stage in the United States, social media posts point to other countries that require voter identification as a model for the U.S. "India has nearly 1.4 billion citizens. Nearly 800 million of them live in extreme poverty — less than $1.90 per day. Yet EVERY singly (sic) Indian citizen is required to have a valid form of ID to vote in national elections," says a Jan. 12 post on Facebook. It continues, "What excuse does America have to not do the same?" The claim came from Jovan Hutton Pulitzer, who pushed conspiracy theories about the 2020 presidential election. The post was flagged as part of Facebook’s efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about our partnership with Facebook.) The post implies that a country with a large population and high poverty can require voter identification without disenfranchising voters. But it gets a fact wrong, and leaves out important context about voting in India and the debate over voter ID in the U.S. The post significantly misstates how many people live in extreme poverty in India. An estimated 134 million live on less than $2 per day, not 800 million, according to Pew Research Center. In India, citizens are required to have a valid form of identification to vote in national elections, which can include a voter ID card or other documents issued by the government, such as a passport, driver’s license or birth certificate. But before they can vote, they must enroll as new voters and their names must appear on electoral lists, according to the Election Commission of India. Reports indicate that some citizens — mostly minorities and women — have not been able to get their names added to electoral lists or were removed from the lists, which means they cannot vote. Indian citizens become eligible to enroll as new voters when they turn 18. The only citizens who are not entitled to be included on electoral rolls are "persons who are of unsound mind and have been declared so by a competent court or disqualified due to 'Corrupt Practices' or offences relating to elections," the government’s national portal says. In practice, though, people are not always added to the electoral rolls when they register, sometimes without explanation; others are removed from the rolls without explanation, Foreign Policy magazine reported in 2019, after the last national election. A polling official, right, checking the name of an Indian woman voter during the seventh and final phase of national elections in Dharmsala, India, May 19, 2019. (AP) Featured Fact-check Instagram posts stated on October 23, 2022 in a post Arizona Secretary of State Katie Hobbs “sent 6,000 wrong ballots to Republicans.” By Gabrielle Settles • October 28, 2022 "India is often celebrated for its status as the world’s largest democracy, but relatively little attention is given to the fact that many citizens are denied the chance to vote," the magazine said. "The founders of Missing Voters, a smartphone app to track disenfranchised voters in India, estimated that nearly 120 million citizens were missing from voter lists in last May’s national election." Minorities and women make up a disproportionate number of the people missing from electoral rolls, the magazine reported. Other researchers corroborated the report: "​​We find enough evidence that shows various problems in electoral rolls have become stumbling blocks preventing citizens from exercising their right to vote," they wrote in The Print, an Indian publication, during the 2019 election. India had about 900 million eligible voters during the 2019 election, according to CNN. About 67% of those eligible cast a ballot in the 2019 national election, The Hindu newspaper reported, or around 603 million people. The U.S. has no national-level ID requirement to vote, but 35 U.S. states have laws asking voters to show some form of identification at the polls, while the remaining states require other identifying information when voters cast ballots, such as a signature, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures. What bothers some voting rights advocates is what’s in the mix of allowable options for acceptable IDs. In Texas and Tennessee, for example, gun permits are considered valid voter IDs, but student IDs are not. Critics say this makes it easy for gun owners, a heavily Republican group, to vote but harder for students, a predominantly Democratic group. Also, voters who lack government-issued IDs tend to be nonwhite. Proposed legislation backed by Democrats would expand the range of acceptable IDs and provide a workaround for voters who don’t have an ID. Our ruling A Facebook post says, "India has nearly 1.4 billion citizens. Nearly 800 million of them live in extreme poverty — less than $1.90 per day. Yet EVERY singly (sic) Indian citizen is required to have a valid form of ID to vote in national elections. What excuse does America have to not do the same?" The claim implies that a country with a large population and extreme poverty was able to implement a voter identification law without disenfranchising voters. But it errs in a couple of ways. The post misstates how many people in India live in extreme poverty; the correct number is estimated at 134 million, not 800 million. India has a national voter ID requirement, but the post leaves out important context about voting in the U.S. and India. In India, before casting a vote, citizens must enroll as new voters and be included on electoral lists. Reports have indicated that people are not always added to the rolls when they register, and others are removed from the rolls without explanation. In the U.S., most states have an ID requirement for voting, and the rest require some type of identifying information. The statement is partially accurate but leaves out important details, so we rate it Half True

Former President Donald Trump “is fluent in Japanese. A post on Facebook suggested that former President Donald Trump is fluent in Japanese, despite a significant lack of documentation of such a skill. "Is Donald Trump a trained Quantum Physicist? I recently came across information that postulates Trump was tutored at MIT by a Japanese mentor," said a Facebook user in a post shared Jan. 13. "Also, learned Trump is fluent in Japanese. Interesting." This post was flagged as part of Facebook’s efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about our partnership with Facebook.) Foreign language proficiency would come in handy for a president’s diplomatic affairs. Jimmy Carter spoke Spanish on his trips to Latin America, and Franklin D. Roosevelt was fluent in French and German. Roosevelt is believed to be the last multilingual president of the United States. However, there is scant evidence that Trump is fluent in Japanese. The 45th president’s biography on the White House website makes no mention of foreign language skills. Neither does the Trump Organization’s biography of its founder. (PolitiFact reached out to the White House Historical Association and did not hear back.) It’s unknown whether Trump studied any foreign languages at the New York Military Academy, Fordham University or the Wharton School of Finance and Commerce at the University of Pennsylvania, because he has refused to publicly release his high school and college transcripts, The Washington Post reported. Featured Fact-check Instagram posts stated on October 10, 2022 in a post “Premature babies are at a much higher risk of injury from immunizations than full-term babies.” By Andy Nguyen • October 13, 2022 As president, Trump used translators when meeting with foreign dignitaries, including those from Japan. During his first visit with then-Prime Minister Shinzo Abe in February 2017, Trump did not wear a translator earpiece for the opening remarks, according to reporters’ tweets. In photos and videos of the event, Trump is seen nodding along as if he understood Abe’s speech, even though Trump could not hear the English translation. At the time, White House officials told reporters that Trump had previewed an English translation of the speech and had spoken with Abe about the topics extensively prior to the event. Trump wore an earpiece to hear translations after the opening remarks. In later visits with Abe and other Japanese officials — like this one in April 2019 — Trump also used an interpreter or a translation device. Our ruling A Facebook post claimed that Trump is fluent in Japanese. There is no evidence that the former president is proficient in Japanese or any other foreign language. As president he required translation assistance. We rate this claim False.

A Black Lives Matter administrator was arrested in a 1983 bombing at the U.S. Capitol The one-year anniversary of the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol reminded one social media user of an attack decades earlier: a late-night bomb blast near the Senate chambers. A Facebook post reads: "Did you know that on November 7, 1983 the May 19th Communist Organization detonated a bomb in the senate in an attempt to kill Republicans? Susan Rosenberg was arrested for this. She was pardoned by Clinton. She is now an administrator for Black Lives Matters and now does fundraising and administrative work for BLM." This post was flagged as part of Facebook’s efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about our partnership with Facebook.) On Nov. 7, 1983, a late-night bomb blast set off by a left-wing group caused extensive damange to a conference room near the Senate chambers. No one was injured in the attack, which caused about $1 million in damage, according to some reports. The May 19th Communist Organization is described by the FBI as "a Marxist-Leninist organization which advocated the armed revolution and violent overthrow of the United States Government." It used several aliases, including the "Armed Resistance Unit." That was the name the group gave when it called the Capitol switchboard and the Washington Post shortly before the bombing. The group said its goal was to oppose U.S. military involvement in Grenada and Lebanon. Republicans controlled the U.S. Senate at the time, but the group stated in a letter to NPR taking credit for the attack that it was not attempting to kill anyone. It did suggest the possibility of deadly violence in the future. "We purposely aimed our attack at the institutions of imperialist rule rather than at individual members of the ruling class and government. We did not choose to kill any of them this time. But their lives are not sacred …, " the group wrote, according to the Washington Post. Rosenberg was one of the group’s earliest members, according to Smithsonian Magazine. She was one of seven members of the group indicted in 1988 in the Capitol bombing, as well as other building attacks around that time. Charges were dropped against Rosenberg and two others in a 1990 deal in which three others pleaded guilty, so she was never tried or convicted in the Capitol attack. Rosenberg at the time of the 1988 indictment was serving a 58-year sentence after she was caught bringing guns and more than 600 pounds of explosives to a New Jersey storage facility in 1984. Featured Fact-check Instagram posts stated on October 27, 2022 in a post Video shows Marjorie Taylor Greene planted pipe bombs at Republican and Democratic party headquarters on Jan. 5, 2021. By Gabrielle Settles • October 31, 2022 After Rosenberg served 16 years in prison, President Bill Clinton commuted her sentence on his last day in office on Jan. 20, 2001. Rosenberg does not work for Black Lives Matter, but sat on the board of directors of an organization called Thousand Currents. PolitiFact has previously reported that Thousand Currents, a nonprofit that partners with grassroots groups and movements, partnered with the Black Lives Matter Global Network in a fiscal-sponsorship agreement. The group provided "administrative and back-office support, including finance, accounting, grants management, insurance, human resources, legal and compliance," a spokesperson for Thousand Currents told us in 2020. An archived web page from February 2021 said that the fiscal-sponsorship agreement with Black Lives Matter was in effect from 2016 to 2020. It said the group’s fiscal-sponsorships have sunset so that the organization can "​​focus on its core grantmaking to grassroots groups and movements in Africa, Asia, and Latin America." An archived web page for Thousand Currents from June 16, 2020 lists Rosenberg as vice chair of its board of directors and describes her as a human and prisoner rights advocate. The board of directors page is no longer available and redirects to the group’s homepage. That appears to be in response to what the group in a blog post on July 6, 2020 called "hateful disinformation campaigns," that forced it to protect the privacy of staff that became "targets of harassment." The topic of Rosenberg and the charity’s connection to Black Lives Matter was the subject of numerous articles in conservative media that summer. It’s not clear how involved, if at all, Rosenberg was in the group’s work for Black Lives Matter. According to Thousand Currents most recent tax return filed in March of 2021, Rosenberg was listed as its vice chair of the board. The return shows Rosenberg did not receive any compensation from Thousand Currents and that she averaged about two hours of work per week. We reached out by email to Thousand Currents to ask if Rosenberg is still affiliated with the group and whether her work directly involved the Black Lives Matter sponsorship, but have not heard back. Our ruling A Facebook post claims that Susan Rosenberg is a Black Lives Matter administrator who was arrested in a 1983 bombing at the U.S. Capitol. Rosenberg is not an administrator for Black Lives Matter. She did serve on the board of directors for a nonprofit called Thousand Currents, which helped manage grants for the Black Lives Matter Global Network in a fiscal-sponsorship agreement. That partnership ended in 2020, and it’s not clear if Rosenberg’s work directly involved Black Lives Matter. Rosenberg was indicted in 1988 in the Capitol bombing, but the charges were dropped in 1990 while she was serving a lengthy prison sentence on separate charges of illegal possession of weapons and explosives. We rate this claim Mostly Fals

“Million pounds of rat meat being sold as boneless chicken wings in the U.S. It was Super Bowl season — prime time for feasting on chicken wings — when a baseless claim about the boneless delicacy first surfaced six years ago. Now the debunked rumor is once again making the rounds before the big game. "Million pounds of rat meat being sold as boneless chicken wings in the U.S.," says one Instagram post dated Jan. 11. The post was flagged as part of Facebook’s efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about our partnership with Facebook.) There is no evidence to support the claim. Government agencies that oversee food safety have not issued any press releases that corroborate the assertion. The falsehood that "rat meat disguised as chicken wings were sold in the U.S. before the Super Bowl" made its debut in February 2016, according to Snopes. The fact-checking site reported that the story originated as satire. When the claim appeared again in 2017 and 2018, a U.S. Food and Drug Administration spokesperson told fact checkers it was false. Featured Fact-check Facebook posts stated on October 13, 2022 in a post on Facebook If a sealed bag of raw poultry appears “puffy,” it means the protein is not safe to consume. By Michael Majchrowicz • October 14, 2022 Both the 2016 and 2022 versions of the claim included the same image, made to look like a screenshot of a breaking TV news story. But a search of online news archives show there have been no such breaking TV stories. The image is posted on Wikimedia Commons, where photos are available for download; the caption indicates it’s a poto of rat meat for sale in Thailand that was first shared on an individual’s public Flickr account in 2007. We rate the claim that a million pounds of rat meat is being sold as boneless chicken wings in the U.S. Pants on Fire!

