Datasets:

Cartinoe5930

/

Politifact_fake_news

like 0

Suggests Amber Heard snorted cocaine while on the stand in court Claims are coming fast and furious about Amber Heard’s behavior during the defamation trial initiated by her ex-husband, Johnny Depp, with the latest one suggesting — without evidence — that she used illegal drugs while in court. A May 6 post on Facebook includes a 15-second video clip of Heard on the stand in court with a caption that says, "DID SHE LITERALLY JUST HAVE A BUMP OF COCAINE ON THE STAND!??" The footage shows Heard wiping her nose with a tissue, pausing momentarily to touch one nostril with her finger while the tissue is still on her face. 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 that Heard used cocaine while in court. Heard has periodically cried during her testimony, and a longer video of the same proceeding shows that two minutes before the moment depicted in the Facebook clip, she wiped her nose with a tissue. 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 In the longer video, at the 12:05 mark, Heard picked up a tissue and wiped her nose for several seconds, then lowered the tissue to her lap. At the 14:38 mark — the moment shown in the Facebook clip — she raised the tissue to her nose again. Also, those entering the Fairfax County Courthouse in Fairfax, Virginia, where the trial is being held, are screened for contraband. Security procedures include emptying pockets, having personal belongings X-rayed and walking through a metal detector, according to the Fairfax County Sheriff’s Office. Depp sued Heard for libel after she accused him of domestic abuse in a 2018 opinion editorial in the Washington Post. Depp’s lawyer described the allegations as "catastrophic" to Depp’s career. During the trial, Heard has been the focus of intense ire from Depp’s fans, particularly on TikTok, where videos ridiculing her testimony have racked up tens of millions of views. Variety called the trial, which is being live-streamed, a "digital media spectacle." We rate the claim that Heard snorted cocaine while on the stand in court Pants on Fire!

"Kari Lake has been appearing at rallies with neo-Nazis," while "two federal juries have found" Katie Hobbs "guilty of racial discrimination. In the race for governor in Arizona, one candidate went icepick-sharp with an attack that cut competitors on both the right and left. The TV ad from former state representative Aaron Lieberman, a Democrat, hit the two frontrunners, Republican Kari Lake and Democrat Katie Hobbs. "Right now, Arizona’s politics are a dumpster fire," Lieberman said into the camera, as flames rose from a trash container behind him. "Kari Lake has been appearing at rallies with neo-Nazis. And she’s beating Katie Hobbs, who two federal juries have found guilty of racial discrimination." The ad ends with Lieberman appearing to spray the dumpster with a fire extinguisher. There is only an element of truth in both parts of Lieberman’s attack. Lake posed once with reported Nazi sympathizer We did not find evidence that Lake, a former anchor for Fox 10 News in Phoenix who is endorsed by former President Donald Trump, has been sharing a stage generally with neo-Nazis. The ad cited a November CNN report that said Lake "embraced" three "fringe far-right figures in her campaign events," including Greyson Arnold. The report said Lake posed for a photo and video with Arnold at one of her rallies in August. CNN reported that after Arnold posted a photo on Twitter, Lake replied, "It was a pleasure to meet you, too." The report called Arnold a Nazi sympathizer with a history of making white nationalist, racist, antisemitic and pro-Nazi statements. A previous CNN report also said Arnold repeatedly shared memes saying the U.S. fought on the wrong side in World War II. Months later, the Arizona Mirror reported that Arnold used his social media pages to post memes lauding Nazis as the "pure race" and lamenting the American victory in World War II. Arnold told the Mirror his posts were taken out of context, and he denied being a white nationalist or supporting Nazi ideology. When we asked a Lake campaign spokesperson in emails about the Lieberman ad, the spokesperson did not specifically answer questions about Arnold. Arnold himself told PolitiFact: "CNN is fake news." Hobbs played role in discriminatory firing Hobbs, then the Democratic leader of the Arizona Senate, did have a role in the 2015 firing of Talonya Adams, an Arizona Senate policy adviser who won a racial discrimination lawsuit. But Hobbs was not personally charged in the matter. Featured Fact-check America First Legal stated on November 1, 2022 in an ad “Kamala Harris said disaster aid should go to non-white citizens first." By Tom Kertscher • November 5, 2022 Adams, who is Black and represented herself, sued the Senate, alleging that she was fired for raising concerns about racial and gender discrimination because she was paid less than white male peers. Adams alleged in the lawsuit that after she emailed a staff supervisor to discuss her job status, Hobbs told Adams that her email was inappropriate, because Adams had already discussed her status with Hobbs, the supervisor and another official. A jury agreed with Adams’ discrimination claims and awarded her $1 million after a trial in 2019. But the Senate was granted a second trial after its attorneys argued that Adams could not claim retaliation because she did not first inform Senate leaders that she believed discrimination was taking place. Adams won the second trial, in November 2021, when a jury found she was the victim of retaliation. The jury awarded her $2.75 million, though a federal cap law is expected to reduce that to $300,000. Hobbs testified at both trials that she participated in the discussion to terminate Adams, saying she had lost trust in Adams over her decision to take emergency leave to care for her son in Seattle, and because of other chain-of-command issues, according to news reports. Hobbs reiterated that point in a November 2021 letter to her campaign supporters, writing: "I take responsibility for my role in the decision to terminate Ms. Adams, and I stand by what I’ve consistently said, that this decision on my part was not based on gender or race." Hobbs issued another statement in December 2021, apologizing to Adams. Unlike in her November letter, Hobbs said discrimination occurred, telling the Arizona Republic: "I know that in proceeding in her termination, I participated in furthering systemic racism." Hobbs issued the apology after Black community leaders and others criticized Hobbs' initial response to the second jury verdict, the Arizona Republic reported. Arizona’s primaries are Aug. 2. Campaign watchers rate the Nov. 8 general election as a toss up. The major Republican candidates in the governor’s race include Lake; Karrin Taylor Robson, of an Arizona political dynasty; and former U.S. Rep. Matt Salmon. The major Democratic candidates are Hobbs, Lieberman and former Nogales Mayor Marco Lopez. Our ruling Lieberman said that Lake "has been appearing at rallies with neo-Nazis" and "two federal juries have found" Hobbs "guilty of racial discrimination." Lieberman is exaggerating the facts to cast his opponents in the worst light possible. Lake posed for a photo and video at one of her campaign rallies with one man who is identified in news reports as a Nazi sympathizer, but there’s no evidence that this was anything more than a random interaction at a campaign event. Hobbs, now Arizona’s secretary of state, was the Democratic leader of the Arizona Senate when she participated in the 2015 decision to fire an Arizona Senate employee who later successfully sued the Arizona Senate for racial discrimination. Hobbs herself was not sued, which means no court made a finding specifically against her. Lieberman’s claim has an element of truth but leaves out critical information that would give a different impression. We rate it Mostly False. PolitiFact staff researcher Caryn Baird contributed to this repor

“Is ANYONE asking how Ron DeSantis was worth $340,000 in 2020 and is now worth $52 million? Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis has raised a large sum of money for his re-election bid, topping $100 million in April. Those same fundraising talents have fueled several misleading claims on social media. "Is ANYONE asking how Ron DeSantis was worth $340,000 in 2020 and is now worth $52 million?" a May 8 tweet read. "This is corruption for sure," one user replied. "Kickbacks." The tweet is wrong, but that didn’t stop it from being retweeted more than 20,000 times — including by Janet Long, Pinellas County commissioner and former Democratic member of the Florida House. Long, who did not respond to our request for comment, undid her retweet. Similar claims that DeSantis had dramatically increased his net worth have appeared on Twitter since at least late March. But they conflate net worth with how much he has fundraised for his re-election. State elected officials must file a financial disclosure to the Florida Commission of Ethics by July 1 each year. These filings detail the officials' assets, liabilities, and sources of income. The commission also asks that each elected official note their net worth, calculated by totaling the value of all their assets — such as cash and property — and subtracting any debt owed. DeSantis listed his 2020 net worth at $348,832, an increase of more than $57,000 from the year prior. His gubernatorial salary of $134,181 was the only source of income recorded in the filing. DeSantis also reported assets in a USAA account, a government thrift savings plan and the Florida Retirement System. His increase in net worth is linked to these assets. Featured Fact-check Rebekah Jones stated on October 26, 2022 in a post on Instagram Document shows Rebekah Jones “demonstrated” a violation of Florida’s Whistleblower Act. By Sara Swann • November 1, 2022 So, where were people getting an increase to $52 million? That figure appeared in news coverage about donations that DeSantis' re-election campaign raised in the first eight months of 2021. Friends of Ron DeSantis, his political committee, reported raising around $52 million as of Sept. 1, 2021. (He has since raised more than twice that amount.) "Political campaign fundraising is NOT net worth," DeSantis press secretary Christina Pushaw tweeted on March 19. "All of this info is reported in detail for Florida public officials." Such fundraising dollars are not permitted to be used for a candidate’s personal expenses, according to state statutes. Florida’s Constitution also prohibits DeSantis from using his position to obtain a "disproportionate benefit" for himself. DeSantis came from more of a middle-class background in Dunedin, Florida. His mother worked as a nurse, and his father installed boxes that monitored TV ratings for Nielsen. Before DeSantis began a career in politics, he served in the U.S. Navy as a JAG officer. After his service, DeSantis worked as a federal prosecutor. DeSantis' net worth is less than his Democratic gubernatorial opponents. According to the Florida Commission on Ethics, Agriculture Commissioner Nikki Fried reported a net worth of $970,244, as of 2020. U.S. Rep. Charlie Crist had an estimated net worth of $1.4 million in 2018, according to data maintained by the nonpartisan research organization, OpenSecrets. State Sen. Annette Taddeo listed her net worth at about $1 million. Our ruling A tweet said DeSantis "was worth $340,000 in 2020 and is now worth $52 million." DeSantis has not yet reported his net worth for 2021. PolitiFact found no credible evidence to substantiate the claim that he had such a massive financial increase. The figure used in the tweet seems to be derived from campaign filings in September 2021, which indicated that DeSantis raked in around $52 million in donations. We rate this claim Fals

“CO2 is not a pollutant. The Republican Party of Virginia recently held a weekend bash at a Dulles hotel to celebrate its sweep in the statewide elections last fall and discuss its agenda. High among its goals is to repeal the state’s Clean Economy Act, a law that commits Virginia to joining a regional cap-and-trade program and achieving 100% carbon-free power by 2050. The law was passed in 2020 when Democrats controlled both chambers of the General Assembly as well as the governorship. The law was labeled "wokeism" at a seminar held by the Suburban Virginia Republican Coalition, an Alexandria-based group that says its weekly newsletter reaches 25,000 people. SUVGOP rejects that a climate crisis exists and that man-made carbon dioxide (CO2) is harming the environment. "CO2 is not a pollutant," SUVGOP said in its presentation materials for the April 30 session. The statement contradicts piles of scientific studies showing increasing CO2 levels are contributing to rising temperatures across the globe, the efforts of industrial nations to reduce their emissions, a ruling by the Supreme Court and a statement by the Environmental Protection Agency. Let’s start with a trip back to middle school science, where we learned about photosynthesis. Plants pull in carbon dioxide through tiny openings in their leaves where it combines with water and sunlight to create sugar, producing oxygen as a byproduct. It may be hard to imagine something as life-sustaining as CO2 could be so damaging, but it’s what’s called a greenhouse gas. Those gasses, which also include methane, nitrous oxide and others, produce an insulating effect that allows sun rays to enter the atmosphere but not leave after they bounce off the earth’s surface. When fossil fuels - such as oil, gas and petroleum - are burned to create energy, they release CO2. In the U.S., 76% of greenhouse gas emissions are CO2. The concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere has increased by 47% since the beginning of the Industrial Age and 11% since 2000, according to NASA. The Supreme Court, by a 5-4 vote, ruled in 2007 that greenhouse gasses fall under the Clean Air Act’s definition of pollutants and can be regulated by the Environmental Protection Agency. (The high court heard oral arguments in February 2022 challenging the ruling but has yet to render a second opinion.) In 2009, the EPA classified greenhouse gasses - especially from vehicle emissions - as a form of pollution. The gasses "are the primary driver of climate change, which can lead to hotter, longer heat waves that threaten the health of the sick, poor or elderly; increases in ground-level ozone pollution linked to asthma and other respiratory illnesses; as well as other threats to the health and welfare of Americans," the EPA said. Featured Fact-check Instagram posts stated on October 17, 2022 in a video Video shows “California sets their own forest fires and claims them as climate change effects.” By Ciara O'Rourke • October 20, 2022 SUVGOP’s counter Why does SUVGOP reject these findings? We asked Collister Johnson, a senior advisor to the group who led the presentation as well as another one to the state’s Republican party in December 2021. "I’ve been studying this for a long time," said Johnson, who lives in Alexandria and is a former chairman of the Virginia Port Authority and administrator of the Saint Lawrence Seaway Development Corporation. "We breathe in carbon dioxide. The notion that it’s polluting to human beings doesn’t hold up." Johnson laid out his arguments in a 2020 article for CFACT, a conservative organization that disputes human-made climate change. He accurately noted that CO2 constitutes about four of every 10,000 molecules in the atmosphere - an increase of about one CO2 molecule since the mid-20th century. "Most importantly, the theory of man-made global warming does not pass the sniff test – the test of common sense," Johnson wrote. "It simply does not follow common sense to believe that an increase of one human-caused atmospheric CO2 molecule out of ten thousand over eighty years should result in the ruination of the planet. Johnson’s logic, a talking point among climate-change doubters, is widely dismissed by climate scientists. They say the important point is that CO2 levels are increasing - not that they still compose a tiny part of the atmosphere. "It shouldn't be surprising that a small amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere can have a big effect," wrote Jason West, a professor of environmental sciences and engineering at the University of North Carolina. "We take pills that are a tiny fraction of our body mass and expect them to affect us." Vickie Connors, an assistant professor at Virginia Commonwealth University’s Center for Environmental Studies, wrote in an email, "The argument that common sense has any role to play in determining the ultimate outcome from our unabated release of fossil fuel emissions into our thin envelope of atmosphere is outrageous in this era of global data sets, measurements of temperature increases from any altitude above the surface to the tropopause, in the surface and upper layers of the oceans, in the upper soil horizon, in the measured melting [of] sea ice, glaciers, and snow at high elevation and polar latitudes." Johnson has also noted that CO2 levels were once 10 times higher than they are today and "animal life thrived and prospered." But scientists told us that occurred before humans existed. "‘Pollution’ is a term that is somewhat human-centric," John Reilly, co-director of the MIT Joint Program on the Science and Policy of Global Change, wrote in an email. Kevin Trenberth, distinguished scholar at the National Center for Atmospheric Research, sent us an email labeling the CO2 claims by Johnson and SUVGOP "misleading rubbish." Our ruling SUVGOP, in a presentation at a meeting of the state Republican Party, said "CO2 is not a pollutant." The statement contradicts piles of scientific studies showing increasing CO2 levels are contributing to rising temperatures across the globe, the conclusions of almost all climate scientists, a ruling by the Supreme Court and a statement by the Environmental Protection Agency. We rate the claim Fals