Says Joe Biden said “dozens of police were killed” during the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol but “exactly zero people” died that day A Facebook post made on the one-year anniversary of the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol is claiming to have fact-checked a statement made by President Joe Biden regarding the number of deaths during the attack. The post claims Biden said "dozens of police were killed on Jan. 6," and features a photograph of the president appearing to give a speech. "FACT CHECK," text below the image reads. "According to the official FBI database for Jan. 6, 2021, exactly zero people died in DC on that day. We rate Joe Biden’s claim false." The post, which we found on a Facebook page called "Resist 46," was flagged as part of Facebook’s efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about our partnership with Facebook.) The photograph of Biden featured in the post was originally taken by an Agence France-Presse photographer during a speech the president gave on the one-year anniversary of the Capitol attack. At no point in his speech did Biden say "dozens of police were killed" on Jan. 6. We also searched the internet, Nexis news archives and transcripts of Biden’s speeches and public remarks and found nothing that would substantiate the claim that Biden said this. However, the president did say in his Jan. 6, 2022, speech that more than 140 police officers were injured during the attack. He also specifically mentioned U.S. Capitol Police Officer Brian Sicknick, who was pepper sprayed twice during the rioting and died a day later after suffering two strokes. Sicknick was determined to have died of natural causes, but Washington, D.C.’s chief medical examiner told The Washington Post "all that transpired (in the attack) played a role in his condition." The Facebook post makes reference to an "official FBI database for Jan. 6, 2021" that claims "zero people died in D.C. on that day." The FBI does keep track of the number of law enforcement officers who were killed and assaulted in the line of duty through its Uniform Crime Reporting Program. The data is voluntarily submitted to the FBI from participating law enforcement agencies, and officers who died from natural causes, by suicide or from their own personal situations are not considered as line of duty deaths and assaults. Because Sicknick died of natural causes, and the deaths of four other officers who responded to the attack were by suicide, they would not be counted. While the Uniform Crime Reporting Program does track crime statistics, its data currently only goes up to 2020. The agency also has a database pertaining to the Capitol attack — it’s a collection of photographs and videos the agency is using to help identify suspected rioters. Featured Fact-check Instagram posts stated on October 12, 2022 in an Instagram post “Nancy Pelosi (purchased) 10,000 shares of Amgen, manufacturer of Nplate, a drug used to treat radiation sickness.” By Sara Swann • October 25, 2022 The FBI did not immediately respond to our request for comment. The Capitol attack’s death toll A bipartisan Senate report released in June 2021 found that a total of seven people died in connection to the attack, three law enforcement officers including Sicknick and four people who attended the pro-Trump rally that turned into a violent assault on the Capitol. Both U.S. Capitol Police Officer Howard Liebengood and Washington Metropolitan Police Officer Jeffrey Smith died by suicide in the days following the attack. Liebengood died on Jan. 9 while Smith died on Jan. 15. Two more officers who responded to the Capitol attack would subsequently die by suicide following the release of the Senate report. Metropolitan Police Officer Kyle DeFreytag was found dead on July 10 and Metropolitan Police Officer Gunther Hashida was found dead in his home on July 29. The four people who attended the pro-Trump rally were Ashli Babbitt, Rosanne Boyland, Kevin Greeson and Benjamin Phillips. Babbitt, 36, was an Air Force veteran and QAnon conspiracy theorist who was shot and killed on Jan. 6, 2021, by a Capitol police officer while attempting to climb through a barricade in the House of Representatives. Boyland, 34, was a Georgia resident and supporter of Trump and the QAnon conspiracy theory. It was initially believed Boyland died after being trampled by a mob of people attempting to enter the Capitol building, but it was later determined she passed away during the attack because of an accidental amphetamine overdose. Greeson, 55, was an Alabama native who died from a heart attack while attending the pro-Trump rally outside of the Capitol. Phillips, 50, organized a caravan of Trump supporters from his native Pennsylvania to attend the rally in Washington. He died of a stroke. Our ruling A Facebook post claims that Biden said "dozens of police were killed" during the Jan. 6, 2021 attack on the U.S. Capitol. The post goes on to say the FBI has no evidence that anyone died during the attack. We found no proof that Biden ever said those remarks and the deaths during the Capitol attack have been well documented by both government officials and the news media. Of the deaths connected to the attack, five were of law enforcement officers. We rate the post’s claim as Pants on Fire. PolitiFact researcher Caryn Baird contributed to this repor

Photos show “sheep feces” that are “now in high demand in China because of their richness in protein. For a few months now, images of what’s described as "sheep feces" in drinks have been shared on social media with this claim: "Sheep feces is now in high demand because of their richness in protein." But the small, black balls pictured are not ovine droppings. It’s the chewy tapioca found in bubble tea. These posts were flagged as part of Facebook’s efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about our partnership with Facebook.) A reverse image search leads to an Aug. 4 story on the China Post’s website about the pictures shocking people in Taiwan after they were posted on social media, but not because the drinks were full of poop. Featured Fact-check Facebook posts stated on October 13, 2022 in a post on Facebook If a sealed bag of raw poultry appears “puffy,” it means the protein is not safe to consume. By Michael Majchrowicz • October 14, 2022 Rather, people were surprised by how much tapioca, or boba, was in the tea. "Did you order a glass of bubble tea or a glass of boba pearls?" one person commented, according to the story. We found no evidence that feces is popular in China, either. We rate this post Pants on Fire!

“If you stop testing (for COVID-19) it all goes away and people just have colds like before. As the omicron variant of the coronavirus fueled a surge of COVID-19 cases around the United States, a Facebook post resurfaced the idea that testing for the virus is the reason why the pandemic has persisted. The Jan. 5 Facebook post is an image macro featuring a screenshot of Glinda the Good Witch from the 1939 film "The Wizard of Oz." "If you stop testing it all goes away and people just have colds like before," reads text superimposed on the screenshot. The post, which we found on a Facebook page called "Funny Clean Memes," was flagged as part of Facebook’s efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about our partnership with Facebook.) The post essentially makes the claim that the pandemic has only endured because of large-scale testing. But if testing for COVID-19 were to stop, the virus wouldn’t just go away. A halt in testing would eliminate data showing where and how the virus has spread — it would not mean that the virus would no longer exist, said Vickie Mays, a professor of psychology and health policy and management at UCLA's Fielding School of Public Health. "It’s the data that indicates that, not only does the problem exist, but it also tells you about the magnitude of the problem," she said. Mays said that widespread testing and vaccinations have changed what the pandemic looks like now. Featured Fact-check Instagram posts stated on October 12, 2022 in an Instagram post Pfizer executive “admits” vaccine was never tested for preventing transmission. By Jeff Cercone • October 13, 2022 In the early days of the pandemic, before widespread testing and vaccinations, people who had COVID-19 developed serious symptoms. Because of the nature and severity of their symptoms, a test wasn’t strictly needed to tell if someone had COVID-19, Mays said. With a larger number of people vaccinated against the virus, those who test positive now may likely develop only mild symptoms, but they are still infectious. "The milder response might look like it’s a cold," Mays said. "But those colds are literally not just a cold. They may be indicators that a person might be infected with the SARS-CoV-2 virus." The U.S. saw a daily average of 756,752 confirmed COVID-19 cases in the last two weeks, with the average daily testing rate at 2.5 million, according to the New York Times’ coronavirus tracker. However, the numbers are likely an undercount because of a lack of access to testing and people who are asymptomatic or with mild symptoms choosing to not get tested. One group of researchers found that, at one point in the pandemic, up to 60% of COVID-19 cases in the U.S. went unreported. Testing is also used to screen for asymptomatic infected people, as they could unknowingly spread the virus to others. It’s particularly important when an asymptomatic person lives in a group environment, such as a nursing facility or multi-generational home, according to the National Institute on Aging. Our ruling A Facebook post claims that, if people were to stop testing for COVID-19, the pandemic would go away and people will "just have colds like before." Testing does not cause the virus, and putting a stop to it wouldn't mean an end to the pandemic. Testing is important to track the spread and severity of the virus in a community. If testing does stop and people appear to just have colds, that could still mean they’re infected with COVID-19. A person who is vaccinated against the virus but still gets infected is more likely to develop mild symptoms that have the appearance of a cold. They could unknowingly spread the virus to other people. We rate the Facebook post Fals

"Even the WHO has conceded that the (SARS- CoV-2) virus … is no more dangerous than the common flu, with an infection fatality rate of 0.14%. Reiner Fuellmich, a German lawyer who has spread misinformation about the origins of COVID-19 and the accuracy of PCR tests, is in a video shared on Facebook in which he downplays the severity of the coronavirus. Fuellmich claimed that the World Health Organization has said that COVID-19 is no more dangerous than the flu. "Even the WHO has conceded that the virus, regardless of whether it is fully or semi-artificial or natural, is no more dangerous than the common flu, with an infection fatality rate of 0.14%," he said in the video posted Dec. 30. The post was flagged as part of Facebook’s efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about our partnership with Facebook.) The World Health Organization said in an emailed statement that it never said that COVID-19 is no more dangerous than the common flu. The WHO said that it does not have a single global estimate for the infection fatality ratio of COVID-19, but that previous studies have estimated it at around 0.6%. Seasonal influenza has an infection fatality ratio of about 0.1%, subject to fluctuations. That’s about six times lower than the figure WHO pointed us to. The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention published in April that the infection fatality rate for COVID-19 in the U.S. is 0.7%. The CDC included the figure in a report on the findings of an outside peer-reviewed study. The study had taken that figure from a meta-analysis of other studies, published in September 2020. The infection fatality rate for the flu is much lower. In one particularly bad season, the IFR for symptomatic influenza A was .126%, according to a CDC report of deaths from the 2017-2018 flu season. That season was atypical, with more cases of severe flu for all ages. In the 2019-2020 season, the IFR for symptomatic cases was .058%. The COVID-19 infection fatality ratio, which estimates the proportion of deaths among all infected individuals, has varied widely across studies, as scientists use different data sources to evaluate how different populations are affected by the virus. The ratio also varies significantly by age, increasing in age groups above 60 years old, by underlying conditions, and by socioeconomic factors and ethnicity, the WHO said. To make these calculations, scientists use data on the presence of antibodies among different populations, also known as serological surveys. "As data from serological surveys is compiled, this estimate will continue to evolve, including adjustments for new developments such as increasing numbers of people vaccinated," the WHO said in a statement emailed by a spokesperson. "Irrespective of the precise estimate, COVID-19 remains a dangerous and deadly infectious disease, claiming thousands of lives each day." The WHO referred us to two studies to support its statement. A study in Nature from November 2020 estimated that the COVID-19 infection rate ratio increased with age, ranging from .001% in children ages 5-9, to 8.29% in people age 80 and older. Authors said there are "key unanswered questions with regard to the consistency of mortality patterns across countries." In a study in the Lancet, from June 2020, researchers estimated that the overall COVID-19 infection fatality ratio for China was 0.66%, which increased with age. Dr. Amesh Adalja, a senior scholar at the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security, said overall infection fatality ratio for COVID-19 was around 0.6%, but it has fallen somewhat because of better treatments. However, that’s still higher than the seasonal flu which has been measured at around 0.1%. "Irrespective of the IFR, seasonal flu doesn’t kill 800,000 Americans or crush hospitals the way COVID did," Adalja said. Featured Fact-check Instagram posts stated on October 12, 2022 in an Instagram post Pfizer executive “admits” vaccine was never tested for preventing transmission. By Jeff Cercone • October 13, 2022 In an overview of six prior studies, Dr. John P. A. Ioannidis of Stanford University found the infection fatality rate, which is the probability of dying for a person who is infected, to be around 0.15%, though he warned that it varies widely around the world. An investigation into the Diamond Princess Cruise outbreak published in May 2020 found that the case fatality rate, or the number of deaths per confirmed cases, was 0.5%, when adjusted for age. While warning that such assessments are premature, the authors in that study noted: "A case fatality rate of 0.5% would still be 5 times the commonly cited case fatality rate of adult seasonal influenza." Dr. Thomas A. Russo, an infectious disease researcher at the University at Buffalo and a practicing physician, said that an undercounting of people infected with COVID-19 and an undercounting of deaths makes reliable data on deaths per infection difficult to come by. He estimates that the true infection mortality rate is between 0.4% and 0.8%. While flu is a lethal disease, Russo said, he thinks Fuellmich underestimates the risk from COVID-19. "I think we can all agree, we never with influenza see the carnage that we’re seeing with COVID," Russo said. We reached out to Fuellmich for evidence to support his claims but did not hear back. Other fact-checkers have also looked into these claims. Correctiv, which is based in Germany and is a member of the International Fact-Checking Network, found in October 2020 that the WHO did not confirm that COVID-19 is less bad than the flu. The WHO told Correctiv that flu deaths vary every year, but that it estimated the infectious mortality rate for seasonal flu to be below 0.1%, which means the severity of the flu is "much lower" than of COVID-19. In October 2020, Health Feedback found that this claim was based on a misinterpretation of a WHO estimate, and is inaccurate. PolitiFact found in October 2020 that by one estimate, COVID-19 is about 10 times more deadly than the seasonal flu. Our ruling Fuellmich said that the WHO has said that COVID-19 is no worse than the flu, and that the infection fatality rate is 0.14%. In a statement to PolitiFact, the WHO said that it never said that COVID-19 is no worse than the flu. Estimates of the infection fatality ratio vary widely, and the WHO said prior estimates are 0.6% — far higher than the 0.14% Fuellmich claimed. The CDC in April published findings from a paper showing that the infection fatality rate for COVID-19 in the U.S. is 0.7%. We found other estimates for the infection fatality ratio and rate to vary, and we noted one as low as 0.15%. But scientists warn that the infection fatality rate can be influenced by the availability of testing, the age of the population, socioeconomic conditions, and other factors. Fuellmich was incorrect about the WHO making a favorable comparison between the coronavirus and the flu, and his infection fatality rate estimate was lower than those in many published studies. His statement suggests a level of certitude that the WHO has never conceded. We rate this claim False.

Images show how climate change destroyed the Greenland ice sheet and harmed a polar bear from 2009 to 2019 The 10-years challenge has been making the rounds on Facebook, with users sharing photos of how they’ve changed within the last decade. A climate change advocacy group got in on the trend by using purported then-and-now photos of a polar bear and an aerial view of Greenland, showing dramatic changes. Climate change is the "10 years challenge we should really care about," the group’s Jan. 12 post said. The image, shared by a Facebook page called Green New Deal, shows two split images: one of the ice on Greenland being heavily diminished and another showing a healthy polar bear in 2009 and an emaciated bear in 2019. This image uses misleading photos of polar bears and Greenland. The post was flagged as part of Facebook’s efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about our partnership with Facebook.) With the "2009 and "2019" time stamps, the post gives the impression that the images depict changes that happened over that 10-year span. That’s not the case. While climate change has affected Greenland’s ice sheet and polar bears, the Facebook post is exaggerated. PolitiFact reached out to The Other 98%, the group that runs the page account, and their CEO John Sellers responded to say they deleted the image from all of their pages. We found similar posts shared across Facebook. Greenland ice A search of NASA images show that the area of land in the picture is Greenland, which experts also confirmed. (Greenland is geographically in North America, but it belongs to the kingdom of Denmark.) The post portrays the huge island’s ice sheet as almost wiped away as of 2019. Greenland did have record ice loss of 532 billion tons in 2019, according to NASA. The ice loss added 1.5 millimeters to the average global sea level, which NASA said was enough to cover California with 4 feet of water. "Orange and red shades indicate areas that lost ice mass, while light blue shades indicate areas that gained ice mass. White indicates areas where there has been very little or no change in ice mass since 2002." Source: NASA Climate Change on YouTube Still, satellite images taken by NASA that year show it looks nothing like the Facebook post. The image makes "no sense," said Mark Serreze, director of the National Snow and Ice Data Center at the University of Colorado Boulder. "It seems to be showing the Greenland ice sheet present day (left) compared to some rendition of what the island would look like without an ice sheet," Serreze told PolitiFact. Featured Fact-check Instagram posts stated on October 30, 2022 in a photo “There are no greenhouse gas emissions in this photo” of cows grazing. By Kristin Hugo • November 7, 2022 Serreze said it would be "many centuries" at current warming rates before the Greenland ice sheet disappears. The ice sheet makes up 80% of Greenland and is the second-largest ice sheet in the world, behind the Antarctic ice sheet. Polar bears The picture of the emaciated bear was not actually taken in 2019. In 2015, a photographer named Kerstin Langenberger spotted the bear in the Svalbard archipelago in the Arctic Ocean east of Greenland and took a photo of it, drawing the conclusion that the bear’s poor condition was due to climate change. Langenberger’s picture garnered media attention, including from the CBC in Canada. But even a defender of polar bears wasn’t buying it. "When you get claims that this picture of this particular bear is evidence of climate change then you’ve crossed a bridge too far," said Geoff York, Polar Bears International's senior director of conservation, in a CBC interview. Another expert pointed out that it’s unlikely that the images show the same polar bear. Andrew Derocher, professor in the department of biological sciences at the University of Alberta in Canada, said none of the 19 polar bear populations monitored in Alaska, Canada, Norway and Greenland have gone through such a shift in overall body condition within a 10-year period. The skinny bear’s grim condition could have been due to reasons other than climate change, like disease, advanced age and injury. "Yes, individuals undergo changes in condition, but an animal (in) such an advanced stage of malnutrition is an extreme situation and not what has been observed on a population level," Derocher said. Jennifer Francis, acting deputy director and senior scientist at the Woodell Climate Research Center in Massachusetts, said there are studies, like one published in the peer-reviewed journal Nature Climate Change, that indicate polar bears’ health is declining due to rapid sea ice loss. Polar bears use ice to capture sea lions. But Serreze said there really isn’t a connection between the ice loss in Greenland and the distressed polar bear. "The issue with polar bear habitat is loss of the Arctic Ocean's floating sea ice cover," he said. Our ruling A Facebook post claimed to show that within 10 years, climate change has gutted the Greenland ice sheet and caused a healthy polar bear to waste away. The post is exaggerated. Greenland did lose a record amount of ice in 2019, but the loss recorded in satellite images was not what the post suggested. It’s not clear where or how the "after" photo was generated. In addition, the picture of the emaciated bear was taken in 2015, not 2019. Experts point out that while polar bears have been affected by climate change, there are other factors that could have contributed to the bear’s poor health. We rate this 10-year challenge False.

Carlos Gimenez “wants a national database to track you and discriminate against you. The time-honored campaign tactic of tarnishing a candidate as a socialist is being deployed again early in the new year — but this time one of the targets is a Republican. Rep. Carlos Gimenez of Florida, who is running in 2022 for a second term, has been branded a socialist in several Facebook ads by the conservative America First Political Committee. The former Miami-Dade County mayor has a "sorid (sic) socialist record," one of the ads states, and "he wants a national database to track you and discriminate against you." The ad cites Gimenez’s vote for H.R. 550, alleging the bill would "greenlight the development of a federal vaccination registry, aka database." We found no evidence it would do that. The House on Nov. 30 voted 294-130 to approve H.R. 550, the Immunization Infrastructure Modernization Act. No action has been taken in the Senate. The bill would authorize $400 million in grants to state and local health departments to update their computer databases of immunization records — not create a database or registry. It would direct the federal Health and Human Services Department to "improve data sharing and other aspects of immunization information systems. These are confidential, population-based databases that maintain a record of vaccine administrations," according to a Congress.gov summary. Multiple experts said the post’s characterization of the bill is inaccurate. Sharona Hoffman, professor of law and bioethics and co-director of Case Western Reserve University’s Law-Medicine Center, said the aim is to improve the existing databases’ accuracy and ability to exchange information; support the administration of vaccines; and require a report that assesses immunization access in medically underserved, rural and frontier areas. Featured Fact-check Instagram posts stated on October 12, 2022 in an Instagram post Pfizer executive “admits” vaccine was never tested for preventing transmission. By Jeff Cercone • October 13, 2022 Lawrence Gostin, a global health law professor at Georgetown University, agreed that the bill would not create a federal database. The vaccine data systems at the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention "are weak, and this legislation would help upgrade the agency's collection and sharing of data," he added. Dr. Joseph Kannry, chair of the Public Policy Committee of the American Medical Informatics Association, said the bill "would allow doctors to assess how much of the population is at risk during any pandemic, including potential future outbreaks. It could ensure equity of distribution of vaccines and other resources." Asked for information to back its claim, the America First Political Committee sent us a statement from Dec. 7 that repeated its claim, among others about Gimenez. Gimenez’s House office and campaign did not reply to our requests for comment. Thomas Miller, a senior fellow in health care policy at the conservative American Enterprise Institute, said that the bill, "in earlier times, would seem like the typical effort to facilitate better immunization-related health data — not an unusual objective, given its current limited state." "This legislation and reactions to it illustrate our more overheated and polarized reactions to many changes in national data reporting and development during the pandemic era. Much of this could be considered a necessary updating of poorly performing health data standards and processes, assuming one allows a limited amount of good faith presumptions on the part of federal health administrators and regulators. "Of course, if one mostly fears the worst, any change presents a threat." So far in 2022, the "socialist" attack line has been leveled against Democrats in races in Georgia, Missouri, Minnesota and Kentucky. The ads were paid for by the campaigns of Republican Reps. Drew Ferguson of Georgia and Pete Stauber of Minnesota; and the campaign of GOP House candidate Kalena Bruce of Missouri; and by the Kentucky Freedom PAC against Charles Booker, a Democrat running for the seat held by Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky. Our ruling The Facebook ad said Gimenez "wants a national database to track you and discriminate against you." We found no evidence to back the attack on Gimenez. We rate it Fals

“Gavin Newsom Gets Death Penalty. The live-stream of Donald Trump’s Arizona rally from Right Side Broadcasting, a right-wing website known for streaming Trump’s events, took a conspiratorial turn when one attendee insisted that California Gov. Gavin Newsom had been executed and replaced with a clone. "Newsom’s a clone, OK? They just took him out," the rally goer told RSBN’s Brian Glenn before the Jan. 15 event in Florence, Arizona. "The real Governor Newsom has had his military tribunal at Gitmo. He’s been executed. OK?" The claim appeared to be a reference to recent articles on Real Raw News, a misinformation website that regularly publishes made-up stories alleging that various public figures have been arrested by the military, transported to Guantanamo Bay, tried and executed. Similar narratives have taken hold in the past among some supporters and promoters of the QAnon conspiracy theory. The website’s lead story from Jan. 3: "Gavin Newsom Gets Death Penalty." This nonsense storyline — arrested by military, executed at Gitmo and replaced by the deep state with a clone — is a regular narrative on the conspiracy theory website Real Raw News. The site has spun the same misinformation about Newsom in recent months. https://t.co/0cxHti9Gkv https://t.co/9AhjTthWuo— Bill McCarthy (@billdmccarthy) January 16, 2022 The headline, which followed months of similar posts spinning a wildly fictitious narrative about the Democratic California governor, was flagged as part of Facebook’s efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about our partnership with Facebook.) In the alternative universe of Real Raw News, Newsom was indicted by the military in July; arrested, sent into a COVID-19 vaccine-induced coma, shipped off to Guantanamo Bay, and replaced by the "deep state" with a doppelganger in November; tried before a military tribunal in December; and sentenced to death for treason and child sex crimes in early January. PolitiFact rated the claim that the military arrested Newsom Pants on Fire, and none of the related stories on Real Raw News are true. Featured Fact-check Instagram posts stated on October 10, 2022 in a post “Premature babies are at a much higher risk of injury from immunizations than full-term babies.” By Andy Nguyen • October 13, 2022 Erin Mellon, a spokesperson for Newsom, confirmed that her boss was still alive and working in California, not in jail. "There is absolutely no truth in this whatsoever," Mellon said. In recent weeks, Newsom held an hours-long press conference about his proposal for the state’s budget, visited an encampment of homeless people, and hosted several other events. On Jan. 18, three days after the Trump rally goer relayed the baseless execution claim in his interview with Right Side Broadcasting, Newsom participated in an announcement related to a plan for investing in California students’ higher education. California Gov. Gavin Newsom helps clean an encampment for homeless people on Jan. 12, 2022, in San Diego. (AP) A PolitiFact investigation in September found that Real Raw News is authored by a 53-year-old man, Michael Tuffin, who previously ran several other websites and associated YouTube channels that also promoted far-fetched conspiracy theories. His websites publish information under the pseudonym "Michael Baxter." The website’s "About Us" page features a disclaimer saying it contains humor, parody and satire, but the author of the articles often insists in the site’s comment sections that the content is legitimate, and the Right Side Broadcasting interview indicates that some people believe the type of content he pushes. The website’s latest claims about Newsom have no basis in reality. We rate them Pants on Fir