Supreme Court Justices Amy Coney Barrett and Samuel Alito said that the U.S. needs a “domestic supply of infants” to meet the needs of parents seeking to adopt Following the Supreme Court draft opinion leak on Roe v. Wade, some social media users zeroed in on the document’s inclusion of an eyebrow-raising phrase: "domestic supply of infants." Many falsely attributed the words to Justices Amy Coney Barrett and Samuel Alito, claiming that the two said the U.S. needed this "supply" of babies to meet the needs of people seeking to adopt. "BREAKING: In a brief re abortion, Supreme court Justices Amy Coney Barrett/Alito's Draft, said US needs a ‘domestic supply of infants’ to meet needs of parents seeking to adopt — that those who would otherwise abort must be made to carry to term — giving children up for adoption," reads one post that’s been shared over 21,000 times on Twitter. "Two judges on the highest bench in the land actually wrote this line ‘domestic supply of infants for adoption’ as justification for taking away a woman's right to control her own body," another post on Facebook said. "Actually wrote that line down, on paper, like it wasn't some insane Orwellian dystopia." 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 draft opinion was authored by Alito, not Barrett, according to the document, which was first published by Politico. But the phrase referenced in the Facebook post appears in the opinion as a footnote and wasn’t written by either justice. It was a quote from a 2008 U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention document about adoption data. The line, as it appears in the footnote, reads: 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 "Nearly 1 million women were seeking to adopt children in 2002 (i.e., they were in demand of a child), whereas the domestic supply of infants relinquished at birth or within the first month of life and available to be adopted had become virtually nonexistent." The CDC quote is cited on the page 34 of the leaked draft in a paragraph that lists arguments from those opposed to abortion. The citation is made after a sentence that reads that "a woman who puts her new- born up for adoption today has little reason to fear that the baby will not find a suitable home." It followed another paragraph on page 33 that summed up the beliefs of people who support abortion rights. The opinion ends the section with this paragraph: "Both sides make important policy arguments, but supporters of Roe and Casey must show that this Court has the authority to weigh those arguments and decide how abortion may be regulated in the States. They have failed to make that showing, and we thus return the power to weigh those arguments to the people and their elected representatives." Viewing the CDC’s quote about infant supply in its full context shows that the line is emphasizing that babies put up for adoption will likely find families. It’s not claiming that birth rates need to increase, or that abortion should be outlawed, in order to meet high adoption demands. Our ruling Social media posts claim that Justices Alito and Barrett said the U.S. needs a "domestic supply of infants" for adoptive parents in their justification to overturn Roe v. Wade. These aren’t the justices’ words. The line appears in the leaked opinion draft as a footnote and came from a 2008 CDC document about adoption data. We rate these posts Fals

Says photo shows "one of Tesla's lithium supply mines where entire mountains are eliminated. Seeking to simplify the complicated issue of clean energy, social media posts have proliferated claiming to show pictures of the destruction left by lithium mining for hybrid and electric-vehicle batteries. The problem is that many of these posts have been wrong about what the images show. And a new one from a March 24 post follows that pattern with a photo it says shows "one of Tesla's lithium supply mines where entire mountains are eliminated." The post includes two images, of an oil well and a mine. The caption says the oil well is where "100% organic material is pumped out of the ground, taking up around 500 to 1000 square feet," contrasting that with the mine, which it says "came at a cost of entire mountains, thousands of square miles of land and billions of gallons of oil and fuel." 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 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.) (Screengrab from Facebook) But the post gets it wrong, because the photo does not show a lithium mine — it’s a copper mine in Chile. The post, like others before it, attempts to compare the environmental impact of fossil fuels against hybrid or electric vehicles. Lithium typically is mined in South America and Australia. Earlier this year, Tesla signed a 5-year agreement with an Australian mine, which will supply the carmaker beginning in 2024, Mining.com reported. Lithium "can be extracted in three ways: from hard rock, which is common in Australia; from sedimentary rock, a process currently under development in the U.S. Southwest; and through the evaporation of brines found beneath salt flats on South America’s Atacama Plateau," according to the Natural Resources Defense Council, an environmental nonprofit group. The last method uses large amounts of groundwater, meaning that manufacturing electric vehicles is about 50% more water intensive than traditional internal combustion engines, the New York Times reported. Extracting lithium from brine is more environmentally friendly than open pit mines. We rate the claim that a photo shows "one of Tesla's lithium supply mines where entire mountains are eliminated" False.

Because of U.S. Senate rules, Democrats need "more than a majority ... to codify Roe vs. Wade. A leaked draft opinion that indicated the U.S. Supreme Court could soon strike down the landmark Roe v. Wade decision establishing the right to abortion has sent shockwaves through American political, religious and societal circles. If the 1973 ruling is overturned, in Wisconsin an 1849 ban on nearly all abortions would go back into effect. Nationally, with Democrats controlling Congress and the White House, there has been a push to codify the right to an abortion in federal law. But that’s not as easy as it may sound. And that gets at a vexing issue that we wanted to use this fact-check to help address: Where does the Senate fit in a political world in which most everything else — including the Supreme Court — is majority rule? "Because the U.S. Senate is a minority institution, meaning you don't have to get the most votes and still control the chamber, we need to have more than a majority of Democrats in control to codify Roe v. Wade," state Sen. Kelda Roys, D-Madison, said May 8, 2022, on "Capital City Sunday." On Wednesday, Senate Democrats failed to advance legislation intended to protect abortion access nationwide even if the Supreme Court overturns Roe v. Wade. On a 51-49 vote, Democrats fell short of the 60 votes they would have needed. When we asked Roys for backup, she – unsurprisingly – pointed to the Senate rules, specifically the 60-vote requirement for "cloture," or what is needed to end debate for a (majority rules) vote on the underlying bill. "Without 60 votes, a minority of senators can filibuster any proposal to which they object," Roys told us. There are some exceptions to this rule, such as budget reconciliation measures, but those exceptions provide limited opportunities and would not apply to a proposed bill codifying abortion rights. Republicans say the filibuster protects the rights of the minority party. In recent years, the focus on eliminating the filibuster has centered on federal court nominees. The filibuster used to apply to all judicial nominees, but Democrats eliminated it for many nominations under President Barack Obama, and Republicans eliminated it for Supreme Court nominees under President Donald Trump. Right now, the chamber is evenly divided, but Democrats have the tie-breaker vote in the form of Vice President Kamala Harris. Roys said the situation is compounded by the U.S. Senate’s "unbalanced representation." Featured Fact-check Tim Michels stated on October 24, 2022 in News conference Tony Evers “wants to let out between 9,000 and 10,000 more” Wisconsin prisoners By Madeline Heim • November 4, 2022 "Right now, the 50 Democratic senators represent 41 million more Americans than the 50 Republicans," Roys said, a statement confirmed by a Nov. 6, 2020, Vox report. This is because Democrats typically garner more votes in high-population states, while Republicans fare better in states with lower populations. But each state gets two U.S. senators regardless of population. For example, Wyoming, with a population close to 600,000 and called the most Republican state in the U.S., has two senators; while California, with a population close to 39 million and considered to be a Democratic stronghold, also has two senators. Expert weighs in Norman J. Ornstein, an emeritus scholar at the American Enterprise Institute, a Washington, D.C., conservative think tank, said the Senate is a minority institution in two ways. "Because each state, regardless of population, gets two senators, a tiny majority of the population can determine the outcomes," Ornstein said in an email to PolitiFact Wisconsin. "To give a contemporary example, we are almost at the point where 70 percent of Americans live in just 15 states. Meaning 30 percent of Americans will elect 70 senators." Ornstein, who serves as an election analyst for CBS News and writes a weekly column for Roll Call, also explained that the filibuster rule means that "41 senators can block action on any bill except for those that are protected by rules like reconciliation." According to the U.S. Senate reference website, using the filibuster to delay debate or block legislation has a long history. "The term filibuster, from a Dutch word meaning ‘pirate,’ became popular in the United States during the 1850s when it was applied to efforts to hold the Senate floor in order to prevent action on a bill," the Senate site says. In 1917, according to the website, in response to pressure from President Woodrow Wilson and the crisis of World War I, the Senate adopted a new rule establishing the "cloture" procedure. This allowed the Senate to end debate with a two-thirds vote (67 votes in a 100-member Senate). In 1975, the Senate reduced the number of votes required from two-thirds to three-fifths (60). "So, even if Democrats had 50 or even 59 votes to codify Roe v. Wade, so long as the filibuster rule remains as is, unified Republican opposition can block the bill," Ornstein said. "Right now, all Republicans are opposed. The Democrats could find a way to alter the rule, as was done for confirmations, by majority, but right now at least two of their own won't agree." Our ruling Roys said due to U.S. Senate rules, Democrats need "more than a majority ... to codify Roe vs. Wade." Roys was referring to Senate rules which require 60 votes for ending debate prior to a vote on a bill, which means it’s possible to have a party with control — in this case the Democrats — but without the ability to move measures forward that don’t have support from the other. We rate Roys’ claim True. 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 abortion rights activist urging women to "run on down to the abortion clinic" if they get pregnant An edited video of a woman who appears to be speaking enthusiastically about abortion is being falsely portrayed on social media. "Absolute evil. Listen to her voice and the cheering..," read a May 7 Facebook post. The post shared a TikTok video where a woman tells a crowd, "Ladies, if you get pregnant, run on down to the abortion clinic and have that little bastard sucked right out!" A crowd of young people watching her cheer and 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.) Several social media users, including high-profile conservatives, have shared the video, and suggested it shows the cruelty of abortion rights supporters. "The proof that this isn't about health...It's about death," Sebastian Gorka, a former aide to President Donald Trump, tweeted on May 7. He tweeted the video again a day later, calling it "Truly Satanic." "Highlight reel footage for the midterms," conservative commentator Mike Cernovich tweeted on May 7. But the claim that this person is actually advocating abortion misses context about who the speaker is and what she has said she believes. The video appears to have originated on TikTok, where it amassed nearly 3 million views. "This just in: Sister Cindy supports abortion," reads the caption, which is a clue that the video is not what it seems. "Sister Cindy," whose real name is Cindy Smock, is a Christian evangelist from Indiana who travels with her husband to, she writes on the ministry’s website, "share the Gospel of Jesus Christ with the students of America." The husband-and-wife team have been traveling to college campuses around the country for more than 40 years. Smock often uses inflammatory rhetoric, and sometimes comedy, in her speeches and commentary. Some of her comments have been criticized as being homophobic and racist. "My husband and I take the confrontational approach to Evangelism," Smock told Vice in a 2021 interview. "We go out on the campuses and call the students to repentance and faith in Jesus." Smock has become a TikTok star, amassing over 400,000 followers who watch videos of her campus visits and buy her merchandise or order videos of her "roasting" their friends. 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 Students can be seen in videos flocking to Smock’s campus appearances, cheering her on, perhaps ironically, jeering her or laughing at or with her as she welcomes them to her "slut-shaming show." Some ask her to pose for selfies and others have joined her in a TikTok dance for her channel. She’s also drawn criticism from some who find her rhetoric offensive or hateful. In another video of her abortion comments filmed at Missouri State University on May 3, Gregory Holman, a reporter for KSMU, a local public radio station, tweeted that her remarks about women running down to abortion clinics were sarcastic and came in response to students chanting "my body, my choice." In response to students chanting “my body my choice”, the speaker sarcastically advised people to seek out abortions… The students went wild pic.twitter.com/twmrDpdwbU— Gregory Holman 📲📻 (@gregoryholman) May 3, 2022 We reached out to Smock to find out more context about the video being widely shared but she didn’t respond. However, on her TikTok account, she shared the video where she spoke about abortion, with a text overlay that reads, "When Gen Z, the masters of satire, are outwitted by Sis. Cindy." She then snapped her fingers in approval after hearing the line that has garnered so much attention online. A text overlay at the bottom of the video reads, "Your choice but, ‘Shall not the JUDGE of the earth do right?’" Some commenters on her Tik-Tok video still seemed confused about her position on abortion. One asked her what she thought of abortion as a live-saving procedure, and Smock replied it’s "between her and God!!" Further down, another commenter posted "Jeremiah 1:5," to which she replied, "exactly." That Bible verse reads: "Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, and before you were born I consecrated you; I appointed you a prophet to the nations." But in another TikTok video, she urged her followers to head to Truth Social, Trump’s fledgling social network, to find out what she really believes. "So what does Sister Cindy really believe?" she says in the video on Truth Social. "Roe vs. Wade? Well, I believe that life begins at conception, and of course I'm pro-life." Our ruling A video claims to show an abortion rights supporter brazenly encourage young women to go get abortions. But the woman shown in the video is a longtime evangelist who travels the country to preach at college campuses, often using crude language and over-the-top rhetoric as satire to try to relate to the young students. In a video on Truth Social she described herself as "pro-life." We rate this claim False. PolitiFact reporter Yacob Reyes contributed to this repor