"Mask mandates on children lead to learning loss that harms early childhood development." As the omicron variant of COVID-19 is surging across the United States, some states and municipalities are returning to mask mandates. In Milwaukee, the Common Council on Jan. 18, 2022, approved a change to the city's existing mask ordinance to require masks for anyone at least 3 years old in buildings open to the public. All of that has led to a new round of pushback from critics. That could be seen in the response to a Nov. 29, 2021 announcement by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services of a new universal masking policy for federally-funded Head Start education centers. That policy applies to everyone above the age of 2, including all staff, volunteers and contractors. Two Republican lawmakers – U.S. Sen. John Thune of South Dakota and U.S. Rep. Lisa McClain of Michigan – introduced a bill to bar such a requirement, which also faces a host of legal challenges across the country. U.S. Rep. Scott Fitzgerald, R-Wisconsin, had this to say in a Dec. 21, 2021 Twitter post: "Mask mandates on children lead to learning loss that harms early childhood development." Most of the concern about learning loss has been centered on virtual learning, instead of in-person classes. Is Fitzgerald right about mask mandates? Study vs. opinion piece When asked for supporting information, Fitzgerald’s office pointed us to a Dec. 21, 2021 letter crafted by McClain and sent to Dr. Bernadine Futrell, director of the Office of Head Start. Fitzgerald was among those who signed the letter, and he included a link to it in his tweet. "We have grave concerns that your (Head Start Program Performance Standards) rule requiring universal masking for all individuals two years of age and older and universal masking and vaccinations for staff, certain contractors, and volunteers will further exacerbate the ongoing challenges posed by the pandemic," the letter reads, in part. The letter cited an Aug. 11, 2020 article that can be found online via the U.S. National Library of Medicine (NLM) that states how important "facial recognition and expressions are for learning among young children." Online sources describe NLM, operated by the National Institutes of Health, as the world’s largest medical library. The article in question was written by Manfred Spitzer, a professor in the Department of Psychiatry at the University of Ulm in Germany. The article notes that "covering the lower half of the face reduces the ability to communicate, interpret, and mimic the expressions of those with whom we interact." Featured Fact-check Instagram posts stated on October 12, 2022 in an Instagram post Pfizer executive “admits” vaccine was never tested for preventing transmission. By Jeff Cercone • October 13, 2022 It goes on to say: "positive emotions become less recognizable, and negative emotions are amplified. Emotional mimicry, contagion, and emotionality in general are reduced and (thereby) bonding between teachers and learners, group cohesion, and learning – of which emotions are a major driver. The benefits and burdens of face masks in schools should be seriously considered and made obvious and clear to teachers and students." But the Spitzer article is not based on scientific study. In fact, an ethical statement at the end of the piece notes that "no data was collected for this opinion paper." Response from public health officials In a Dec. 6, 2021 Science brief, The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention noted that limited available data indicates "no clear evidence that masking impairs emotional or language development in children." "A study of 2-year-old children concluded that they were able to recognize familiar words presented without a mask and when hearing words through opaque masks," according to the brief. "Among children with autism spectrum disorders (ASD), interventions including positive reinforcement and coaching caregivers to teach mask wearing have improved participants’ ability to wear a face mask. These findings suggest that even children who may have difficulty wearing a mask can do so effectively through targeted interventions." When asked about the issue, Wisconsin Department of Health Services communications specialist Jennifer Miller emphasized that the article referenced in Fitzgerald’s tweet "is not a study, but an opinion paper published in August 2020, before a handful of actual studies on this topic were published." "The Wisconsin Department of Health Services believes masks are one of the tools to effectively help stop the spread of COVID-19, but we also recognize that there may be reasons certain groups of people may find it difficult to wear a mask, including some children 2 years and older and people of any age with certain disabilities." Miller said in an email. With regard to the potential impact of masks on language and emotional development, Miller reiterated the CDC position that "available data indicate no clear evidence that masking impairs emotional or language development in children." Our ruling Fitzgerald claimed that "mask mandates on children lead to learning loss that harms early childhood development." But the article he and his colleagues cited is an opinion piece, not based on a study. In addition, it came out before other formal studies were completed that showed a different view. The CDC says limited available data indicates "no clear evidence that masking impairs emotional or language development in children." For a statement that contains an element of truth but ignores critical facts that would give a different impression, our rating is Mostly False. window.gciAnalyticsUAID = 'PMJS-TEALIUM-COBRAND'; window.gciAnalyticsLoadEvents = false; window.gciAnalytics.view({ 'event-type': 'pageview', 'content-type': 'interactives', 'content-ssts-section': 'news', 'content-ssts-subsection': 'news:politics', 'content-ssts-topic': 'news:politics:politifactwisconsin', 'content-ssts-subtopic': ' news:politics:politifactwisconsin' });

Video shows Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez pouring shots for a group of people “days before testing positive” for COVID-19 Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., announced Jan. 9 that she tested positive for COVID-19, prompting social media users to speculate about how she could have contracted the virus. One TikTok user shared a clip of the congresswoman behind a bar, maskless, pouring liquor into a long row of shot glasses. "AOC days before testing positive," reads the text overlaid on the video. TikTok identified this video as part of its efforts to counter inauthentic, misleading or false content. (Read more about PolitiFact's partnership with TikTok.) Though some conservative critics did take aim at Ocasio-Cortez for being seen outdoors Jan. 2 without a mask at a large Miami gathering, the video in this claim predates the time period in which the congresswoman might have contracted the virus. It was filmed in October 2021 at Jack Rabbit, a restaurant in Buffalo, New York. According to news reports, Ocasio-Cortez visited the city in October to support mayoral candidate India Walton. At the restaurant, Ocasio-Cortez pulled her hair back and revisited her bartending roots, pouring shots while some onlookers chanted, "A-O-C! A-O-C!" Featured Fact-check Instagram posts stated on October 12, 2022 in an Instagram post Pfizer executive “admits” vaccine was never tested for preventing transmission. By Jeff Cercone • October 13, 2022 Jack Rabbit shared a video of the moment on its Instagram page on Oct. 24, 2021. At the time, some critics took issue with Ocasio-Cortez’s decision to be inside a bar without wearing a mask, months after she said she planned to continue wearing masks in shared public spaces indoors. Although the restaurant’s video was filmed at an angle different from the video shared on TikTok, both appear to capture the same moment. Our ruling A TikTok post claimed to show Ocasio-Cortez pouring shots for a group of people "days before testing positive" for COVID-19. She contracted COVID-19 in January 2022, but the video is from Ocasio-Cortez’s visit to a Buffalo restaurant in October 2021. We rate this claim Fals

“NASA hired 24 theologians to study human reaction to aliens. NASA, aliens and 24 theologians — it sounds like the start of a joke, but in fact, it was the makings of misinformation spreading on social media. "NASA hired 24 theologians to study human reaction to aliens," said the Dec. 28 post on Instagram. The post appeared to be a screenshot of an online story from the New York Post, and it was shared by Joe Rogan, host of the popular Spotify podcast "The Joe Rogan Experience." The post was flagged as part of Facebook’s efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about our partnership with Facebook.) The claim stems from funding that NASA awarded to a nonprofit, but it gets the details wrong. The project happened several years ago, but the New York Post published an article Dec. 27 about a new book that describes the nonprofit’s work. NASA provided a grant in 2015 to the Center of Theological Inquiry, a nonprofit theological institute, to study astrobiology, which is research into the origins of life on Earth and the search for life beyond Earth. But those who worked on the project — including visiting scholars in theology, the humanities and social sciences — were not hired or employed by NASA. The project was called "Inquiry on the Societal Implications of Astrobiology," and also received grant funding from the John Templeton Foundation. When the Center of Theological Inquiry was awarded the $1.1 million grant from NASA, the center’s director said the organization would "oversee a resident team of visiting scholars in theology, the humanities, and social sciences that will conduct an interdisciplinary inquiry on the societal implications" of the search for life in the universe, beyond Earth, according to a 2015 press release. Featured Fact-check Viral image stated on October 23, 2022 in an Instagram post “Wikileaks releases moon landing cut scenes filmed in the Nevada desert.” By Ciara O'Rourke • October 25, 2022 NASA told fact-checkers that "the researchers and scholars involved with this study were not hired by NASA, but instead received funding through CTI to conduct this work." The agency also noted that the people receiving funding were not NASA employees or advisers. A NASA spokesperson told the Associated Press that NASA has sought to address similar topics, including the "potential societal impact of finding life beyond Earth," since 1998. NASA’s astrobiology program "supports research that leads to a better understanding of how life emerged and evolved on Earth, what conditions make environments in our universe capable of supporting life, and what the distribution of habitable worlds and life beyond Earth might be," according to its website. The Center of Theological Inquiry "works on a distinctive model," according to a 2016 article in Religious Dispatches, a publication based at the USC Annenberg School for Communication and Journalism. "Each year, it invites a cohort of scholars to spend a year at the center, which is located in Princeton, N.J. While there, they pursue independent research projects and hold discussions around a common theme." The Instagram post’s claim that the theologians involved in the project would study "human reactions to aliens" appears to be vastly oversimplified. The Religious Dispatches article said people were invited to apply for the astrobiology project if they were open to questions such as, "If there are many different forms of life … how would philosophy relate these diverse forms life to one another and establish the limits of what it means to be ‘alive’?" or "How might the world’s religions respond to the discovery of life on other planets?" Our ruling An Instagram post said, "NASA hired 24 theologians to study human reaction to aliens." NASA awarded a grant in 2015 to the Center of Theological Inquiry to study astrobiology, and a description of the project involved philosophical questions about the prospect of alien life. But those involved in the project were not hired or employed by NASA. The claim contains an element of truth, but gives a misleading impression about NASA’s role. We rate this claim Mostly False