Mehmet Oz is “pro-abortion. Some candidates for higher office moved fast to spotlight the issue of abortion in their TV ads and fundraising appeals after the leak of a Supreme Court draft opinion overturning Roe v. Wade. In the race for U.S. Senate in Pennsylvania, former hedge fund manager Dave McCormick unveiled an ad that squarely attacked Dr. Mehmet Oz, McCormick’s top rival for the Republican nomination, on abortion. The minute-long video opens with a clip of Oz in a Senate debate saying: "There isn’t, to my knowledge, evidence that I’m not ‘pro-life.’" Then there are clips of Oz talking about abortion in a radio interview that the ad labels, "Evidence from 2019." The ad ends with these words on the screen: "Mehmet Oz. Pro-abortion. Anti-life. Hollywood liberal." Politicians often use "pro-life," "pro-choice" or "pro-abortion," even though the labels lack precise meanings. In the 2019 interview, Oz, a heart surgeon and attending physician at New York Presbyterian-Columbia Medical Center, was "pro-abortion" in that he spoke in favor of access to the procedure. But he also said he was personally opposed to the procedure and would advise his family members against having one. And while campaigning to win the May 17 primary, Oz has turned more ardently anti-abortion, touting himself as "100% pro-life" and celebrating the draft opinion by saying he supports overturning Roe v. Wade, the 1973 Supreme Court decision that provides the national right to an abortion. The draft opinion would return to the pre-Roe world, where states set their own laws. There could be small or significant changes in the draft as justices weigh in before a final decision, which is expected in late June or early July. Oz in 2019 criticized abortion restrictions McCormick’s ad relies on the Oz radio interview comments, which are shown in video clips. The clips are from Oz’s appearance on "The Breakfast Club," a nationally syndicated show with a mostly Black audience, on May 21, 2019. At the time, Oz was a nationally syndicated newspaper columnist and hosted his own television show. Oz was asked about a law signed six days earlier by Alabama’s Republican Gov. Kay Ivey that would have banned nearly all abortions in that state. The law was later blocked in federal court. The question led to a seven-minute discussion about abortion. Oz said he didn’t want to interfere with other people’s decisions about getting an abortion, and indicated that states should decide laws on abortion. He expressed support for access to abortion, but opposition to abortion personally. "I think the law was really only passed to generate a Supreme Court challenge. But most people don’t know that they’re pregnant. It’s two weeks past your last period when you have to decide by….And it’s also banned in case of incest and rape. So, I don’t quite get it, as a doctor," he said. A host on the show said she was concerned that women would seek dangerous illegal abortions. "As a doctor, just putting my doctor hat on, it’s a big-time concern," Oz said. "Because I went to medical school in Philadelphia and I saw women who’d had coat-hanger events. They’re really traumatic events that happen, when they were younger, before Roe v. Wade. And many of them were harmed for life. Emotionally, there’s scarring anyway. "At a personal level, I wouldn’t want anyone in my family to have an abortion. I told my kids this, I love the lives that they’re creating so much that I personally wouldn’t want it. But I don’t want to interfere with everyone else’s stuff, because it’s hard enough getting through life as it is." Oz warned that Alabama’s law could have economic consequences, saying, "You want to ban abortion, make that loud and clear, but there’s going to be a big sucking sound of businesses leaving there." "If someone deep in their heart feels that the moment of conception is a human life, and they just can’t deal with that life being harmed, they got to be heard, they can’t get ignored. But that doesn’t mean that’s what the rule of the land is." 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 Excerpts from the same interview are used in two other ads attacking Oz that were released after the draft opinion was published. One is a McCormick ad that also labels Oz as "pro-abortion." The other ad, from the pro-McCormick Honor Pennsylvania super PAC, questions whether Oz is "pro-life." On May 5, 2022, Oz was asked in a Philadelphia radio interview if he had changed his position since the 2019 interview. Oz replied that he said in the 2019 interview that he was "pro-life," but supported the three major exceptions for abortions, to protect the life of the mother, and in cases of rape or incest. To back its "pro-abortion" claim, McCormick’s campaign pointed us to articles citing the 2019 interview and to a 2008 article in the National Review of Medicine, a publication for Canadian physicians. In the 2008 article, Oz was quoted as saying he was "not socially conservative," and that "we should not be creating obstacles during the difficult time that women have when trying to terminate a pregnancy." Oz’s anti-abortion statements in campaign During the campaign, Oz has decried legislation that he describes as Democrats’ "pro-abortion agenda." Oz’s campaign website describes him as "100% pro-life." And he says "life starts at conception." Oz campaign spokesperson Brittany Yanick told PolitiFact that Oz "has never said that he supports abortions" and that he is "adamantly opposed to abortion." However, Oz told a Pennsylvania TV station in December that he supports allowing abortions to protect the life of the mother, and in cases of rape or incest. He added: "I’m OK with the Supreme Court making the right decision based on what they think the Constitution says." Oz praised the draft ruling, tweeting: "The Court is right. Roe was wrongly decided. Abortion laws should be left up to the American people and their elected representatives. I look forward to supporting pro-life legislation that saves innocent lives in the U.S. Senate." Contest could help decide Senate control The Pennsylvania race is for the seat held by Republican Pat Toomey, who was first elected in 2010 and decided not to seek re-election. Besides McCormick and Oz, the major Republican candidates are commentator Kathy Barnette, real estate developer Jeff Bartos, Philadelphia attorney George Bochetto and Carla Sands, who served as Trump's ambassador to Denmark. The leading Democratic candidates are Lt. Gov. John Fetterman, state Rep. Malcolm Kenyatta and U.S. Rep. Conor Lamb. The Nov. 8 general election race is rated as a toss-up and as "tilts Republican." The outcome could help determine which party controls the Senate, now split 50-50. Our ruling McCormick said Oz is "pro-abortion." Before his Senate race, Oz was more open to abortion access. He spoke against restrictive abortions laws, citing his hospital experience, though he said he personally opposed abortion. As a candidate, Oz describes himself as "pro-life" and supports overturning Roe v. Wade. But he supports allowing abortions in cases such as rape and incest. McCormick’s ad misleads voters about the positions Oz said he would hold as an elected leader. We rate the statement Mostly False. RELATED: The race for the Pennsylvania U.S. Senate seat: A guide RELATED: Fact-checks in the Pennsylvania U.S. Senate race RELATED: Fact-checking 5 claims in the leaked Supreme Court draft opinion on Roe v. Wade RELATED: Why polling about abortion hides the true complexity of what Americans thi

Says photo shows "the sharpest image of the sun ever recorded. A Facebook post that claims to show the sun as you’ve never seen it is not what it seems. The May 8 post has a caption that says a photo shows "the sharpest image of the sun ever recorded." In the image, the sun has the appearance of being covered in a soft material, similar to hair or fur. 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.) 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 The photo is a "heavily software-processed image," photographer Jason Guenzel wrote in a Jan. 20, 2021, Twitter post about the image. He also explained in a 2021 interview that he had digitally enhanced the image by using software to sharpen it and change its contrast. "Walking the thin line between science and art ... perhaps blurring it a bit," Guenzel tweeted. (Screengrab from Facebook) More recently, on March 7, the highest resolution photo ever taken of the sun’s full disc and corona was captured by the Solar Orbiter, a cooperative mission between the European Space Agency and NASA, according to the European Space Agency. The image was created by combining 25 photos. "Taken one after the other, the full image was captured over a period of more than four hours because each tile takes about 10 minutes, including the time for the spacecraft to point from one segment to the next," according to the European Space Agency. And in 2020, astronomers released what they said were the most detailed images of the surface of the sun. The claim that a Facebook post with another image represents "the sharpest image of the Sun ever recorded" has no factual basis. We rate it False.

Says video shows "Ukrainian forces shoot down Russian plane carrying hundreds (of) troops on Kyiv airport. Images of destruction and war are not hard to find as Russia continues its attack in Ukraine, but not all the ones appearing on social media show what they describe. The caption on a May 5 Facebook post says a video shows "Ukrainian forces shoot down Russian plane carrying hundreds (of) troops on Kyiv airport." 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 uses old images. Ukraine did shoot down a Russian transport plane with hundreds of troops on board early in the war. But the footage in the Facebook video is not current and is not from Ukraine; it is from an August 2021 plane crash in Moscow. Beginning at the 5-second mark in the Facebook video, a plane with flames coming out of it flies through the sky, passing what appears to be a communications tower, then nose-dives to the ground. The exact same footage was released by Russian state media on Aug. 17, 2021, with a caption that said, "A prototype of the new Russian transport aircraft Il-112V crashed near Moscow." Featured Fact-check Viral image stated on October 16, 2022 in an Instagram post Kid Rock posted “Zelensky just bought his parents an $8,000,000 villa, complete with a salt water pool & 3 brand new vehicles.” By Ciara O'Rourke • October 17, 2022 Media reports at the time said the Russian plane crashed during a test flight, killing three people. The Facebook video also includes old footage from Ukraine. At the 52-second mark, soldiers are sitting side-by-side at computers, looking at radar. That footage can also be seen at the 1:52 mark in a 2019 video about the final stage of tests of anti-aircraft missile systems that was posted by the General Staff of the Armed Forces of Ukraine.. And at the 59-second mark in the Facebook video, the footage of a tank is the same as the 3:21-mark in a 2014 video filmed in the Donbas region of Ukraine. We rate the claim that this video shows recent footage of Ukrainian forces shooting down a Russian plane False

Margaret Sanger, founder of Planned Parenthood, referred to Black women as weeds that needed to be plucked from their garden, and was a supporter of the Ku Klux Klan and a Democrat Following the leak of a Supreme Court draft opinion overturning the landmark Roe v. Wade abortion case, a U.S. Senate candidate’s Facebook post claimed Black abortion-rights activists are "picking up the fight for a woman who founded Planned Parenthood." Peggy Hubbard, an Illinois Republican who ran for U.S. Senate in 2020 and is running again this year, wrote in a Facebook post that Planned Parenthood founder Margaret Sanger "referred to Black women as weeds that needed to be plucked from their garden" and was a "white supremacist, supporter of the KKK and DEMOCRAT." Sanger embraced the idea of eugenics, defined by the National Human Genome Research Institute as the "scientifically inaccurate theory that humans can be improved through selective breeding of populations." Her espousal of those ideas has led Planned Parenthood to take steps to distance her name from the organization. But Sanger never made that statement about Black women, according to historians and fact-checkers, and she was not a supporter of the KKK or a Democrat. She was a member of the Socialist Party. When asked via email if she could provide evidence to support her claim, Hubbard replied, "Yes! Google!" More than one inaccurate quote about "human weeds" has been attributed to Sanger, including that ​​"Slav, Latin and Hebrew immigrants are human weeds" and that "colored people are like human weeds." But Sanger did not say or write either of those comments, according to PolitiFact and the Washington Post, respectively. And while Sanger spoke to a group connected to the KKK — called the Women of the Ku Klux Klan, a parallel, official organization — she described it in her 1938 autobiography as a willingness to talk to anyone in order to advocate for birth control. Her descriptions of the encounter suggested she was not a supporter; she described it as "one of the weirdest experiences I had in lecturing." Sanger did make other published comments about "human weeds," including: "How are we to breed a race of human thoroughbreds unless we follow the same plan? We must make this country into a garden of children instead of a disorderly back lot overrun with human weeds." (1924) "I was merely thinking of the poor mothers of congested districts of the East Side who had so poignantly begged me for relief, in order that the children they had already brought into the world might have a chance to grow into strong and stalwart Americans . . . Birth Control is not contraception indiscriminately and thoughtlessly practiced. It means the release and cultivation of the better racial elements in our society, and the gradual suppression, elimination and eventual extirpation of defective stocks — those human weeds which threaten the blooming of the finest flowers of American civilization."(1923) Though many have noted that such statements today are widely regarded as objectionable, Sanger did not link the comments to any race or ethnicity. Featured Fact-check Kari Lake stated on October 9, 2022 in an interview on CBS News' Face the Nation “Katie Hobbs voted for allowing a baby who survives an abortion — that the hospital would refuse medical care and allow the baby to die on a cold metal tray.” By Jon Greenberg • October 12, 2022 When Sanger worked on the Lower East Side of Manhattan, it was an "overcrowded slum that was home to generations of immigrants, mostly Italian and Eastern European," according to the Margaret Sanger Papers Project, an editing effort launched in 1985 by historian Esther Katz and sponsored by New York University's Department of History. For Sanger, "eugenics was meant to begin with the voluntary use of birth control," Salon reported in 2011. It was at a time, prior to the Holocaust, when eugenics was a popular intellectual movement considered "far more respectable than birth control," according to Salon, which said at that point, contraception was still legally banned under obscenity statutes. "The purpose of eugenics was to improve the human race by having people be more healthy through exercise, recreation in parks, marriage to someone free from sexually transmitted diseases, well-baby clinics, immunizations, clean food and water, proper nutrition, non-smoking and drinking," said Ruth Engs, professor emeritus at the Indiana University School of Public Health and an expert in the movement, who was interviewed by PolitiFact New Hampshire in 2015. The Facebook post’s two-pronged claim — that Sanger referred to Black women as weeds and was a supporter of the KKK — implies that she was racist, but as PolitiFact reported in 2015, "even authors who treat Sanger critically don’t believe she held negative views about African-Americans." Jean H. Baker, who wrote a biography of Sanger and is the Bennett-Harwood professor of history at Goucher College in Maryland, told PolitiFact in 2015 that attempts to portray Sanger as a bigot are misguided. "She was far ahead of her times in terms of opposing racial segregation," Baker said. "She worked closely with Black leaders to open birth control clinics in Harlem and elsewhere. She believed all women should have the information about birth control that rich women had, hence her lecture to the KKK women." Our ruling Hubbard said Sanger referred to Black women as weeds that needed to be plucked from their garden, and was a supporter of the KKK and a Democrat But Sanger never made that statement about Black women, according to historians and multiple fact-checks. Sanger made remarks about "human weeds" that most people would find objectionable now, but she did not link the comments to any race or ethnicity. And Sanger did speak before the Women of the Ku Klux Klan, a group connected to the KKK, but she did so in her role as an advocate for birth control and not as a supporter. She was not a Democrat, but a member of the Socialist Party. We rate this claim False

The state crime lab under Attorney General Josh Kaul "is testing significantly less items than former AG Brad Schimel and is still taking longer to test many categories of key items in comparison to Schimel, including DNA. Delays at the state crime lab have been a front-burner issue every election cycle, including in 2018, when Democrat Josh Kaul won the attorney general’s job on promises to clear a backlog of DNA samples in sexual assault cases. Now, just as Kaul skewered then-Attorney General Brad Schimel, a Republican, one of the Republican candidates hoping to face Kaul in November 2022 is saying Kaul "is trying to bury his abysmal failure of mismanaging the crime lab." In an April 14 , 2022, news release, Fond du Lac County District Attorney Eric Toney went on to claim that Kaul "is testing significantly less items than former AG Brad Schimel and is still taking longer to test many categories of key items in comparison to Schimel, including DNA." Is he right? Cases and turnaround times When asked for data to support his claim, Toney directed PolitiFact Wisconsin to an annual report from Kaul’s own Department of Justice. We should note that while it’s commonly referred to as the State Crime Lab, there are actually three labs where testing is done – Madison, Milwaukee and Wausau. For our purposes here, we will group them all together. When looking at overall cases, in 2018, Schimel’s last year, the crime lab took 12,680 cases. In 2021, under Kaul that fell to 9,297 cases – a more than 30% drop. So Toney is right that Kaul "is testing significantly less items than former AG Brad Schimel." What about turnaround times? According to the labs’ 2021 annual report, in the 10 categories analyzed, turnaround took more time in six of them under Kaul than under Schimel. Let’s start with DNA, since that is what Toney emphasized in his claim. The report actually breaks down DNA in two areas. DNA analysis involves analyzing and interpreting samples, and comparing them to others. The DNA databank category involves receiving, verifying and analyzing a repository of reference samples. Before we get started, there is an important nuance to note on the intake and output figures. The output figure can be higher than the input figure, and vice versa, since a sample may come in late one year and not be completed until the next year. In both DNA areas, under Kaul the crime lab is handling fewer cases and taking longer with them. In the DNA analysis category, in 2018 the lab had a case intake of 8,626, case output of 5,664 and median turnaround time was 50 days. In 2021, case intake was 3,612, case output was 3,526 and median turnaround was 115 days – more than double. In the DNA databank category, in 2018 sample intake was 29,900 and turnaround time was 24 days. In 2021 sample intake was 20,736 and median turnaround time was 41 days. Here are the other five areas where the lab is lagging 2018 numbers: In the Automated Fingerprint Identification System (AFIS) category, the quality control figure was 131,412 in 2018 under Schimel and 83,072 in 2021 under Kaul. The system performs comparative analysis of submitted fingerprints, including conducting database searches and provides technical and analytical support to state and federal agencies. According to the DOJ, this is the check an analyst has to do any time a set of fingerprints is submitted. Analysts check to make sure they’re putting quality prints in the database – that is, ones not smudged or less readable. "If someone has prints submitted multiple times, even decades apart, our analysts review both sets and retain the clearest version of each finger," said Gillian Drummond, the DOJ spokeswoman. Featured Fact-check Tim Michels stated on October 24, 2022 in News conference Tony Evers “wants to let out between 9,000 and 10,000 more” Wisconsin prisoners By Madeline Heim • November 4, 2022 In the controlled substances category, in 2018 case intake was 5,283, case output was 5,422 and median turnaround time was 35 days. In 2021, case intake was 4,430, output was 3,522 and median turnaround time was 49 days. In firearms, in 2018 case intake was 446, output was 419 with median turnaround time of 87 days. In 2021, case intake was 437, output was 399 and median turnaround time was 104 days. In toxicology, in 2018 case intake was 3,897, output was 4,051 and median turnaround was 23 days; in 2021 case intake was 4,073, output was 4,078 with median turnaround time of 27 days. In forensic imaging, in 2018 case intake was 62, output was 59 and median turnaround time was 25 days. In 2021, case intake was 84, output was 71 and median turnaround was 55 days. So, on those six areas, there generally were fewer cases handled and the median time to complete them was longer, sometimes considerably so. And Toney’s claim was a narrow one – not that turnaround was up in all categories, but in "many" categories. That said, it’s worth noting Kaul did have a better showing in turnaround time in some areas: For instance, the median turnaround time in the latent prints category was 43 days in 2021, compared to 139 in 2018, under Schimel. In trace evidence, it was 29 days, compared to 58. Additionally, in the footwear category, Kaul’s median turnaround was 11 days, compared to 134 under Schimel. And in crime scene responses, Kaul did better, with 155 responses to Schimel’s 122. Coronavirus impact The arrival of the pandemic and its effect on daily lives and workplaces nationwide also had an effect at the Wisconsin Department of Justice. In its 2021 report, the Department of Justice noted that COVID-19 created various "challenges" for the agency, affecting its work flow and, in some cases, the ability of staff members to work from home. For instance, according to department spokeswoman Gillian Drummond, social-distance requirements meant staggered shifts and were tough to address in Milwaukee and Wausau, due to space issues. "Further, following court closures in 2020, there was a spike in jury trials in 2021, increasing the amount of time staff were away from laboratory benchwork in order to testify," the agency report said. "These consequences of the pandemic impacted case queues and, in turn, turnaround times." For his part, in an email to PolitiFact Wisconsin, Toney argued "the private sector, first responders, prosecutors, and court staff across Wisconsin juggled staffing and Covid issues and found ways to be in person throughout 2021, often in cramped settings." Both sides make fair points here – even if Kaul’s office may be being selective, in that the COVID conditions they blame for some delays did not seem to hamper other areas, where timeliness improved. Our ruling Toney claimed the state crime lab under Kaul "is testing significantly less items than former AG Brad Schimel and is still taking longer to test many categories of key items in comparison to Schimel, including DNA." Reports from the Department of Justice show that overall cases are down from 2018, Schimel’s last year at the helm, and 2021 under Kaul. What’s more, in six of 10 categories monitored, including the vital DNA category, the median processing time is up under Kaul, sometimes dramatically so. And while the lab under Kaul improved in some areas, Toney’s claim was limited in scope – to "many categories." We feel he met that mark, and rate his claim True. 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' });

“Senator Grassley hopped off the Finance Committee, where he could be helpful to Iowa and the nation, in favor of the Judiciary Committee Mike Franken, a retired U.S. Navy admiral seeking Iowa’s Democratic nomination for the U.S. Senate seat in this year’s general election, took aim on May 5 at his party’s biggest target in the race: longtime Republican Sen. Chuck Grassley. Franken’s launch pad was Twitter, with a since-deleted message: "Senator Grassley hopped off the Finance Committee, where he could be helpful to Iowa and the nation, in favor of the Judiciary Committee…where he is a tool for the radical right, even some insurrectionists." Except that Grassley never left the Senate Committee on Finance. Franken campaign manager Julie Stauch clarified Franken’s tweet in an email to PolitiFact Iowa. "The tweet should have read Senate Finance Committee Chairmanship. It was in reference to Grassley choosing to chair the Judiciary Committee over Finance in order to impede the Senate rules regarding judicial appointments," she wrote. Stauch said the tweet was taken down the next morning after PolitiFact Iowa contacted her. Grassley certainly angered Democrats while leading the judiciary committee as he moved Republican President Donald Trump’s judicial nominees at a rate that far exceeded that or Democratic President Barack Obama. Notably, Democrats were upset when Grassley did not move on Obama’s 2016 nomination of Merrick Garland for the Supreme Court because, Grassley and other Republican Senate leaders said, it was an election year. Then, in 2020, he pushed for and presided over as president pro tem of the Republican-led Senate the confirmation of Amy Coney Barrett to the Supreme Court. Trump nominated Barrett a little more than one month before the 2020 presidential election and the Senate confirmed her in one month. Obama nominated Merrick eight months before the 2016 presidential election. 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 The Pew Research Center reported at the end of Trump’s term that the Republican-led Senate approved as many Trump judicial nominees in four years as Obama nominees in eight years. An Iowa Law Review article accused Grassley of ignoring or diluting rules and customs for judicial appointments while chairing the Judiciary Committee in order to meet Republican goals for thwarting Obama court nominations. Grassley was the Finance Committee’s chairman for six months in 2001, and again from January 2003 to January 2007 and January 2019 to January 2021. He also was the ranking minority member from June 2001 to January 2003 and from January 2007 to January 2011. Republican Party rules for U.S. Senate committee leadership say that members may not serve more than three two-year terms as a committee chair or minority ranking member. The rules also state a Republican cannot serve as a chair or ranking member for more than one committee, with a few exceptions for the ethics committee and joint committees for printing and the Library of Congress. Grassley is not the ranking minority member of the finance committee but has that role on the Committee on the Judiciary, while remaining on the finance committee as a senior member. Grassley also serves on the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry; Committee on the Budget; Joint Committee on Taxation, and is vice chairman of the Senate Caucus on International Narcotics Control. "Grassley’s leadership and committee assignments ensure Iowans have an influential voice at the policymaking tables, advocating for Iowans in the most pressing issues of our day," Grassley campaign communications director Michaela Sundermann wrote in an email to PolitiFact Iowa. "Senator Grassley has achieved these assignments through years of hard work to ensure he weighs in on public policy important to the lives and livelihoods of Iowans." Grassley has not missed a full committee hearing this year, Sundermann said. "He holds that perfect attendance record while serving on multiple committees including Judiciary, Agriculture and Budget Committees," she wrote to PolitiFact Iowa. Franken, of Sioux City, is in a primary battle for the Democratic nomination with former U.S. Rep. Abby Finkenauer of Cedar Rapids, and Glenn Hurst, a physician from Minden. Grassley, for all of the national attention he gets because of his committee positions but also for his longevity in the Senate, is facing a primary challenge in the Republican Party from state Sen. Jim Carlin of Sioux City. Our ruling Franken tried to portray Grassley as leaving a committee that Grassley never left. Even if you consider that Grassley left a leadership position on the finance committee to take a leadership role at the Committee on the Judiciary, Grassley remains a senior member of the finance committee, plus Republican rules prohibited him from having a leadership role on finance. Franken’s campaign clarified the tweet when asked about it and eventually took it down the morning of May 6. But saying Grassley "hopped off" the Committee on Finance during 24 hours that the tweet existed was False