"The number of COVID-19 deaths recorded so far in 2021 has surpassed the total for 2020. 2021 was the year COVID-19 vaccines became widely available to Americans after a grim 2020. While our resistance to the virus has improved with the vaccine, the pandemic persists. On Dec. 2, U.S. Rep. Roger Williams, R-Austin, said in an email, "According to the latest data from John (sic) Hopkins University, the number of COVID-19 deaths recorded so far in 2021 has surpassed the total for 2020." He linked this increased level of deaths to President Joe Biden and credited the vaccine development to former President Donald Trump's Operation Warp Speed, a federal agency partnership to accelerate the development and distribution of the vaccine. We also found a Dec. 21 tweet by Williams that said, "Americans are WORSE off under this Administration than ever before," citing "More COVID deaths under President Biden than President Trump." At the request of a reader, we're fact-checking this claim: Is it true that, despite vaccine availability, more people died from COVID-19 in 2021 than in 2020? The Johns Hopkins dashboard tracks active cases and deaths worldwide We reached out to Williams' office (five emails starting Dec. 6 and three phone calls) to confirm the email and ask about the source but received no answer. However, the original Dec. 2 newsletter email pointed to the Johns Hopkins Coronavirus Resource Center's global map that tracks active cases, vaccines administered, and deaths worldwide. The dashboard has tracked how the world is faring against COVID-19 since the pandemic's early days. National outlets including USA Today, The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal and Forbes all reported in late November that the number of deaths in 2021 exceeded those in 2020. They used Johns Hopkins data as an up-to-date marker of 2021 deaths and compared that to the CDC's official count of 2020 death certificates. The outlets used the dashboard data instead of data from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention on COVID-19 deaths since CDC data is less frequently updated. Data must be received and processed by the National Center for Health Statistics. CDC data indicates there were 385,443 U.S. deaths attributing COVID-19 as an underlying or contributing cause on death certificates in 2020. By contrast, there were 446,197 U.S. deaths attributed to COVID-19 on death certificates in 2021, as of Jan. 12. A CDC spokesperson wrote in a Jan. 5 email the CDC won't have the final 2021 data for nearly a year, but the death toll will climb as more data comes in for 2021. The spokesperson said it is safe to say the 2021 death toll will remain higher than in 2020. The CDC numbers show there were over 60,000 more deaths in 2021 compared to 2020. So, indeed, the number of COVID-19 deaths in 2021 as reported by the CDC exceeds the number of deaths reported in 2020. For Texas, the CDC counted 47,669 deaths involving COVID-19 in 2021 as of Jan. 12 and 33,542 deaths involving COVID-19 in 2020. Featured Fact-check Instagram posts stated on October 12, 2022 in an Instagram post Pfizer executive “admits” vaccine was never tested for preventing transmission. By Jeff Cercone • October 13, 2022 Williams has voted against a mask mandate in the U.S. House and criticized Biden's vaccine mandate for employers, including in the same tweet he complained that Biden had presided over a higher COVID-19 death toll. The Biden administration has been advocating for vaccination as the linchpin in a strategy to combat the virus. Scientists call vaccination the single biggest protection against falling ill and dying from COVID-19. A September CDC report found that after the Delta variant became the most common variant, people who were not fully vaccinated had a 10-times-higher risk of dying from COVID-19 than fully vaccinated people. A study supported by the National Institutes of Health published in August estimated the vaccines prevented up to 140,000 COVID-19 deaths in the U.S. during the first five months they were available. Despite the vaccine, why are there more deaths this year? Spencer Fox, associate director of the University of Texas COVID-19 Modeling Consortium, said the first thing to consider when it comes to looking at 2020 and 2021 pandemic statistics is that 2020 is a ten-month period while 2021 is a full pandemic year. Much of the COVID-19 deaths happened March 2020 and onward; only 26 deaths involving COVID-19 were recorded for January and February 2020. Additionally, the U.S. experienced a surge in cases starting winter 2020 near the end of that year, Fox said. Many people died from those 2020 infections in early 2021, and that was well before vaccines were widely available. So while many of the infections in that wave happened in 2020, they were part of the 2021 mortality statistics. There was also a delta variant surge in summer 2021, after vaccines had become widely available to the public. "What we've seen basically since that surge is really just continued spread," Fox said, noting that the delta and omicron variants surprised a lot of people. The delta variant was more infectious and had increased transmissibility, according to the CDC. "But I think even though vaccines were widely available, I think a lot of the mortality that happened over the summer – during that major delta surge – was happening on unvaccinated individuals," Fox said. Fox noted that even though many people were vaccinated, vaccination rates were low. "There was plenty kind of fuel for the COVID virus to spread on," Fox said. Timothy Bray, University of Texas at Dallas professor and director of the Institute for Urban Policy Research, noted there was not clear guidance at the beginning of the pandemic on how to record a death that was COVID-19-related. The institute runs the North Texas COVID Data Viewer and works with local governments on COVID-19 reporting. "It didn't even have a cause of death code. And so, in the early days, we were asking local health departments to tell us how many people have you had that have died from COVID," Bray said. "Eventually, that process became a little bit more concretized and was hung upon the death certificate process." Detecting and determining COVID-19 deaths has been an evolving process, Bray said, adding that numbers have become more accurate as officials got better at detecting the virus and knowing its complications. So while there have been more COVID-19 deaths counted in 2021, it's also important to note that individual medical professionals and local hospitals have gotten better at tracking deaths. And all that data on the local level rolls up to become the national-level data. "Over time, the medical community's understanding of the disease, and the complications of the disease, has changed," Bray said. Our ruling Williams' office wrote in a Dec. 2 email newsletter, "According to the latest data from John (sic) Hopkins University, the number of COVID-19 deaths recorded so far in 2021 has surpassed the total for 2020." CDC data shows there were over 60,000 more deaths in 2021 compared to 2020. Johns Hopkins data, used by Williams and many national news outlets, also reported more deaths in 2021. We rate this claim Tru

Says Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla said: “Two doses of the vaccine offers very limited protection, if any. An Instagram post takes remarks by Pfizer’s CEO out of context to suggest that he described his company’s COVID-19 vaccine as largely ineffective. "Two doses of the vaccine offers very limited protection, if any," the Jan. 13 post says, attributing the quote to "Pfizer CEO, Albert Bourla, Jan. 10, 2022." The post was flagged as part of Facebook’s efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about our partnership with Facebook.) The remarks were taken from an interview Bourla gave to Yahoo Finance on Jan. 10. He was asked about the wave of COVID-19 cases caused by the omicron variant of the virus. Bourla talked about how omicron is more mild, but very infectious, posing a challenge for the vaccine. But the quote in the post leaves out important context about what he was discussing. He was referring to how well two doses of the vaccine protected specifically against infection by the omicron variant. "We know that the two doses of the vaccine offer very limited protection, if any," he said. "The three doses, with the booster, they offer reasonable protection against hospitalization and deaths. Against deaths, I think very good, and less protection against infection." In another interview the same day on CNBC, Bourla talked about the omicron wave and the need for better vaccine protection. He said Pfizer was working on a version of the vaccine that would offer "way, way better" protection against omicron, particularly against infections. He said the new vaccine would be available in March. Featured Fact-check Instagram posts stated on October 12, 2022 in an Instagram post Pfizer executive “admits” vaccine was never tested for preventing transmission. By Jeff Cercone • October 13, 2022 "The protection against the hospitalizations and the severe diseases, it is reasonable right now, with the current vaccines, as long as you are having, let’s say, the third dose," he said. We reached out to Pfizer but did not hear back immediately. PolitiFact has reported on how omicron spreads quickly and is more resistant to vaccine protection, though the vaccines do protect against serious illness from the virus. Fact-checkers at Reuters found that this claim was missing context, and Snopes said it was Mostly False. Our ruling An Instagram post claims that Pfizer’s CEO said two doses of the COVID-19 vaccine offer "very little protection, if any." The quote in the post was part of remarks Bourla made in an interview. But he was referring specifically to the vaccine’s protection against infection by the omicron variant, not about their effectiveness against COVID-19 in general. He also said that three doses protect against severe disease. This claim contains an element of truth but ignores critical facts that would give a different impression. We rate it Mostly False

“Fully vaccinated Australians in hospital for COVID-19 surpass unvaccinated Australia faces a surge of COVID-19 cases as the highly contagious omicron COVID-19 variant continues to spread across the continent. Throughout the pandemic, each spike in cases has taken its toll on hospital systems, and the omicron surge has been no different. But one media outlet claims there is something different about the latest wave of COVID-19. "Fully Vaccinated Australians In Hospital For COVID-19 Surpass Unvaccinated," reads the headline of a Jan. 12 article from the Epoch Times, a conservative media site with a history of publishing misinformation. Similar to the headline, the beginning of the article implies that the vaccinated are more susceptible during the omicron surge. "For the first time, New South Wales (NSW) has seen more fully vaccinated patients hospitalised with COVID-19 compared to the number of unvaccinated patients as the Omicron outbreak continues to edge toward its peak," the article says. Beyond that sentence, the article is behind a paywall — keeping many readers from seeing context that explains the situation more fully. The article was shared in social media posts, which were flagged as part of Facebook’s efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about our partnership with Facebook.) The headline is misleading; it refers to "Australians," but the complete article focuses only on data from New South Wales, a state in the southeast region of the country. The data from the New South Wales government was current through Jan. 9. According to that data, 2,030 COVID-19 patients were hospitalized in New South Wales. Of those patients, 28.8% were unvaccinated and 68.9% were fully vaccinated. (The data does not include information about whether the patients had received vaccine boosters.) The same data reported 159 COVID-19 patients in intensive care units. Of those patients, 49.1% were unvaccinated and 50.3% were vaccinated. Based on those New South Wales statistics, it was accurate to say that the number of vaccinated people in hospitals in New South Wales exceeded the number of unvaccinated people. Even so, the Epoch Times article itself acknowledged the apparent increased risk for the unvaccinated. Featured Fact-check Instagram posts stated on October 12, 2022 in an Instagram post Pfizer executive “admits” vaccine was never tested for preventing transmission. By Jeff Cercone • October 13, 2022 "Based on the data presented, unvaccinated individuals appear to be six times more likely to be hospitalised and nearly 13 times more likely to be sent to ICU than those who are fully vaccinated," said the Epoch Times. "This is considering that the number of unvaccinated patients appears to be over-represented in the figures — 7.3 percent of the NSW population aged 12 and over at the time were unvaccinated, but they made up half of the COVID-19 ICU patients in the NSW Health system." The article no longer references the most current data. Currently, there are more people hospitalized in New South Wales and Victoria — Australia’s hardest-hit states — than at any earlier point of the pandemic, Reuters reported. On Jan. 12, New South Wales officials reported 2,242 COVID-19 patients in hospitals throughout the state. Premier Dominic Perrottet reported 175 patients in ICUs. "More than 50% of those people are unvaccinated," Perrottet said of the ICU patients. "Vaccination has been key over this period of time in keeping you and your friends and your family safe. It is very clear on those numbers. They do not lie." In New South Wales, 92.5% of the eligible population (those age 12 and older) were fully vaccinated as of Jan. 9, according to the state’s most recent COVID-19 data. That represents 78.3% of the state’s total population. Perrottet emphasized that because New South Wales has such high vaccination rates, the fact that more than 50% of those in the ICU with COVID-19 were unvaccinated demonstrates the effectiveness of the vaccines. "Around 93% of adults in NSW have now been fully vaccinated, leaving around 7% of the population not entirely protected," the New Zealand Herald reported on Jan. 12. "Despite making up a small proportion of the wider community, these 7% now account for more than half of all ICU admissions." Catherine Bennett, an epidemiology professor at Deakin University, told the Herald that if the vaccines weren’t protecting people from severe COVID-19 illness and hospitalization, vaccinated people would make up a larger portion of COVID-19 patients in intensive care units. "People making up a very small proportion of the at-risk population, are making up a large proportion of those in ICU," Bennett said. Our ruling An Epoch Times headline shared on social media said "Fully vaccinated Australians in hospital for COVID-19 surpass unvaccinated." The headline suggests that vaccinated people are more susceptible to severe illness from the virus than unvaccinated people. But the headline misrepresents the data cited in the article, parts of which are accessible only to paying subscribers. The article is about data from one Australian state — not the whole country — where there were more vaccinated people in the hospital than unvaccinated people. But nearly 93% of eligible people in the state are vaccinated. Coupled with the fact that more than 50% of those in the ICU with COVID-19 were unvaccinated, experts say, the figures demonstrate the vaccines’ effectiveness in preventing severe illness. The statement is partially accurate but leaves out important details or takes things out of context. We rate this claim Half Tru

“We’ve brought in more than $81 billion in economic investment, more than four times any previous administration. In the final days of his term, Gov. Ralph Northam has been stressing that his governorship was about more than coronavirus and racial justice issues that led the news. "During our four years, we’ve brought in more than $81 billion in economic investment, more than four times any previous administration…" Northam said Wednesday during his valedictory State of the Commonwealth address. Northam made the same claim in a Dec. 16, 2021 speech to the General Assembly’s money committees and in a Jan. 9 op-ed in The Virginian-Pilot. He will leave office on Jan. 15. Northam’s press secretary, Alena Yarmosky, told us the governor’s claim is based on records kept by the Virginia Economic Development Partnership, a state authority that promotes business location and expansion. The records identify each economic development project announced by recent governors, the expected investment by the company and the expected number of new jobs the project will bring to Virginia. The data tells us that Northam-announced projects are, in total, expected to bring more than four times as much corporate investment to Virginia than those of his six most recent predecessors. Here are the numbers: Northam, $81.4 billion; Terry McAuliffe, $18.7 billion; Bob McDonnell, $13.7 billion; Tim Kaine, $11.8 billion; Mark Warner, $13 billion; Jim Gilmore, $12.3 billion; George Allen, $10.7 billion. Although Northam can claim success in economic development, there are caveats to these numbers. First, these totals represent only deals that governors publicly announced, which are different from ironclad contracts. Some of the announced deals never come into fruition, others never meet expectations and some exceed them. It’s too early to tell how many of Northam’s projects will succeed. For example, the largest project announced by McAuliffe never materialized: a deal with Tranlin Inc., a Chinese company that promised to build a $2 billion paper plant in Chesterfield County and bring 2,000 jobs to the Richmond area. Although the deal failed, the numbers are still counted in VEDP’s tally of deals announced by McAuliffe, who led the state from 2014 to 2018. "If we’re saying all $80 billion of investment (under Northam) is going to occur, that’s probably not going to happen," said Robert McNab, director of the Dragas Center for Economic Analysis and Policy at Old Dominion University. Another issue: Some deals take years to work out, and the governor who began negotiations with a company may not be the one who announces an agreement. Featured Fact-check Levar Stoney stated on October 26, 2022 in a news conference. “I don’t get involved in the hiring and firing of police chiefs.” By Warren Fiske • November 2, 2022 For example, one of the richest deals Northam announced was Amazon’s $2.5 billion plan to build a corporate headquarters in Arlington that will bring an estimated 25,000 new jobs to the region. Although VEDP credits the numbers to Northam, who played a large role in making the deal, the state’s highly competitive recruitment of Amazon began under McAuliffe. "There’s some luck of timing involved," said Terry Rephann, a regional economist for the Weldon Cooper Center for Public Service at the University of Virginia who is skeptical about the value of the announcement data. Governor’s "love to toot their horns on the announcements," he said. A more meaningful measure of economic growth, Rephann said, is to look at the number of jobs the projects create. The VEDP lists the estimated new jobs that come with each announcement, but they come with the same caveats we have discussed. Northam ranks third among his six predecessors in this category. Here are the total job estimates that came with the projects each governor announced: Gilmore, 159,770; Warner, 122,883; Northam, 103,568 Allen, 89,650 McAuliffe, 77,377; McDonnell, 75,563; Kaine, 74,444. McNab said Northam deserves credit for economic expansion and that the state has become increasingly wise in targeting new businesses and creative in offering incentives for them to move to Virginia. Under Northam, there was a notable increase in construction and expansion of data centers, huge facilities that centralize an organization’s information technology operations. Data centers don’t require many employees, but they pay sizable local real estate taxes. They also bring spin-off companies that help service and replace equipment. Of the 894 economic development projects announced during Northam’s term, 673 publicized expansion plans by existing companies in Virginia and 221 heralded new companies moving into the state. In estimated investment under Northam, $69.4 billion comes from the expansion of companies already in Virginia and $12 billion comes from new ones locating in the state. Our ruling Northam said, "We’ve brought in more than $81 billion in economic investment, more than four times any previous administration." Northam accurately cites figures compiled by the state’s economic development authority. The numbers reflect the total estimated investment of businesses that each of the last seven governors announced were moving to Virginia or expanding their existing facilities in the state. While the numbers indicate strong economic development during Northam’s term, they come with caveats. Some of the projects governors announce never get off the ground, and others fail to meet expectations. So the actual investment under Northam is likely to shrink from its announced total. Also, many projects transcend gubernatorial terms. A governor who started negotiations with a company may not be the one who announces a deal. We rate Northam’s claim Mostly Tru

A Mack Trucks employee told Joe Biden, “You can’t drive anything besides the country into the ground. "Biden… is not liked by the blue collar workers," reads the description of a TikTok video that’s being shared on Facebook. In the clip, President Joe Biden approaches a man in front of a truck who appears to tell Biden he has "no business driving this truck." "We took a vote and we’re all in agreement that you can’t drive anything besides the country into the ground," the man appears to say. This post was flagged as part of Facebook’s efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about our partnership with Facebook.) The video is authentic, but the audio isn’t. Featured Fact-check Instagram posts stated on October 10, 2022 in a post “Premature babies are at a much higher risk of injury from immunizations than full-term babies.” By Andy Nguyen • October 13, 2022 The clip was taken from Biden’s July visit to a Mack Trucks manufacturing facility in Pennsylvania. It starts around the 5:25 mark of this C-SPAN video. Biden asks if he can open the door to the truck and the man politely says that they don’t have the keys. "I can tell you a lot about this truck however," he says. "So I am an honored — we are honored — to be standing here today to show off the Mack Electric LR to you. It’s a feat of engineering. … This is just the newest addition of what we can do and how we can plow into the future with our heavy-duty electric LR here." RELATED VIDEO The bio of the TikTok username that can be seen on the Facebook video describes his account as "Comedy & Politics." We rate claims that the video in the Facebook post is authentic False.

As a youth, “I got arrested” protesting for civil rights When President Joe Biden went to Georgia to press for voting rights legislation, he made a passing reference to a moment from his past — the time he "got arrested" while protesting for civil rights. It’s not the first time Biden has said he was arrested in his youth while protesting for civil rights. And it’s not the first time that the evidence to back up his assertion is scarce. He’s been called out repeatedly for decades by fact-checkers, including PolitiFact, for exaggerating his experiences with the civil rights movement and his interactions with law enforcement. Biden invoked the civil rights battles of the 1960s as he spoke on a campus shared by Morehouse College and Clark Atlanta University, two historically black colleges. "I did not walk in the shoes of generations of students who walked these grounds," he said. "But I walked other grounds. Because I’m so damn old, I was there as well." This drew laughs from the crowd. "You think I’m kidding, man. It seems like yesterday the first time I got arrested. Anyway." We reached out to the White House to clarify what arrest he was referring to, and they pointed to excerpts from three speeches Biden has made in recent years. They addressed an incident in Delaware in the 1950s in which people gathered to protest the sale of a home to a Black couple. Police were called to the home as hundreds of people protested outside. There were a few arrests, but no evidence that Biden was among them. How Biden described the incident In the earliest of those speeches, at the Economic Club of Southwest Michigan on Oct. 16, 2018, Biden discussed the episode in the context of joining the ticket of Barack Obama, who would become the first Black president. Biden recalled the 2008 exchange with his mother, Catherine Eugenia Finnegan, who was then in her 90s: "She said, ‘Joey, didn't I call you about a month ago and ask you about Barack?’ I said, ‘Yeah, mom.’ She said, ‘Didn't you say to me you thought he was really bright and had a great deal of integrity and would make a good president if he was the nominee?’ I said, ‘Yeah.’ "She said, ‘Joey, remember at 15 years old and that real estate agent sold a house to the Black couple in Lynnfield.’ … This was in suburban sprawl, the neighboring neighborhood. ‘I told you not to go down there because of the protests, and you went down and you got arrested because you were standing on the porch with the Black couple?’ I said, ‘Yeah, mom. I remember that.’" Biden again used the word "arrested" when describing what his mother said about thday in another speech at an African Methodist Episcopal Church in Nevada on Feb. 16, 2020. But Biden has not always used the term "arrest" when telling this story. On Dec. 13, 2018, during remarks at the University of Utah, he recounted his mother saying, "Remember I told you not to go down, and the police brought you back because you were standing on the front porch with the Black couple?" He used similar language in quoting his mother — the police "brought you home," rather than "arrested" him — during a Zoom interview with Oprah Winfrey on Oct. 28, 2020, the Washington Post Fact Checker reported. Biden did not mention getting arrested when he recalled the discussions around joining the ticket with Obama in his 2017 memoir, "Promise Me, Dad: A Year of Hope, Hardship, and Purpose." What does the documentary evidence show? Contemporary newspaper articles confirm that there were protests at two homes near where Biden was growing up in Delaware in 1959. The larger one in Collins Park was at the home of a Black couple. The second, in suburban Carrcroft, was held at the home of the real estate broker who had sold that couple their home. The News-Journal, a Wilmington newspaper, reported on Feb. 25, 1959, that seven arrests followed the protest at the Collins Park home — three men for disturbing the peace and four teenagers for possessing fireworks. Featured Fact-check Kanye West stated on October 16, 2022 in an interview Suggests fentanyl, not Derek Chauvin, killed George Floyd By Gabrielle Settles • October 18, 2022 An Associated Press article on March 2, 1959, said that a 17-year-old — described as the son of a "Harold Figgett" — arrested for juvenile delinquency was among four people arrested that Saturday. (Biden would have been 16 at the time.) It also mentions the seven earlier arrests. No arrests were made at the Carrcroft home protest, the AP reported. So there’s evidence that protests over racial discrimination in housing occurred in the general proximity of Biden’s home when he was a teenager. Biden’s home in Lynnfield was about 9 miles from the Collins Park home and a short walk away from the Carrcroft home, according to Google Maps. Was Biden arrested? There is no record of Biden being arrested. Ric Simmons, an Ohio State University law professor, said that if the police arrived to break up a disturbance, told everyone to disperse, offered to drive some of the people home, and Biden agreed to be driven home, then the ride would have been consensual and thus definitively not an arrest. If the officer instead made clear to Biden that he did not have a choice and would be forcibly placed into the squad car if he refused, then Biden would have been "seized." Not all seizures are arrests, Simmons said, but the argument for calling it an arrest would be stronger. However, Simmons added that this is a hyper-legal definition of arrest. It would be "very unlikely," he said, that an ordinary person would consider being driven home by the police in this scenario — without a booking at the police station or any involvement with the courts — to be an "arrest." "If anything, Biden's experience seems like the police officer made a conscious decision not to arrest — whether because Biden was a juvenile, or because the officer was sympathetic to Biden's motivation, or because Biden's actions did not constitute probable cause to believe a crime occured," Simmons said. "So I think to call this an ‘arrest’ in the lay sense of the term is an exaggeration, to say the least. It would be more accurate to say he had a run-in with police, or that he was involved in an event in which the police had to intervene." Mark Osler, a law professor at the University of St. Thomas, in Minnesota, added that how Biden perceived the events might be quite different from how outsiders would perceive them. "While being driven home by the police probably isn’t viewed as an arrest by the police, it may feel that way to a young person," Osler said. Previous controversies over Biden’s claims about civil rights activism This is not the first time Biden has been challenged over whether he has been arrested in events surrounding civil rights. At a campaign event in 2020, he said he had been arrested in South Africa in 1977 while attempting to see the then-imprisoned Black leader Nelson Mandela. PolitiFact rated this Pants on Fire. After multiple outlets fact-checked this claim, Biden clarified that he had been separated at the airport from a Black delegation he was traveling with. Biden has also been accused of embellishing his activism in the 1960s. During his 1988 campaign for president, Biden told crowds that he marched in the civil rights movement. Even though his advisers, according to the New York Times, "gently reminded" him that he hadn’t, Biden continued to make the claim. Then, during his 2020 presidential campaign, Biden told viewers of a virtual town hall with the NAACP that he "got involved in the civil rights movement. Desegregating restaurants, that kind of thing." The Washington Post’s Fact-Checker gave that claim Two Pinocchios, writing that "as far as we can determine, Biden participated in just one walk-out at one restaurant." Biden has twice made claims of being arrested for less serious reasons — once when he accompanied two women to their Ohio University dorm in 1963, and another time when he said he wandered onto the floor of the U.S. Senate as a 21-year-old. In both cases, he revised the story. Our ruling Biden said that as a youth, "I got arrested" protesting for civil rights. Biden may have participated in one of two flare-ups over racial discrimination in housing that occurred near his home in Delaware when he was in a teenager. However, there is no evidence that Biden was actually arrested in the sense of being booked at a police station and facing any consequences in the criminal justice system. At times, Biden himself has described the police’s actions as driving him home, rather than putting him under arrest. We rate the statement False. Caryn Baird contributed to this articl