"GOP Sen. Marsha Blackburn has proposed that birth control should only be legal for MARRIED couples. A leaked draft opinion by the Supreme Court that shows a majority of justices are prepared to overturn Roe v. Wade has some Americans worried that conservatives want to go even further. Numerous social media users claimed that U.S. Sen. Marsha Blackburn, R-Tenn., proposed limiting contraceptive use only to married couples. "Get this! GOP Sen. Marsha Blackburn has proposed that birth control should only be legal for MARRIED couples," read one May 8 tweet from Jon Cooper, a Democrat activist with nearly 970,000 followers. This tweet and others misstated what the senator said on the subject of contraception. Prior to the Supreme Court confirmation hearings for Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson, Blackburn released a video where she described the 1965 Supreme Court ruling in Griswold v. Connecticut — one that overturned a state ban on contraception — as "legally unsound." "Constitutionally unsound rulings like Griswold v. Connecticut, Kelo v. the city of New London, and NFIB vs. Sebelius confused Tennesseans and left Congress wondering who gave the court permission to bypass our system of checks and balances," Blackburn said in the video, where she expressed her opposition to Jackson’s nomination. The 7-2 court ruling in Griswold v. Connecticut said the Constitution’s First, Third, Fourth and Ninth Amendments created a right to privacy in a marriage, which the Connecticut law banning contraception violated. (The other cases Blackburn mentioned were about eminent domain and the Affordable Care Act.) The Griswold ruling was later cited as precedent in Roe v. Wade in 1973. Featured Fact-check Tony Evers stated on October 19, 2022 in Campaign ad If a 12-year-old girl became pregnant because of rape or incest, "Tim Michels would force her to deliver the baby." By Madeline Heim • October 21, 2022 Blackburn did not expound in the video on why she thought the ruling was unsound, nor did she make any proposals about birth control. It’s not clear if Blackburn was opposed to overturning a ban on contraception or if she thought the court overstepped and created a right not in the Constitution. We asked if she has ever proposed any laws or made any statements seeking to limit or ban the use of contraception for anyone, and Spencer Hurwitz, a spokesperson for Blackburn, referred us to a tweet by CNN fact-checker Daniel Dale, who said the senator’s position was being inaccurately described. Hurwitz declined to answer questions about why Blackburn thought the Griswold ruling was unsound or whether she supports any bans on contraception. Whether Senate Republicans will propose such action in the future is unclear. The National Republican Senatorial Committee issued talking points on May 3 about abortion for legislators and candidates and one reads, "Republicans DO NOT want to take away contraception." Mississippi Republican Gov. Tate Reeves, meanwhile, didn’t rule out laws on contraception in an interview Sunday on CNN’s "State of the Union," but he said "that is not what we’re focused on at this time." Our ruling Social media users are claiming that Blackburn proposed limiting contraception use to married couples only. Blackburn has not made any such proposal, either in the Senate or in public statements. She critiqued a Supreme Court ruling, Griswold v. Connecticut, that overturned the state’s ban on contraception on the basis of a married couple’s right to privacy. But Blackburn has not elaborated on her issue with the ruling, saying only that it was "constitutionally unsound." Without proof that Blackburn wants to limit contraception use to married couples, we rate this claim Fals

“Tennessee just banned Plan B and made it a crime punishable by a $50,000 fine to order it. If the Supreme Court votes to overturn Roe v. Wade, as a leaked draft majority opinion indicates it might, access to abortion would vary across states due to differing policies. Advocates of abortion rights are expressing concern that some states’ efforts will go further to curtail contraceptive use. But has Tennessee already outright banned the emergency contraceptive known as Plan B? Short answer, no. But that’s what many people were left wondering after claims started circulating online that said the state recently outlawed emergency contraceptives and will now fine people who try to get the medication. "Tennessee just banned Plan B and made it a crime punishable by a $50,000 fine to order it," read a tweet from Pam Keith, CEO at the Center for Employment Justice and 2020 Democratic nominee for Florida’s 18th Congressional District. (Keith lost to Republican Rep. Brian Mast.) Tennessee did recently pass a law that restricts access to certain medications, but it did not involve Plan B. Known as the morning-after pill, Plan B is emergency contraception used to prevent pregnancy — not induce abortions — after unprotected sex or when a birth control method has failed. The medication is available over-the-counter and does not require a prescription. The legislation at the center of this claim, though, imposes strict restrictions on the dispensing of abortion pills. Signed by Republican Gov. Bill Lee on May 5, it doesn’t address or ban emergency contraceptives. The law includes a $50,000 penalty for doctors or anyone who dispenses abortion pills by mail. There is no criminal penalty for patients. PolitiFact reached out to Keith for comment through her company’s website but did not hear back. However, on May 9, Keith tweeted that she made a mistake and deleted her original tweet. "Hey all. I tweeted something about a change in Tennessee law criminalizing a component of women’s health care that I understood to be similar to the proposed bans in Louisiana and Missouri. I have taken it down," Keith wrote. Abortion pills refer to the medication option for abortion, usually taken in about the first 11 weeks of pregnancy. It involves a combination of two medicines — mifepristone and misoprostol — that are typically taken around 24 hours apart. Mifepristone blocks progesterone, the hormone needed to maintain a pregnancy, and misoprostol makes the uterus contract to complete the abortion. 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 The Tennessee Abortion-Inducing Drug Risk Protocol Act goes into effect Jan. 1, 2023. The legislation states that qualified medical clinicians are required to be physically present when abortion pills are given to patients. To lawfully receive abortion pills, a patient must visit a doctor, give consent, and then return to pick up the medication. Delivery of abortion pills by mail is prohibited. According to the measure, the drugs can only be dispensed by qualified physicians, a category that does not include pharmacists. The legislation explicitly states that this applies to abortion-inducing drugs. "This is not what this bill is doing," said Akram Faizer, associate professor of law at Lincoln Memorial University in Harrogate, Tennessee. "Anything that can be treated as contraceptive would not be affected by this legislation." Legal experts say it’s not yet known whether states like Tennessee can restrict access to abortion pills in the wake of the FDA's 2021 decision to allow mail-delivery of the medication nationwide. It would likely come down to what happens with Roe v. Wade. If the draft Supreme Court ruling overturning the legislation is finalized, states could set laws about how and when to allow abortions — including restrictions on abortion pills. "State governments shouldn’t have jurisdiction over the mailing of things, that’s typically within federal jurisdiction," Faizer said. "But if the federal government loses its jurisdiction to enforce abortion rights, that’s where things might change." Our ruling Keith claimed on Twitter that Tennessee banned the Plan B emergency contraceptive and made it a crime punishable by a $50,000 fine to order it. The legislation imposes restrictions on the dispensing of abortion pills, but it doesn’t ban emergency contraceptives like Plan B. The $50,000 fine, meanwhile, is for anyone who provides abortion pills by mail. The measure exempts patients from criminal penalties. We rate this claim False. RELATED: Ask PolitiFact: What would the end of Roe mean for access to abortion pill

"In Texas, Republicans passed a law allowing rapists to sue their victims for getting an abortion. Days before Politico reported that a leaked U.S. Supreme Court draft opinion indicates that a majority intends to overturn Roe v. Wade, U.S. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., tweeted an alarming claim about victims of rape in Texas. Ocasio-Cortez was addressing the claim from right-wing politicians that "the extreme left is taking over." To that, Ocasio-Cortez asked "WHERE" in all caps. "In Texas, Republicans passed a law allowing rapists to sue their victims for getting an abortion," Ocasio-Cortez tweeted. Texas has some of the strictest laws restricting access to abortion. As discussion and concern rises for Roe v. Wade — the landmark 1973 ruling that established a right to abortion — and what this means for Texas, let's look at Ocasio-Cortez's claim. Texas law targets abortion providers We reached out to Ocasio-Cortez's media office and campaign email addresses but did not hear back. She seems to be referring to Senate Bill 8, which took effect in September. The law prohibits abortion after six weeks of pregnancy and leaves enforcement up to the public, allowing any person to sue abortion providers or people who aid or abet illegal abortions. There are no exceptions for pregnancies from rape or incest. But the law specifically prohibits a rapist from suing: "Notwithstanding any other law, a civil action under this section may not be brought by a person who impregnated the abortion patient through an act of rape, sexual assault, incest, or any other act prohibited by Sections 22.011, 22.021, or 25.02. Penal Code." 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 This provision is the only limit placed on who can sue under the law. In addition, Ocasio-Cortez claimed that a victim's rapist could sue them. However, SB 8 permits people to sue providers and those who aid and abet someone who gets a prohibited abortion, not the person seeking an abortion. In other words, University of Houston law professor Seth Chandler said, the person seeking an abortion could not be sued under this law, but anyone helping them could. "Now, it is true that the defendant in an SB 8 action may need to prove that the plaintiff wasn't a rapist," Chandler wrote in a follow-up email. "It's not entirely clear (since there are no cases) on whom the burden of proof lies. But to go from that to saying that Texas allows the rapist to sue strikes me as a canard." Our ruling Ocasio-Cortez tweeted on April 29, "In Texas, Republicans passed a law allowing rapists to sue their victims for getting an abortion." The law specifically bars someone's rapist to sue because they sought a prohibited abortion. The law also allows actions against abortion providers, rather than the patient, for procedures past a pregnancy's six-week mark. We rate this claim as Fals

Amber Heard plagiarized lines from the movie “The Talented Mr. Ripley” in her opening statement during the Johnny Depp libel trial Amber Heard’s testimony in the defamation trial initiated by ex-husband Johnny Depp launched a frenzy of news coverage as well as some false rumors. One popular claim said Heard’s testimony borrowed heavily from a monologue in the 1999 movie "The Talented Mr. Ripley." A viral tweet compared Heard’s alleged opening statement with lines from the movie, side by side: The claim spread widely on Facebook, where 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.) While the post shows a real quote from the movie, Heard didn’t say these words. The lines in the film are delivered by the character Marge Sherwood, played by Gwyneth Paltrow. They are as follows: "The thing with Dickie ... it’s like the sun shines on you, and it’s glorious. And then he forgets you and it’s very, very cold ... When you have his attention, you feel like you’re the only person in the world, that’s why everybody loves him so much." The social media claims about Heard substituted the name Johnny for Dickie. But Heard didn’t say this, according to video evidence from the trial, news reports and official transcripts. 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 Fact-checkers from the Associated Press reviewed nearly seven hours of footage from the proceedings and also couldn’t locate the alleged quote. The rumor was similarly debunked by Newsweek and Snopes. Shortly after taking the stand Heard answered some basic questions about her name, age and profession. She described how she met Depp and talked about their relationship. Some social media users tried to compare parts of her testimony that used similar language as proof that she took lines from the movie, but the remarks contain significant differences. For example, about 34 minutes into her testimony, Heard said that when she was around Johnny, she "felt like the most beautiful person in the world," and that he made her "feel seen" and feel like "a million dollars," and then he would "disappear." This is not what Paltrow says in the movie. Depp sued Heard for libel after she accused him of domestic abuse in a 2018 opinion editorial in the Washington Post. Depp’s lawyer described the allegations as "catastrophic" to Depp’s career. Our ruling Social media posts claim that Heard plagiarized lines from the movie "The Talented Mr. Ripley" during her testimony in the defamation trial brought by her ex-husband. This is wrong. A fake transcript made it look like Heard repeated lines verbatim from the movie. Multiple reviews of the proceedings show that she did not make the comments attributed to her online. We rate these posts False.

When the New York State Senate voted to legalize abortion in 1970, 12 Republican senators voted in favor of it A leaked draft opinion from Justice Samuel Alito to overturn the U.S. Supreme Court's landmark abortion rights decision Roe v. Wade has mobilized abortion rights advocates in New York state, where Democratic leaders said that they would maintain access to abortion. State Senate Majority Leader Andrea Stewart-Cousins, D-Yonkers, who spoke to reporters after the draft was leaked, said that when New York state legalized abortion, three years before Roe v. Wade was decided, Republicans held power in the Senate and some of them joined Democrats in supporting a measure to repeal the state’s ban on abortions. "Under a Republican majority in the Senate, those reproductive rights laws were passed," Stewart-Cousins said. "And not only was it a Republican majority leadership in the Senate, but 12 Republicans joined the majority of Democrats in order to pass our reproductive rights bills here." Since then, the party has moved to the right on abortion. In 2019, when another abortion bill passed in New York, no Republicans in the state legislature supported it. Stewart-Cousins is right that Republicans supported legalizing abortion in 1970. At the time, Republicans controlled the Senate, the Assembly and the governor's office - but she got the tally wrong by one vote. The New York State Library and librarian Michael Meyer sent us photocopies of the Senate vote on bill 8556-A, which was voted on by the Senate on April 10, 1970. A vote on March 18, 1970, in the Senate on a more liberal version of the legislation had an identical tally. Thirteen Republican senators voted for the bill, which passed 31-26. The Senate had 57 districts in 1970. There are 63 districts today. Featured Fact-check Tony Evers stated on October 19, 2022 in Campaign ad If a 12-year-old girl became pregnant because of rape or incest, "Tim Michels would force her to deliver the baby." By Madeline Heim • October 21, 2022 We approached Stewart-Cousins’ office, and spokesperson Emily Bruggeman sent us a New York Times article stating that in the Senate, the vote was 31 to 26, with 13 Republicans and 18 Democrats in favor, and 20 Republicans and six Democrats voting against it. Stewart-Cousins is correct that Republican leadership in the Senate allowed the bill to come to the floor, though the majority leader at the time, Sen. Earl Brydges of Niagara Falls, was no proponent of abortion. Brydges could have stopped the vote, but he did not. An abortion rights supporter told the New York Times that Brydges miscalculated, that he allowed a vote for a full repeal of the abortion ban, without restrictions, because he did not think it would pass. Brydges reserved his comments during the floor debate for the roll call vote, and he said he was disturbed by the bill. "I have kept my word to do nothing to keep this bill from coming to the floor or not to lobby personally against it," Brydges said, according to the New York Times. "But I have a deep, real, abiding conviction that this is the wrong way for the state to go because we are a bellwether state and many other states will follow our lead." Gov. Nelson Rockefeller had been calling for changing the state’s abortion law and signed the measure in 1970. When a repeal of the legalization was passed in 1972, he vetoed it. Our ruling Stewart-Cousins said that legalization of abortion in New York state was approved with the support of 12 Republicans in the Senate. She missed one vote. The roll call shows 13 Republicans in the Senate supported the bill. We rate her statement True, because being off by one vote doesn't significantly affect its accurac