Retired U.S. presidents and members of Congress collect full salaries “for life. Elected officials’ post-retirement benefits have long been the target of false or misleading claims. PolitiFact has repeatedly debunked claims about benefits available to executive and legislative officials when they’re finished serving. An old post with more such claims is regaining traction on Facebook. "Salary of retired U.S. presidents … $450,000 FOR LIFE," the image in the post reads. Originally published in 2019, the post goes on to quote other salaries "for life" for lawmakers: $174,000 for House and Senate members; $223,500 for the speaker of the House; and $194,400 for other congressional leaders. It continues with a comparison: "Average salary of a soldier DEPLOYED IN AFGHANISTAN … $38,000," the image reads. "Average income for seniors on Social Security … $12,000. I think we found where the cuts should be made!" The post, which people were sharing and commenting on as recently as Jan. 13, was flagged as part of Facebook’s efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about our partnership with Facebook.) The post quotes numbers that align with the current salaries of officials in office. But it makes a big error by attaching the phrase "for life." Elected officials at the federal level can qualify for pensions after they leave office, but they’re not entitled to their full salaries for life. What do the benefits actually look like for former presidents and members of Congress? Here’s what we found: Former presidents The president earns $400,000 a year while in office, plus a $50,000 expense allowance. The Former Presidents Act of 1958 established that former presidents are entitled annually to an amount "equal to the annual rate of basic pay, as in effect from time to time, of the head of an executive department" — that is, the base pay of a cabinet secretary, not their presidential salary. Today, that amount is ​​$226,300, according to the U.S. Office of Personnel Management. Former presidents are also given allowances for office space and staff and for security and travel expenses. The total benefits may be worth more than the "$450,000 for life" that the post claims, but the annual pension for ex-presidents is $226,300. Featured Fact-check Facebook posts stated on October 14, 2022 in an Instagram post Video footage showing Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi hiding on Jan. 6, 2021, shows the U.S. Capitol attack “was a setup.” By Madison Czopek • October 17, 2022 Former members of Congress A 2018 Congressional Research Service report responding to persistent misinformation spelled out the rules on lawmakers’ pay and benefits. "Members of Congress receive salaries only during the terms for which they are elected," the report said. "They do not receive salaries beyond their terms of office." Congressional salaries haven't changed since 2009. In 2022, most senators and representatives collect an annual salary of $174,000. The speaker of the House gets paid $223,500, and the Senate president pro tempore and the majority and minority leaders of the two chambers earn $193,400 each year​​ while they’re in office. Representatives and senators become eligible to receive retirement benefits only after serving in Congress for at least five years. That’s nearly one full term for a senator, or more than two terms for a House member. Those who have completed the minimum service could begin collecting their pensions at age 62, according to the Congressional Research Service report. Those with a longer record of service can start collecting sooner. "The amount of the pension depends on length of service, as measured in months, and the average of the highest three years of salary," the report explained. But the benefits cannot exceed 80% of that person’s final salary. Based on the current salaries, the annual pension would be capped at $178,800 for a retiring House speaker, and for $139,200 for rank-and-file members. On average, they receive less than that. As of Oct. 1, 2018, 617 retired members of Congress were receiving pensions "based fully or in part on their congressional service," according to the Congressional Research Service. About half of them retired under the Civil Service Retirement System, which existed before 1984, and were receiving an average annual pension of $75,528. The others retired under the ​​Federal Employees’ Retirement System and were receiving an average annual pension of $41,208. Other numbers in the post The salary for active-duty military members varies based on rank, experience and other factors, so it is unclear exactly how the post arrived at the $38,000 "average." A private with less than two years of experience makes $21,420 in basic pay, while a sergeant with six years of experience makes about $38,246, according to the U.S. Army. Basic pay does not include "bonuses, allowances and other benefits." The average monthly benefit paid to retired workers relying on Social Security income is $1,555, according to the Social Security Administration. That amounts to a yearly income of about $18,660 — or 55% more than the Facebook post claims. Our ruling A viral image shared on Facebook claimed that former presidents and members of Congress collect salaries "for life." Former members of Congress do not receive full congressional salaries for life. After serving five years in Congress, former members become eligible to collect a pension. The amount of the pension varies based on length of service, but it would be less than their salary when they were in office. Presidents earn $400,000 a year when they’re in office, not for life. Former presidents are entitled to a pension equivalent to the salary of a cabinet secretary; the current rate is $226,300 a year. We rate this claim Fals

“When a person cries, if the first drop of the tears come from the right eye, it’s happiness. But when it comes from the left eye, it’s pain. There are crocodile tears — a phony display of sadness — but what about crocodile wisdom? Some trivia is being shared on social media, but it’s not accurate. "When a person cries, if the first drop of the tears come from the right eye, it’s happiness," one post says. "But when it comes from the left eye, it’s pain. And when they drop from both eyes, it’s frustration." This post was flagged as part of Facebook’s efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about our partnership with Facebook.) We couldn’t find any credible sources to support this claim. Featured Fact-check Instagram posts stated on October 10, 2022 in a post “Premature babies are at a much higher risk of injury from immunizations than full-term babies.” By Andy Nguyen • October 13, 2022 A 2020 post on crying and tears on the Cleveland Clinic’s website, however, cheekily weighed in. "True or false? If the first tear comes from the right eye, it means happiness and if it comes from the left eye, sadness," the post says. "Short answer: No. Long answer: Not true." Every time you blink, according to the National Eye Institute, a thin layer of tears called "tear film" covers your cornea. Tears come from glands above the eyes, then drain into the tear ducts — small holes in the inner corner of the eyes. But they don’t play favorites. We rate this post False.

Video shows Rafael Nadal and Roger Federer laughing at Novak Djokovic after he was stuck in an Australian airport Tennis star Novak Djokovic was stuck at an airport in Melbourne, Australia, on Jan. 5 after it became clear that his team had applied for a visa that didn’t allow medical exemptions like the COVID-19 vaccination exemption he had obtained to play at the Australian Open. A video circulating on social media appears to show two other tennis stars, Roger Federer and Rafael Nadal, laughing at the Serb’s expense. "Thought he could outwit everyone with phony medical exemption," reads one of the English subtitles rolling at the bottom of the clip as the men laugh. This post was flagged as part of Facebook’s efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about our partnership with Facebook.) Featured Fact-check Instagram posts stated on October 12, 2022 in an Instagram post Pfizer executive “admits” vaccine was never tested for preventing transmission. By Jeff Cercone • October 13, 2022 Some people seem to believe that their comments are real, but the clip is a joke that apparently originated as a satirical story on a German site. @politifact No, this isn’t a real video of Rafael Nadal and Roger Federer laughing at Novak Djokovic. #djokovic #covidvaccine #learnontiktok ♬ Swear By It - Clutch The video itself is authentic and shows Federer and Nadal more than a decade ago. Credit Suisse posted it to YouTube in September 2010, writing that "they had loads of fun" shooting a video promoting a tennis match that would raise money for charity. Unlike in the spoof now being posted to social media, the men can be heard speaking in English and cracking up over their lines for the promo. We rate claims that the video shows them laughing about Djokovic False. RELATED VIDEO

Video shows China launching an “artificial sun” into space A video that’s being shared on social media shows a crowd of people gathered on a beach and holding their phones in the air to record a glowing orb rising in the distance. "Apparently China launched its ‘Artificial Sun’ into space," a Jan. 11 Instagram post sharing the video said. "This world is getting scary." "Sooooo nobody’s talking about China making a fake sun," a Jan. 11 Facebook post said. "Did China really create a fake sun?" another post asked. These posts were flagged as part of Facebook’s efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about our partnership with Facebook.) Featured Fact-check Instagram posts stated on October 29, 2022 in Instagram post Photo shows Stanford scientists' "3D model of how Joseph, the husband of Mary the Mother of Jesus Christ, might have looked.” By Michael Majchrowicz • November 4, 2022 China does have something called an "artificial sun." It’s a nuclear fusion reactor — officially named the Experimental Advanced Superconducting Tokamak — that recently set a record for sustained high temperatures after running five times hotter than the sun for more than 17 minutes, according to the Independent, which cited state media in China. It’s one of three "artificial suns" being developed in China in hopes of providing "almost limitless clean energy," the story says — and they’re all indoors. The footage that is wrongly being characterized as showing China launching a fake sun appears to actually show a late December rocket launch from the Wenchang Space Launch Center. An English translation of a Dec. 24 Weibo post from a similar vantage point on the beach says: "The rocket launch site, let us witness the great power of China’s aerospace." We rate the claims that China launched an artificial sun into space Fals

“In the 2020 election, President Trump voted from behind the desk in the White House in Florida. While Republican state lawmakers have passed and proposed numerous restrictions on voting by mail since the 2020 election, there exists a curious fact: The leader of their party, former President Donald Trump, chose to vote by mail multiple times in recent years. President Joe Biden noted that do-what-I say-not-what-I-do philosophy during a speech in Georgia calling on Congress to pass voting rights legislation. Biden said that Georgia Republicans have put up obstacles such as "making it harder for you to vote by mail," a reference to the state law passed in 2021 that adds some restrictions to voting by mail, including availability of drop boxes. But in the presidential election, Trump himself cast a mail ballot, Biden said. "The same way, I might add, in the 2020 election, President Trump voted from behind the desk in the White House in Florida," Biden said. Biden is partially correct about Trump’s 2020 voting habits: Trump cast a mail ballot twice in 2020 primary elections. (We don’t know where Trump physically sat to fill out his mail ballot.) But in October 2020, after he was repeatedly challenged about why he criticized voting by mail while using it himself, Trump voted early in person for the general election. Before and after the 2020 general election, Trump spread many falsehoods about voting by mail. These falsehoods have helped fuel the push by many state GOP lawmakers to craft bills that add restrictions to voting by mail in several states, including Georgia and Florida. Biden has called on Congress to pass two key pieces of voting rights legislation: the Freedom to Vote Act, which would create uniform standards for voting including casting mail ballots, and a bill named after U.S. Rep. John Lewis that aims to block discriminatory voting laws. How Trump voted in 2020 in Florida Trump became a Florida registered voter in 2019 using his Mar-a-Lago address. In 2020, we interviewed Wendy Sartory Link, the Palm Beach County supervisor of elections, about Trump’s voting record. A representative picked up ballots for Trump from the elections office, which is allowed under Florida law. Link confirmed that Trump voted using that method for the presidential preference primary in March and the state primary in August. The elections office doesn’t record for each individual whether their ballot is physically dropped off, mailed in or put in a drop box. Trump chose to vote by mail rather than in person even though his motorcade repeatedly drove right by an early voting site at a Palm Beach County library around the date of the March 2020 election, CNN reported. In 2020, Trump and his allies encouraged their supporters to cast ballots by mail, while attacking the option in court and in public. ​​For the general presidential election, Trump voted early in person at the Palm Beach County Main Library, Saturday, Oct. 24, 2020, in West Palm Beach, Florida. "I voted for a guy named Trump," the president said, according to a pool report, the New York Times wrote. Trump said that his experience had been "perfect" and that "it was a very secure vote." Featured Fact-check Instagram posts stated on October 25, 2022 in an Instagram post The documentary “2,000 Mules proves” Democrats “cheated on the 2020 elections.” By Jon Greenberg • October 28, 2022 In the summer of 2020, Trump defended his record of voting by mail. "I’m an absentee voter because I can’t be in Florida, because I’m in Washington," Trump said in July 2020 before repeating unsubstantiated claims of fraud. "I’m at the White House, so I’ll be an absentee voter. We have a lot of absentee voters, and it works. We’re in favor of absentee, but it’s much different than millions of people in California. They’re going to send out tens of millions of voting forms. Well, where are they going to go? You read where postmen are in big trouble now. You read where city councils are in big trouble now. Voter fraud all over the ballot." The Florida Legislature unanimously voted in 2016 to change the phrase "absentee" to "vote-by-mail," in order to ease confusion among voters who mistakenly believed that they had to be away from home to request a ballot by mail. That meant that under Florida law it didn’t matter whether Trump was at the White House, Florida or anywhere else in the world when it was voting season — he had a legal right to a mail ballot. How Trump voted 2016-2018 as a New Yorker Biden singled out Trump’s voting history in 2020, but we decided to look back at his voting habits back to the 2016 general election. We contacted a spokesperson for the New York City Board of Elections to ask questions about Trump’s voting history, but did not hear back by deadline. However, we found news reports showing that sometimes as a New York voter, Trump cast an absentee ballot. 2018: In the midterm elections, Trump voted absentee, a White House spokesperson told reporters. Many high ranking officials in the Trump administration or the campaign voted by mail in 2018 or in recent years prior, including Vice President Mike Pence, Attorney General Bill Barr, Press Secretary Kayleigh McEnany and campaign manager Brad Parscale, according to the Washington Post. 2017: The New York Daily News reported that Trump filled out an absentee ballot for the mayoral election and checked a box on an application stating he would be absent from the city on Election Day. The newspaper found that Trump’s ballot application listed his birthday as July but it is actually June 14, 1946. NY1 reported that Trump and his wife Melania authorized a campaign staffer to pick up the ballots for them. 2016: Trump voted in person in the November election at Manhattan’s Public School 59, blocks from Trump Tower, where he lived. We didn’t look further back for news reports about whether Trump voted absentee or in person prior to November 2016. However, his efforts to cast a ballot in 2004 drew attention in 2020 when a 2004 "Access Hollywood" video resurfaced. "Access Hollywood" filmed Trump as he attempted to vote in person in New York City, where he was turned away from various sites because poll workers said he wasn’t registered to vote at those locations. In the video, Trump grew frustrated and said, "I'm going to fill out the absentee ballot." Ultimately, Trump was seen filling out a ballot in the backseat of a car. "At least you can say the Trumpster doesn’t give up," Trump says. "You’ve gotta vote." "Access Hollywood" reported that Trump cast a provisional ballot. Our ruling Biden said, "In the 2020 election, President Trump voted from behind the desk in the White House in Florida." We don’t know where Trump sat when he voted in 2020, but we do know from Palm Beach County election officials that he voted via a mail ballot in the presidential preference primary in March and the August primary. A representative picked up the ballot for him, which is uncommon but allowed. That said, when people hear "the 2020 election" they generally think of the general election. And for that, Trump cast his ballot in person at an early voting site at a library. We rate this statement Half Tru