When there is “a noose on a college dorm of a Black student” or a racial slur “on a dormitory building, the odds are overwhelming that a Black student actually did that. Conservative radio host Dennis Prager baselessly claimed that when nooses are strung or racial slurs are graffitied on college campuses, "the odds are overwhelming" that the hate crime was really a hoax perpetrated by a Black student at the school. The claim came as Prager, the co-founder of PragerU, which makes conservative video content, riffed on his radio show about what Twitter will look like once billionaire Elon Musk takes over. "Twitter will be flooded with hate, and a lot of it will come from people on the left who want to show how hate-filled it is," Prager said April 26. "It's like their race hoax industry. If you see a noose on a college dorm of a Black student, the odds are overwhelming that the noose was put there by a Black student. If you see the n-word on a dormitory building, the odds are overwhelming that a Black student actually did that. We're filled with race hoaxes." Prager referenced Jussie Smollett, the "Empire" actor who in 2019 paid associates to stage an attack against him in Chicago. Smollett was sentenced to 150 days in jail and ordered to pay a $145,000 fine for lying to police about being the victim of a hate crime. Though a noose was involved in what Smollett framed as a racist and homophobic attack by supporters of then-President Donald Trump, Smollett was not a university student. Prager offered no evidence on his show or in response to PolitiFact’s inquiry that Black students are "overwhelmingly" responsible for the on-campus incidents in recent years that have involved nooses or the use of a racial slur. In fact, experts who track hate crimes told PolitiFact that there isn’t even a nationwide data source that Prager could have used to pin down the number of incidents — real or fake — that specifically involved hanging a noose or scrawling the racist insult on college buildings or grounds. The nationwide data that does exist flies in the face of Prager’s claim. "In my 40 years of experience studying hate crimes, I would say the vast majority of instances where a noose was used to threaten or intimidate, it was displayed by white individuals," said Northeastern University’s Jack McDevitt, a professor of the practice in criminology and criminal justice and the author of two books on hate crimes. "Mr. Prager is long on hyperbole and bigotry and short on facts," said Brian Levin, director of the Center for the Study of Hate and Extremism at California State University, San Bernardino. "Any look at available data shows that out of the officially reported hate crime allegations on college campuses, only a handful out of hundreds are provable false reports, and remember that colleges devote a significant amount of investigative resources to these reports." Available data runs counter to Prager’s claim The FBI’s Uniform Crime Reporting Program keeps tabs on hate crimes in the U.S., based on data submitted by law enforcement agencies. The most recent figures are from 2020. Of the 2,353 "anti-Black or African American" incidents where the offender’s race was known in 2020, 1,717 of them, or roughly 73%, were perpetrated by white people. By comparison, 90, or about 4%, were perpetrated by Black people. The breakdown was similar in 2019 and 2018. Not all law enforcement agencies record the offender’s race. At the Center for the Study of Hate Crimes and Extremism, Levin, a criminologist, produced a report in 2019 analyzing hate crimes that also looked at hate crime hoaxes. Defining false hate crime reports as alleged incidents that were reported to authorities but later discovered to have been intentionally falsified, Levin’s team counted just 11 out of an estimated 7,600 hate crimes in 2018, amounting to 0.14%. Featured Fact-check Instagram posts stated on October 15, 2022 in Instagram post Seattle authorities are investigating a string of serial killings. By Michael Majchrowicz • October 17, 2022 "I live these numbers," Levin said. What Prager claimed "is a lie. It’s promoted again and again as a social construction of a hoax epidemic, when what we're actually having are increases in hate crime." Orlando Martinez, a detective and the coordinator for hate crimes with the Los Angeles Police Department, told the Washington Post in 2019 that he estimated five of the approximately 1,500 cases his team handled over the previous five years involved intentionally falsified reports. Martinez did not specify the race of the people involved in those false reports. Michael Jensen, a senior researcher at the University of Maryland’s National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism, said his research examining the characteristics, motivations and behaviors of those who commit hate crimes also suggests that less than 1% of all hate crimes reported are hoaxes. Jensen said outsized media coverage can make hoax hate crimes appear more recurrent than they are, and that actual hate crime reports have been rising in spite of the fact that fewer and fewer police departments are reporting them to the FBI. "No serious scholar of hate crime believes that this spike is driven in any way by hoaxes," Jensen said. "I am unaware of any serious data source that would support the conclusion that the majority of anti-Black hate crimes are hoaxes." Many universities have not revealed the identities of students caught perpetrating legitimate hate crimes, often citing student privacy concerns. There have indeed been accounts of false hate crimes at colleges, and entire websites have been built to document such cases beyond college campuses. A Black cadet candidate at the Air Force Academy was revealed to be responsible for writing racial slurs in 2017 on message boards on students’ doors, including their own, for example. The Colorado Gazette reported the student committed the act "in a bizarre bid to get out of trouble he faced at the school for other misconduct." College campuses are among the more common locations for such false reports to occur, Levin said. He attributed that to several possible factors, including diversity on many campuses, the seriousness with which school authorities typically regard reports of hate crimes, and the desire of some students to draw attention to an issue or themselves. But there’s no evidence that the overwhelming majority of campus hate crimes — of which there were hundreds logged to the FBI and the Department of Education in recent years — are faked. One scholar who has cataloged more fabricated hate crimes than other experts researching the subject is Wilfred Reilly, an assistant professor of political sciences at Kentucky State University. PolitiFact reached out to Reilly for this fact-check, but our questions went unanswered. In a book on hate crime hoaxes, Reilly culled together a dataset of more than 400 hate crime hoaxes between 2010 and 2017. Other scholars, including Levin, have argued that Reilly’s tally is too broad. According to the Washington Post, Reilly counts some cases as hoaxes in which there was no offender at all, such as an alleged noose at a construction site that police determined was a rope for moving equipment. But the roughly 400 hoaxes that Reilly counted make up less than 1% of the roughly 50,000 hate crimes that were reported to the FBI in that timeframe. And while Reilly has said he believes as much as 15% of hate crimes reports to the FBI could be falsified — based on the possibility that some allegations that don’t face heavy press scrutiny might never be revealed as false — that figure would also not provide evidence of what Prager said were "overwhelming" odds. Our ruling Prager said that when there is "a noose on a college dorm of a Black student" or a racial slur "on a dormitory building, the odds are overwhelming that a Black student actually did that." Prager offered no evidence to support his claim; there isn’t even a data source that tracks on-campus hate crimes and hate crime hoaxes with that level of specificity, experts said. The more general data that is available on hate crimes in the U.S., however, suggests that Prager’s claim is far from the truth. The percentage of hate crime reports to the FBI that have turned out to be falsified is nowhere near "overwhelming." We rate Prager’s claim Fals

“If you earn $100 and pay $33 income tax you’re left with $67. You then buy $67 worth of fuel and in doing so pay a 48% fuel tax (fuel tax = $32.16 + $6.70 GST). This means that the government just got $71.86 tax from your hard earned $100. UPDATE: This fact-check replaces and expands on a previous fact-check that looked only at gas taxes in Canada. (Read an archived version of the previous check.) We decided to review the check after readers asked us about gas taxes in Australia, while other readers questioned our analysis about Canadian law. The previous check concluded the statement was False; we now rate the statement Mostly False. With record-high inflation rates around the world and gas prices still high, consumers’ wallets have been hit hard. But some social media posts have exaggerated the drain these high prices have had on people’s paychecks. An April 9 Facebook post claimed that most of a person’s income was being taxed by the government, rather than going toward goods or services. A similar post was shared by a different account on April 16. "If you earn $100 and pay $33 income tax you’re left with $67. You then buy $67 worth of fuel and in doing so pay a 48% fuel tax (fuel tax = $32.16 + $6.70 GST). This means that the government just got $71.86 tax from your hard earned $100," the Facebook posts claimed. 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.) While the claims don’t explicitly say in which country this alleged 48% fuel tax exists, there is fine print at the bottom of the April 9 Facebook post that references Pauline Hanson, a right-wing populist politician in Australia who has advocated for a lower gas tax. The second Facebook post, shared on April 16, does not include this reference to Australia. The claims could also be about Canada, as the users who shared the both posts state on their Facebook profiles that they are based in that country. The mention of a goods and services tax indicates this claim is not about the United States, as it has no national sales tax. The Australian and Canadian governments do — and they also use a dollar sign for currency — so we looked at both countries to see if the claim holds water in either location. To be sure, the cost of crude oil, wholesale margins, retail margins and taxes all factor into the total price consumers pay at the pump. However, when it comes to both Australia and Canada, these claims misconstrue how much taxes account for the price consumers pay for gas. The claim also lacks context about income tax rates, no matter which of the two countries we consider. Income and fuel taxes in Australia In Australia, income tax varies depending on how much a person makes. So, there are some Australians who are subject to a 33% income tax rate. Those earning between $45,001 and $120,000 pay $5,092 plus 33% of each $1 over $45,000 in income taxes. Individuals earning less than that pay a lower rate or no income tax at all, and people earning more pay a higher rate. (One Australian dollar is equal to about 72 cents in the U.S.) But Australian fuel taxes are lower than the 48% mentioned in the claim. Australia typically has a fuel excise tax of 44.2 cents per liter, but that rate was recently cut in half to help lower the cost of gas for consumers. The country also applies a 10% goods and services tax (GST) to gas purchases. If the GST is included in the total $67 gas purchase, then the tax would equal one-eleventh of the total purchase, or $6.09. That means the consumer spent $60.91 on gas before the GST was applied, according to the Australian government’s GST calculator. The average price of gas in Australia was $1.93 per liter on April 8. (There are roughly four liters in one gallon.) So with $60.91 a person could fill up their car with about 31 liters of fuel. (The typical car can hold between 45-65 liters of gas.) 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 That 31 liters would normally be subject to a fuel excise tax of 44.2 cents per liter, or $13.70 in total. When combined with the GST, the total taxes would equal $19.79, or about 30% of a $67 gas purchase. But the current fuel excise rate is much lower. Starting March 30 until Sept. 28, the Australian government cut the fuel excise tax in half to 22.1 cents per liter. During this time, the amount of fuel taxes paid on a $60.91 gas purchase would be $6.85. Along with the GST, the consumer would pay a total of $12.94 in taxes, accounting for 19% of the purchase. Income and fuel taxes in Canada In Canada, individuals earning less than $50,197 are subject to a 15% federal income tax. If a person makes more than that amount, they are subject to higher income tax rates depending on their amount of taxable income. Only individuals earning more than $221,708 are subject to a 33% income tax. (One Canadian dollar is equal to about 78 cents in the U.S.) All 13 provinces and territories in Canada also have their own income tax rates. None of these rates alone are as high as 33%, even for the highest earners. But depending on where a person lives and how much they make, the federal and provincial income tax rates may together equal 33% or more. However, similar to Australia, the claim that Canadians pay a 48% fuel tax is exaggerated. Gas purchases in Canada are subject to four types of taxes: a federal gas tax, a provincial gas tax, a carbon tax and a sales tax. The federal gas tax is fixed at 10 cents per liter. Provincial gas taxes range from 6.2 cents per liter to 27 cents per liter. The carbon tax ranges from 1.1 cents to 11.05 cents. (In certain parts of Canada, individuals are eligible to receive a quarterly climate action incentive tax benefit to help offset the cost of federal pollution pricing.) The sales tax applied after these fuel taxes varies depending on where a person lives in Canada. Seven provinces and territories pay the federal GST of 5% on gas purchases, while the other six pay a higher harmonized sales tax (HST), which combines the federal GST with the provincial sales tax (PST). Drivers in Vancouver — compared to other cities and provinces in Canada — pay the most total taxes on gas purchases. Vancouver is one of three cities in Canada that adds a municipal tax on gasoline. Vancouver is in British Columbia, which applies the federal GST of 5% to gas purchases. For a total purchase of $67, the GST would equal $2.99. That means the consumer spent $64.01 on gas before the GST was applied, according to the Canadian government’s GST calculator. The average price of gas in Canada was $1.90 per liter on April 4. So with $64.01 a person in Vancouver could buy about 33 liters of gas. That 33 liters would be subject to a 10-cent per liter federal gas tax, a 27-cent provincial gas tax and an 11.05-cent carbon tax, totaling $15.86. After adding the GST, the total taxes paid to the Canadian government would be $18.85, or 28% of the $67 gas purchase. People living in other parts of the country, where the tax rates are lower, would pay less in taxes. Some parts of Canada are lowering certain gas taxes to give consumers a break while the price of oil is high. For example, last month Alberta dropped its provincial fuel tax of 13 cents per liter while the price of U.S. crude oil remains above $90 a barrel. Starting July 1, Ontario will reduce its provincial gas tax by 5.7 cents, so the rate through the end of the year will be 9 cents per liter. Our ruling Two recent Facebook posts claimed: "If you earn $100 and pay $33 income tax you’re left with $67. You then buy $67 worth of fuel and in doing so pay a 48% fuel tax (fuel tax = $32.16 + $6.70 GST). This means that the government just got $71.86 tax from your hard earned $100." Since the Facebook posts did not include how much money this hypothetical person makes a year, it’s not possible to determine their income tax rate in Australia or Canada. Also, neither country has a 48% fuel tax. We rate this claim Mostly Fals

“Military Arrests Biden’s Sec. of Agriculture Tom Vilsack. U.S. Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack hasn’t been arrested, despite posts online claiming otherwise. The rumor appears to have originated in an April 29 story by Real Raw News, a website known for publishing fabricated stories that often include phony military arrests. 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 story falsely said that Vilsack was arrested on April 26 by the U.S. Navy Judge Advocate General’s Corps because of his connection with "calculated destruction" of food processing facilities around the country. PolitiFact previously found no evidence to support claims that said fires at food processing plants were being set intentionally to disrupt the food supply and hasten a food shortage. There also is no evidence that any of the fires have resulted in a food shortage crisis in the U.S. 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 Real Raw News’ "About Us" page features a disclaimer saying it contains "humor, parody and satire," while calls for donations on its article pages claim that the site fights for "truth and freedom of the press in an oppressed society." There is no satire or parody disclaimer on the story about Vilsack. There have been no credible reports about Vilsack’s alleged arrest. He had a full schedule on the day he was supposedly taken into custody that included multiple dealings with the press. He has also made several appearances since. A spokesperson for the U.S. Department of Agriculture confirmed to PolitiFact in an email that claims of Vilsack’s arrest are "false" and highlighted our previous reporting about Real Raw News’ methods and history of fabrications. Patricia Babb, public affairs officer for the Navy Judge Advocate General’s Corps, also said the claim is false. We rate it Pants on Fire! RELATED: Hangings, guillotines and Gitmo: Going behind Real Raw News’ sensational (and fabricated) headline

“New York leads the U.S. in population loss. Lee Zeldin, a Republican U.S. House member who is running for governor of New York, criticized longstanding Democratic control of state government in an April 12 tweet. Poor quality of life in the Empire state, Zeldin charged, has led the state’s population to decline. "New York leads the U.S. in population loss, because residents aren’t feeling safe on the streets and subways, they feel suffocated by heavy-handed government action, it doesn’t make sense economically to remain here, and opportunity for a better life is presenting itself elsewhere," Zeldin tweeted. New York leads the US in population loss, because residents aren’t feeling safe on the streets and subways, they feel suffocated by heavy handed government action, it doesn’t make sense economically to remain here, and opportunity for a better life is presenting itself elsewhere.— Lee Zeldin (@leezeldin) April 12, 2022 In this fact-check, we’ll focus on Zeldin’s premise that "New York leads the U.S. in population loss." (We can’t fact-check how people feel or determine their internal reasons for leaving.) Data from the U.S. Census Bureau shows that New York did lead the states in lost population between July 2020 and July 2021, although the losses were not as steep between the full decennial censuses of 2010 and 2020. When we contacted Zeldin’s office, a spokesperson cited an article from December 2021 in the Rochester Democrat & Chronicle that summarized newly released Census data. According to data released by the bureau in December 2021, New York dropped below 20 million people between July 2020 and July 2021, decreasing from 20.15 million to 19.84 million. That’s a decline of 1.58%, which was the largest percentage loss for any state during that period. (New York also had the largest loss in raw numbers — 319,000 — although statisticians usually prefer to compare states by percentage losses, because some states, like New York, are much larger to start with.) Sixteen other states lost population during that yearlong period. The states with losses closest to New York were Illinois, with a decline of 0.89%; Hawaii, with a decline of 0.71%; California, with a decline of 0.66%; and Louisiana, with a decline of 0.58%. Featured Fact-check Kathy Hochul stated on October 25, 2022 in a debate The state is absorbing the cost of overtime pay for farmworkers, and farm owners do not have to pay any more. By Jill Terreri Ramos • November 5, 2022 An analysis by the Pew Charitable Trusts, an independent think tank, found that New York’s losses were "primarily because many residents left New York for other states." An analysis by the New York-focused Empire Center, another think tank, said the scale of departures during this period "shattered all out-migration records, exceeding New York’s record annual migration losses during the late 1970s." An additional factor was a decline in immigration from outside the United States, due in part to travel controls during the coronavirus pandemic. Net foreign immigration to New York decreased during the one-year period to just 18,860 people, which the Empire Center said was the smallest number in at least 60 years. The coronavirus pandemic also increased the number of deaths in New York, although there were enough births in the state to exceed deaths of all causes by 18,503. The data showing the change in population between July 2020 and July 2021 is based on estimates rather than the full-scale census count that is conducted every 10 years. And the data on population change between the last two censuses, 2010 and 2020, show that New York was not quite so cursed on the population front over that longer period. On average during that decade, New York’s population grew by 0.42% per year, rather than shrinking. That was a bit below the 50-state median; New York had the 32nd fastest growth rate during that period. Only three states lost population during that decade: Illinois, Mississippi and West Virginia. Our ruling Zeldin tweeted, "New York leads the U.S. in population loss." He’s right on the numbers. Census data shows that New York’s population declined by 1.58% between July 2020 and July 2021, the latest population estimate available. That was the largest percentage loss of any state during that period. We rate the statement Tru

“Roe v. Wade happened because a woman lied about being raped by black men. With Roe v. Wade back in the headlines, a previously debunked claim that the landmark case hinged on a lie is again being shared on social media timelines. "Roe v. Wade happened because a woman lied about being raped by black men," says a May 3 post on Facebook. It also says "Where’s BLM?" 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.) But the Supreme Court did not consider the circumstances of the plaintiff’s pregnancy when ruling on the case. The plaintiff was identified during the proceedings by the pseudonym Jane Roe and later publicly revealed her real name, Norma McCorvey. "The U.S. Supreme Court did not consider how ‘Jane Roe’ became pregnant when making its landmark decision in 1973," the Associated Press reported in 2019. And McCorvey’s lawyers "never mentioned an alleged rape in court, and it formed no part of their legal argument," Vanity Fair wrote in 2013. The 66-page ruling from the Supreme Court does not mention Roe’s claim of rape. When describing Roe, the ruling says she "alleged that she was unmarried and pregnant; that she wished to terminate her pregnancy by an abortion ‘performed by a competent, licensed physician, under safe, clinical conditions;’ that she was unable to get a ‘legal’ abortion in Texas because her life did not appear to be threatened by the continuation of her pregnancy; and that she could not afford to travel to another jurisdiction in order to secure a legal abortion under safe conditions." McCorvey initially told reporters she had been raped but admitted in a 1987 interview that she "fabricat(ed) the rape as she sought an abortion in 1969 because she believed it would help her get access to the procedure," The Associated Press reported. "Abortion was illegal in Texas then, except to save a woman’s life. She continued to tell the untrue story as her case attracted national attention." Accounts of McCorvey’s story in mainstream, credible publications do not mention the race of the alleged attacker. When McCorvey revealed in 1987 that she had not been raped, The New York Times reported at that time, "The assertion of rape was not a factor in the Supreme Court's ruling." 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 AP also noted in 2019 that "the Supreme Court has not weighed in on restricting or legalizing abortions based on why a woman seeks the procedure." After the post was shared on Facebook, it was tagged with a 2018 fact check, indicating that it contained false information. The person who shared the post on Facebook commented, "This is not false information. Her story about being raped led to the case. Facebook fact checkers are flat-out lying. This is disgusting." But the rape allegation did not lead to the court case; McCorvey’s desire to terminate the pregnancy is what led to the legal proceedings. As the AP reported this week about Roe v. Wade, "The question before the U.S. Supreme Court was: Does the Constitution recognize a woman’s right to terminate her pregnancy by abortion?" Our ruling A Facebook post says, "Roe v. Wade happened because a woman lied about being raped by black men." But the allegation of rape was not taken into consideration during the case. The Supreme Court did not consider the circumstances of the plaintiff’s pregnancy, and the court’s ruling does not mention Roe’s claim of rape. McCorvey’s lawyers did not mention the alleged rape in court and did not include it in their legal argument. McCorvey’s desire to terminate the pregnancy — not her allegation of rape — is what led to the Roe v. Wade legal proceedings. We rate this claim False.

“mRNA Vaccines Show No Mortality Benefit - Danish Study A Danish study that evaluated how the COVID-19 vaccines impact mortality is being used online as evidence that the messenger RNA-based vaccines from Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna offer "no mortality benefit" at all. "mRNA Vaccines Show No Mortality Benefit - Danish Study" is the title of a YouTube video that says the April 5 study found that the mRNA shots from Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna do not stop infections or transmission and don’t reduce deaths, thus showing "no discernible mortality benefit." The video adds that, by contrast, the adenovirus vector vaccines from Johnson & Johnson and AstraZeneca do show a "very positive mortality benefit from COVID and, intriguingly, even from non-COVID deaths." The video features Chris Martenson, a former pharmaceutical financial analyst and founder of Peak Prosperity, a website that appears to be devoted to sharing concepts from a book he authored. 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.) PolitiFact reached out to Peak Prosperity for comment but did not hear back. The study, titled "Randomised Clinical Trials of COVID-19 Vaccines: Do Adenovirus-Vector Vaccines Have Beneficial Non-Specific Effects?" was posted April 5 in the Lancet journal’s preprint server. A "preprint" is a research paper before it is peer-reviewed or accepted for publication by a scholarly or scientific journal. The study was conducted by researchers affiliated with various institutions, including the University of Southern Denmark, the Statens Serums Institut and the Bandim Health Project. The research analyzed randomized controlled trials to see how much the COVID-19 vaccines reduced deaths from all causes, and it sought to compare how the results differed between the adenovirus-vector vaccines and mRNA-based vaccines. For the mRNA vaccines, the study found that 61 people out of 74,193 participants died. Thirty-one received the vaccine, while 30 received a placebo, thus showing that the vaccine essentially had no impact on "overall" mortality, according to the study. For the adenovirus-vector vaccines, the study recorded 46 deaths out of 122,164 participants. Of the 46, 16 had received the vaccine, while 30 received a placebo. The authors concluded that the two types of vaccines differed significantly "with respect to overall mortality." They also said that adenovirus vaccines were associated with protection against non-accident, non-COVID-19 deaths. But when looking at COVID-19 mortality rates specifically, the picture changes. The study found that of the 31 deaths that occured in mRNA-vaccinated individuals, only two were from COVID-19. The rest were due to other causes. For the adenovirus-vaccinated group, two of the 16 deaths were from COVID-19. One of the study’s lead authors, Dr. Christine Stabell Benn, a professor of global health at the University of Southern Denmark, made a post about the findings on her LinkedIn page. She argued that scientists cannot presume to know the full effect of a vaccine "just by knowing its effect against the target infection" and said scientists need to study its effect on overall health. "We need to be clear about which vaccine, and what outcomes, we are talking about," Benn wrote. "The analysis of the randomized clinical trials suggests that COVID-19 vaccines are not a homogeneous group. Hence, we (health authorities, medical doctors, politicians, media as well as citizens) need to distinguish between ‘mRNA COVID-19 vaccines’ and ‘adenovirus vector COVID-19 vaccines’, and we need to specify if we talk about COVID-19-specific mortality or all-cause mortality." 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 She wrote that headlines that say COVID-19 vaccines reduce mortality are too simplified. But the same argument can be said for the YouTube video’s title — that mRNA vaccines offer "no mortality benefit." It’s misleading because it doesn’t specify that the findings are about non-COVID-19 related deaths, that the study is a preprint, or that more research is needed. While scientists like Benn contend that it’s important to study overall mortality effects of vaccines, people received these shots to protect themselves against COVID-19, which these vaccines continue to do. "The study isn’t about the effectiveness of mRNA vaccines against COVID," said Amesh Adalja, a senior scholar at the Johns Hopkins Center for Health and Security. "The study is aimed to determine if COVID vaccines have non-specific mortality impacts that extend beyond the incontrovertible mortality benefit they confer with COVID-19. Certain vaccines have effects that extend beyond the target infection and decrease mortality from other causes (e.g. measles vaccine)." Dr. Monica Gandhi, an infectious disease specialist at the University of California, San Francisco, also said the question of the paper isn’t about COVID-19, but whether the vaccines had a beneficial effect on other causes of mortality. The research reinforced that both types of vaccines significantly prevented COVID-19 deaths, "which is not surprising as both types of vaccines generate cellular immunity against SARS-CoV-2, protecting us against severe disease." The study’s results showing a stronger association between improved mortality and the adenoviral-vector vaccines could suggest these vaccines have other beneficial effects, Ghandi said. But, again, that does not mean there is no mortality benefit to the mRNA vaccine. "However, to be fair," Gandhi said, "the number of non-COVID and COVID deaths were rare in all of the pooled analyses and the causes of non-COVID deaths not well adjudicated, so this analysis needs to be taken as preliminary and hypothesis generating at best." The authors acknowledged that the study was based on limited available data over a shorter than desired timeframe. In an email to PolitiFact, Benn said she feels the lack of data documenting whether the vaccines reduce deaths from causes other than COVID-19 is an area in need of additional research and suggested such data can give a fuller picture of overall vaccine safety. Meanwhile, in an emailed statement, Pfizer said that numerous peer-reviewed studies around the world have confirmed the safety and efficacy of its COVID-19 vaccine. "With hundreds of millions of doses administered globally, the benefit risk profile of our vaccine remains positive for all approved indications and age groups and we remain confident in the protection and safety our COVID-19 vaccine provides," the statement read. Our ruling A video circulating on social media claims that a Danish study found that mRNA vaccines offer "no mortality benefit." This is an oversimplification that doesn’t accurately reflect the preprint study, which was not peer reviewed. Researchers used clinical trial data to see how the different COVID-19 vaccines reduced deaths from all causes. They found that adenovirus-vector vaccines appeared to protect against non-accident, non-COVID-19 deaths, while mRNA vaccines didn’t have much of an impact. They said more research is needed. The research didn’t conclude that mRNA vaccines were ineffective at protecting people from dying of COVID-19. We rate this False