“The CDC director just said that 75% of ‘Covid deaths’ occurred in people with at least four comorbidities. Dr. Rochelle Walensky, one of the nation’s top public-health officials, shared encouraging news in a TV interview about the effectiveness of vaccines in preventing COVID-19 deaths. But social media posts and articles seized on an edited clip of the interview to falsely suggest that she was downplaying the seriousness of COVID-19. "The CDC director just said over 75% of ‘covid deaths’ occurred in people with at least four comorbidities," reads a Facebook post from Freedom Works, a conservative and libertarian advocacy group based in Washington. "Since Biden can’t shut down covid, suddenly all this data is getting shared publicly." Conservative news websites the Western Journal and Town Hall chimed in, calling it a "shocking" and "damning" admission. Donald Trump Jr., the former president’s son, also weighed in on Twitter: 75% of “Covid Deaths” were in people with at least 4 comorbidities according to the CDC. That’s it. That’s the tweet.— Donald Trump Jr. (@DonaldJTrumpJr) January 10, 2022 But these claims, based on an edited clip of an interview that Walensky gave on ABC’s "Good Morning America," are missing important context, and substantially distort the meaning of her comments. Walensky, director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, was referring to a new CDC study that found over 75% of deaths among vaccinated individuals involved people who had at least four comorbidities, such as another disease, risk factor or health condition. The statistic bolsters the argument that vaccines are effective against COVID-19. The social media claims didn’t mention that the study was on vaccinated people, which gave the misleading impression that Walensky was saying that overall deaths attributed to COVID-19 were largely due to other conditions. The posts were flagged as part of Facebook’s efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about our partnership with Facebook.) The confusion began when ABC News initially released a shortened version of Walensky’s Jan. 7 interview. This version, which quickly spread online, showed Walensky responding to a question from White House correspondent Cecilia Vega about how the study seemed to show vaccines working to prevent severe illness. "The overwhelming number of deaths, over 75%, occurred in people who had at least four comorbidities," Walensky said. "So really, these are people who were unwell to begin with." Featured Fact-check Instagram posts stated on October 12, 2022 in an Instagram post Pfizer executive “admits” vaccine was never tested for preventing transmission. By Jeff Cercone • October 13, 2022 The clip does include Vega mentioning encouraging news about vaccine effectiveness, but the edit cuts off the beginning of Walensky’s response, which makes clear that she was referring to a study of vaccinated people. Here is the full exchange: VEGA: "I want to ask you about those encouraging headlines that we're talking about this morning, this new study showing just how well vaccines are working to prevent severe illness. Given that, is it time to start rethinking how we're living with this virus, that it’s potentially here to stay?" WALENSKY: "A really important study if I may just summarize it, a study of 1.2 million people who were vaccinated between December and October and demonstrated that severe disease occurred in about 0.015% of the people who receive their primary series. And death in 0.003% of those people. The overwhelming number of deaths, over 75%, occurred in people who had at least four comorbidities, so really these are people who were unwell to begin with. And yes, really encouraging news in the context of omicron. This means not only just to get your primary series, but to get your booster series. And yes, we’re really encouraged by these results." The study involved just over 1.2 million people who completed their primary vaccination series — two shots for mRNA vaccines — from December 2020 through October 2021. It found that severe COVID-19-associated outcomes or death were rare among the group — 36 died of COVID-19. Risk factors included being over 65 years old or having a suppressed immune system. All people who experienced severe disease had at least one risk factor, the report said, and 28 of the people who died, or 78%, had at least four. After misinformation started to spread over the weekend about Walensky’s remarks, ABC News published an extended version of the interview with a note at the end. PolitiFact reached out to the CDC but did not hear back. ABC News declined to comment. Our ruling Websites and posts on social media claimed that Walensky said 75% of COVID-19 deaths occurred in people with at least four comorbidities. The claims, based on an edited clip of a TV interview, misrepresent what she said. She was referring to a study that involved vaccinated individuals only, and said over 75% of deaths in that group involved individuals who had multiple other diseases and conditions. She cited the statistic as evidence that the vaccines were effective in preventing severe disease. We rate this False

“You are 17 times more likely to go to the hospital if you’re not vaccinated, 20 times more likely to die. On Jan. 10, when the U.S. reported 1.35 million new COVID-19 cases — the highest daily total for any country on record — White House press secretary Jen Psaki faced pushback regarding President Joe Biden’s assertion that the pandemic is, at this point, "a pandemic of the unvaccinated." During a press briefing that day, Fox News reporter Peter Doocy implied that Biden’s characterization was inaccurate. "I understand that the science says that vaccines prevent death," he said. "But I’m triple vaxxed, still got COVID. You’re triple vaxxed, still got COVID. Why is the president still referring to this as a ‘pandemic of the unvaccinated?’" In her response, Psaki emphasized that vaccination status contributes to a "significant difference" in COVID-19 experiences. "I had been triple vaxxed," she said. "I had minor symptoms. There is a huge difference between that and being unvaccinated." She continued: "You are 17 times more likely to go to the hospital if you’re not vaccinated, 20 times more likely to die. And those are significant, serious statistics. So, yes, the impact for people who are unvaccinated is far more dire than those who are vaccinated." A spokesperson for Psaki said she was referring to publicly available data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. And the CDC data support her claim. In October, unvaccinated people had 10 times the risk of testing positive for COVID-19 and 20 times the risk of dying from COVID-19 compared with people who were fully vaccinated with additional or booster doses, according to the CDC’s COVID Data Tracker. On COVID-19 hospitalizations, CDC data from the end of November 2021 indicated that unvaccinated adults ages 18 years and older were hospitalized with COVID-19 at a rate of about 67.8 per 100,000. By comparison, the rate for fully vaccinated individuals was about 3.9 per 100,000, meaning unvaccinated people were about 17 times more likely to be hospitalized due to COVID-19. Featured Fact-check Instagram posts stated on October 12, 2022 in an Instagram post Pfizer executive “admits” vaccine was never tested for preventing transmission. By Jeff Cercone • October 13, 2022 Data from Texas also supports Psaki’s claims. According to the Texas Department of State Health Services, data from September indicated that "Texans not vaccinated against COVID-19 were about 20 times more likely to suffer a COVID-19-associated death and 13 times more likely to test positive than people who were fully vaccinated." With the U.S. now averaging more than 700,000 new coronavirus cases every day, the data shows that people who are unvaccinated are at a higher risk of severe illness and death than those who are vaccinated. The CDC says scientists are currently researching how protected fully vaccinated people will be against infection, hospitalization and death where the omicron variant is concerned. The highly transmissible variant began to spread in the U.S. in early December and is fueling a surge that experts predict could last through January. But some of the most recent omicron surge data from cities New York and Seattle indicates that COVID-19 vaccines still "radically reduce the chance of severe COVID illness," according to a data analysis by the New York Times. Data on COVID-19 deaths from those cities indicates a relatively low risk of death for people who are vaccinated. Deaths among the vaccinated are expected to rise due to an increase in vaccinated people who have contracted the virus. "They are likely to be concentrated among people in vulnerable health, including the elderly and those with a serious underlying medical condition like a previous organ transplant — especially if they’re not boosted." Data on deaths lags behind data on infections by about three weeks. But the Times reported that the early numbers suggest any increases in deaths among the vaccinated will be comparatively modest. "Deaths among unvaccinated New Yorkers and Seattleites had already begun to surge in December," the Times wrote. "Deaths among the vaccinated had not." Our ruling Psaki said "You are 17 times more likely to go to the hospital if you’re not vaccinated, 20 times more likely to die," compared to people who are fully vaccinated against COVID-19. The most complete data available from the CDC and research from Texas support this claim. While those studies are based on data collected prior to omicron variant spreading in the U.S., early data from New York and Seattle in December and January continue to suggest a significant gap between the experiences of the unvaccinated and the vaccinated who become infected. We rate this claim Tru

Senior citizens qualify for a Medicare “flex card” that pays for groceries, dental costs and prescriptions A social media post hawking a card that provides free groceries and prescriptions for senior citizens is evidence of the old adage: When something seems too good to be true, it probably is. The Facebook post says, "​​As an American over 65, I qualified for the ‘Elderly Spend Card,’ which pays for my groceries, my dental, and my prescription refills. All I did to qualify, was tap the image below, entered my zip and I got my flex card in the mail a week later!" The post includes a photo of a large pile of groceries. Clicking the link on the post brings users to a website that says, "Seniors can get their ‘Medicare Flex Card’ for a limited time," with a photo of a debit card. "Qualify (sic) seniors can spend up to $2,880 each year for medical appointments, prescriptions and more." The post was flagged as part of Facebook’s efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about our partnership with Facebook.) Without more context, this is misleading. Though the post implies that anyone over 65 is eligible for such a card, Medicare — the federal health insurance program for senior citizens and those with disabilities — does not provide the cards. Private insurance companies that sell certain plans, called Medicare Advantage, are allowed to offer customers a prepaid debit card, sometimes referred to as flex cards. The cards are available only in some areas, the monetary limits are often much lower than social media advertisement indicates, and what can be purchased with them is also limited. "Medicare Advantage plans may utilize a debit card as a tool in administering supplemental benefits and/or to reduce enrollee cost sharing on covered benefits," a spokesperson for the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services said. "Plans sometimes refer to these debit cards as ‘FlexCards.’ Plan enrollees may use a plan provided debit card with a set dollar limit to pay for covered supplemental benefits and/or out-of-pocket expenses, such as copays or coinsurance." One insurance brokerage that sells Medicare plans wrote in a blog post, "Truthfully, Medicare is not distributing flex cards. Thus, it is not a government-run program for seniors." The blog notes that the cards are distributed by private Medicare Advantage plans and says they "are not available in every state and are not available with every carrier." Featured Fact-check Instagram posts stated on October 10, 2022 in a post “Premature babies are at a much higher risk of injury from immunizations than full-term babies.” By Andy Nguyen • October 13, 2022 Beginning in 2020, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services allowed private insurers to add a "new benefit facilitated through a debit card that would allow enrollees to use a dollar amount for specific primarily health related services (e.g., copays, OTC drugs, eyeglasses)," according to guidance from the agency. Contrary to the Facebook post’s claim about using the debit card to purchase groceries, the agency’s guidance indicates that only the chronically ill qualify to use the cards for items such as food and produce. Media coverage has indicated that the cards usually offer much lower monetary limits than the post suggests, and are available to a limited group of people. For example, Aetna offers a flex card with a maximum annual benefit for $400, and it’s available only to "select" plans in Pennsylvania and Minnesota, according to a press release. Similarly, Humana is offering a $250 debit card "to members of some Florida plans," according to a press release. Our ruling A Facebook post says that senior citizens can get a Medicare "flex card" that pays for groceries and prescriptions. The cards are not provided by Medicare. They are offered as a benefit to some customers by private insurance companies that sell Medicare Advantage plans. The cards are available in limited geographic areas. They cannot be used by everyone to purchase groceries; the scope of what can be purchased by whom is limited. We rate this claim Mostly False.

Says Steve Jobs said, “I realize that all my recognition and wealth that I have is meaningless in the face of imminent death. In 2011, Apple co-founder Steve Jobs died as a result of complications from pancreatic cancer. More than a decade later, some people are still finding inspiration from words he allegedly said on his deathbed — but there’s also still no evidence to support that he’s the source of this wisdom. "At this moment, lying on the bed, sick and remembering all my life, I realize that all my recognition and wealth that I have is meaningless in the face of imminent death," Jobs said in his last days, according to a Jan. 10 Facebook post. "You can hire someone to drive a car for you, make money for you, but you cannot rent someone to carry the disease for you." This post was flagged as part of Facebook’s efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about our partnership with Facebook.) We found no credible source connecting Jobs to these words. Featured Fact-check Instagram posts stated on October 10, 2022 in a post “Premature babies are at a much higher risk of injury from immunizations than full-term babies.” By Andy Nguyen • October 13, 2022 It didn’t come up in his obituary in the New York Times or in Walter Isaacon’s 2011 Jobs biography or in the eulogy given by his sister, Mona Simpson, who said that Jobs’ last words were spoken after he looked at members of his family: "Oh wow. Oh wow. Oh wow." In previous years, several other fact-checkers who have looked into the claim that Jobs said what’s written in the Facebook post have come up empty. And in 2015, Snopes checked a similar statement and found it wrongly attributed to Jobs. Claims that another supposed billionaire made the statements have also been debunked. Unlike Jobs, this person didn’t actually exist. Like Jobs, he didn’t make this statement. We rate this post False.