Says Gov. Tony Evers "wanted to increase your taxes by $1 billion just for heating your homes. Instead, Republicans cut your taxes by more than $2 billion. Come Tax Day in April, Wisconsin GOP lawmakers were eager to remind their constituents what they’d done for them in the most recent state budget. Several took to Twitter to praise the tax cut at the heart of the most recent Republican-written budget, including Rep. John Macco, R-Ledgeview. But he did so with a twist. "In honor of #TaxDay, I remind you that Governor Evers wanted to increase your taxes by $1 billion just for heating your homes," he tweeted April 18, 2022. "Instead, Republicans cut your taxes by more than $2 billion." We’ve rated a few similar iterations of this claim, and generally, they’ve checked out. But what does heating have to do with it? Not a lot, it turns out. Most of claim on track, but "heating homes" comment isn’t Macco is correct that Evers, a Democrat, sought to raise taxes by $1 billion. A caveat: The governor proposed a net increase of about $1 billion with his plan that would have raised taxes on businesses and the wealthy while providing tax breaks to lower and middle classes. Still, an increase is an increase. PolitiFact Wisconsin rated that claim True on April 6, 2021. He’s also right that Republicans were able to deliver a more than $2 billion tax cut — the largest in state history. Another caveat there: Between the time when Evers released his budget plan and when the Republicans passed theirs, state officials found out Wisconsin would take in $4.4 billion more in additional tax collections than previously anticipated. That’s a lot of money that Evers didn’t have available to him when he wrote his budget proposal. And, important to note, Evers signed the budget, which was needed to put the cut in effect. 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 But again, the Republican-written budget did deliver the tax cut. In September 2021, we rated Mostly True this claim, from state Sen. Alberta Darling, R-River Hills: "Evers wanted to raise your taxes by $1 billion in a pandemic. Republicans stopped him and delivered the largest tax CUT in state history." So what does heating residents’ homes have to do with Evers’ plan to raise taxes? We tried to reach Macco to ask him precisely what he was getting at, but his office did not respond to multiple requests for comment. In a scan of the governor’s proposed budget, it appears he may have been referring to Evers’ plan to increase the amount of revenue that utilities would contribute to the Focus on Energy program, bringing in an additional $100 million. Even so, Macco makes it sound like Evers’ entire plan for tax increases rested on that. In reality, the governor sought to increase taxes using other measures, like scaling back a law that allows manufacturers to avoid paying state income taxes and increasing taxes on capital gains for people who earn $400,000 a year or more. That part of the claim clearly misses the mark. Our ruling Macco claimed that Evers wanted to increase Wisconsinites’ taxes by $1 billion "just for heating your homes," but instead, Republicans delivered a more than $2 billion tax cut. The general thrust of the claim is accurate, and similar to claims PolitiFact Wisconsin has rated in the past. But his comment about heating homes doesn’t fit. Our definition for Half True is a statement that is "partially accurate but leaves out important details or takes things out of context." That fits here. 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' });

“Space X’s Starlink internet constellation has angered Russia as it was reported that the Starlink satellite constellation was used to guide the fire” on the Russian ship Moskva The Starlink satellite-based internet service, from Elon Musk’s SpaceX, has made it possible for vital services in Ukraine to maintain connectivity amid a war. But a social media post cites information from a fake website to claim that the satellite service was part of an attack on the Moskva, a Russian ship that later sank. "Space X’s Starlink internet constellation has angered Russia as it was reported that the Starlink satellite constellation was used to guide the fire on Moskva," the April 30 post on Facebook 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 post links to a story on a site called BAP News — with a fabricated "about us" section and fake contact information. The "about us" section is in Latin (while the rest of the website is in English) and the contact information includes a phone number that is (123) 456-7890. That BAP News story says Dmitry Medvedev, deputy chairman of the Security Council of Russia, ordered that Starlink be destroyed after the Moskva attack. News reports have detailed how the Starlink service is being deployed in Ukraine — including serving as a link to drones used by Ukraine for artillery strikes. But there are no credible government or media reports that the Starlink satellite service was used to facilitate the attack on the Russian ship Moskva. The few online reports that mention Starlink in connection with the ship attack and Medvedev’s ordering of the destruction of Starlink are not from credible sources. The claim about Medvedev originated on a fake website that falsely claimed to be the official site of United Russia, a Russian political party, according to reporting by IXBT, a Russian website that reports on the IT sector. The fake website now appears to have been disabled. Medvedev posted on Telegram on April 16 that the destruction of the satellites was "a fresh idea, thanks." He added, "It is too early to fulfill, but if there is such a request, we will consider it," adding an emoji crying tears of joy. Featured Fact-check Viral image stated on October 22, 2022 in an Instagram post A CNN headline shows Uganda’s president saying he doesn’t support Ukraine because it would be “disgusting.” By Ciara O'Rourke • October 24, 2022 The sinking of the Russian ship The Moskva was the flagship of the Russian fleet, and when it sank, Russia said it was because of an accidental fire that ignited ammunition onboard. But "U.S. officials corroborated assertions by Ukraine’s military that the Moskva was taken down by two Ukrainian Neptune missiles," the New York Times reported. The Neptune missile "is fitted with an active radar-seeker" that guides it in flight, and the Ukrainian system for the missiles includes launch vehicles and associated search radar, according to the International Institute for Strategic Studies, a British research institute. The Starlink service, meanwhile, "uses terminals that resemble TV dishes equipped with antennas and are usually mounted on roofs to access the Internet via satellite in rural or disconnected areas," the Washington Post reported. Starlink launched its internet service in Ukraine in late February, just six weeks before the Moskva was attacked. Our ruling A Facebook post says, "Space X’s Starlink internet constellation has angered Russia as it was reported that the Starlink satellite constellation was used to guide the fire" on the Russian ship Moskva. But there are no credible government or media reports that indicate the Starlink service was involved in the attack on Moskva. The claim that a Russian official ordered the destruction of the Starlink satellite service originated on a fraudulent website. We rate this claim False.

Says JFK. Jr is masquerading as QAnon promoter Juan O. Savin Some conspiracy theorists have held the belief that John F. Kennedy, Jr., an attorney and the son of President John F. Kennedy, is alive and is working with the QAnon movement, which holds that Democrats and public figures are a part of a Satan-worshiping, pedophilic occult. Baseless as it is, the theory is that Kennedy is undercover and acting as Q, the anonymous leader who for years posted cryptic messages to "out" Democrats and claimed to unveil a deep state plot against former President Donald Trump. But there are changing stories about who Kennedy supposedly disguises himself as. A May 3 Facebook post said he’s masquerading as Juan O. Savin, a prominent promoter of the QAnon movement. "JOHN & JUAN," the post says before enumerating all the ways it claims the two men are similar: "Both sit the same (cross legged). Same height. Same voice modality. Same age. Both publishers. Both aviators. Both masters of disguise. Both independently wealthy. Both well connected. Both know the LAW. John signed his name ‘Juan Kennedy’ when he was younger. HMMMMMM ‘Quriouser & Quriouser.’" Facebook flagged the post in an effort to combat misinformation on its platform. (Read more about our partnership with Facebook.) 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 In truth, it’s not that curious: Kennedy died more than 20 years ago. He was flying a plane along with his wife and sister-in-law in 1999 when it crashed into the Atlantic Ocean near Martha’s Vineyard. Kennedy, along with his wife Carolyn Bessette, were cremated and buried at sea. In November 2021, undeterred by Kennedy’s confirmed death, hundreds of QAnon supporters gathered in Dallas under the false belief that he would return before eventually trickling away when he did not. Some QAnon believers claim that Kennedy had similar facial features to Savin. Vice reported that a book published under Savin’s name disclosed that his real name is Wayne Willott. Savin made a rare public appearance at a QAnon conference called For God And Country Patriot Double Down, where he made claims of a globalist plan to depopulate the earth. We’ve fact checked similar claims and found no evidence to support it. Nor is there evidence that Savin is secretly John F. Kennedy, Jr. We rate this Pants on Fire!

“Justices Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, and Barrett assured the Senate Judiciary Committee and the American people that Roe v. Wade was ‘established precedent.’ Rep. Don Beyer of Northern Virginia is among the many Democrats disappointed by a draft opinion showing the U.S. Supreme Court has tentatively voted to strike down its 49-year-old Roe v. Wade decision establishing a right to an abortion. "Thinking about the many times Justices Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, and Barrett assured the Senate Judiciary Committee and the American people that Roe was ‘established precedent.’" Beyer tweeted May 2. "I didn’t believe them, but they said it under oath." A fact-check shows that the three justices nominated by former President Donald Trump — Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett — did say in confirmation hearings that Roe is an important precedent. Barrett and Gorsuch qualified their remarks, however. Barrett said she did not regard Roe as a "superprecedent," a subjective term for "constitutional decisions in which public institutions have heavily invested, repeatedly relied and supported over a significant period of time." Gorsuch did not give a direct answer when asked whether he considered Roe a superprecedent. Kavanaugh, during his hearing, was not asked whether he regarded Roe as a superprecedent. He did say, however, that he would be open to arguments that a precedent is wrong. Let’s take a look at the sworn testimony of the three justices at their confirmation hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee. Gorsuch Gorsuch, in 2017, declined to say whether he thought Roe had been correctly decided. "I would tell you that Roe v. Wade, decided in 1973, is a precedent of the U.S. Supreme Court," he said. Gorsuch added that the high court "reaffirmed" the decision in 1992 with its Planned Parenthood v. Casey ruling, which barred states from imposing an "undue burden" on getting an abortion. "Casey is settled law," Gorsuch said while adding the qualification, "in the sense that it is a decision of the U.S. Supreme Court." Gorsuch didn’t say yes or no when asked if Roe is a superprecedent. "It has been reaffirmed many times. I can say that," he said. Kavanaugh Kavanaugh, in 2018, said Roe "is settled as a precedent of the Supreme Court, entitled the respect under principles of stare decisis. And one of the important things to keep in mind about Roe v. Wade is that it has been reaffirmed many times over the past 45 years, as you know, and most prominently, most importantly, reaffirmed in Planned Parenthood v. Casey in 1992." Featured Fact-check Instagram posts stated on October 25, 2022 in an image shared on Instagram “It’s not that there is no evidence the election was stolen, but that no court had the guts to HEAR the evidence. They dismissed the cases, NOT the evidence.” By Madison Czopek • October 28, 2022 Kavanaugh called the Casey decision a "precedent on precedent," a reaffirmed status he compared to that of Miranda rights. "Even though [former] Chief Justice (William) Rehnquist, by the way, had been a fervent critic of Miranda throughout his career, he decided that it had been settled too long, had been precedent too long, and he reaffirmed it," Kavanaugh said. But under questioning from Sen. Lindsay Graham, R-S.C., Kavanaugh said precedent shouldn’t always be followed. "I listen to all arguments. You have an open mind. You get the briefs and arguments, and some arguments are better than others. Precedent is critically important. It is the foundation of our system. But you listen to all arguments." Barrett As a private citizen, Barrett signed a newspaper ad in 2006 saying it was "time to put an end to the barbaric legacy of Roe v. Wade." During her 2020 hearing, she declined to say whether she thought Roe had been properly decided. Barrett said she did not want to specifically comment on cases that might come before her. Barrett said, "precedent is a principle that you’re not going to overrule something without good reason or roll up the law without justification for doing so." She said she did not consider Roe to be a superprecedent. "Roe does not fall within that category, but that does not mean that Roe should be overruled," Barrett said. "Roe is a precedent of the Supreme Court entitled to respect under the doctrine of stare decisis." Our ruling Beyer said, "Justices Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, and Barrett assured the Senate Judiciary Committee and the American people that Roe v. Wade was ‘established precedent.’" Beyer’s statement about the judges — all of whom support a draft Supreme Court ruling that would overturn Roe — is correct, but comes with a caveat. While all three paid homage to precedence and described Roe as such during their confirmation hearings, none said precedents are untouchable or that Roe was cast in stone. When asked whether they considered Roe to be a "superprecedent," Barrett said no and Gorsuch didn’t answer directly. Kavanaugh, under questioning from an anti-abortion senator, said he would be willing to hear arguments that a precedent is wrong. We rate Beyer’s statement Mostly True.

“The student debt that is out there, almost 60% of it is graduate school debt. Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis opposes President Joe Biden's willingness to explore additional student debt forgiveness, saying that it would primarily benefit people who earned advanced degrees. "The student debt that is out there, almost 60% of it is graduate school debt," DeSantis said at a press conference on April 29. "Why would you make a truck driver, or a waitress, or a construction worker pay off the debt for somebody that did a Ph.D. program in gender studies?" As a presidential candidate, Biden promised to forgive all undergraduate student debt for people earning up to $125,000. More recent discussions have involved providing up to $10,000 in student debt relief for people earning up to $125,000. Because the proposal is still very much up for debate, it’s unclear whether the debt relief would be tied to income. We follow the facts and share what we learn so you can make your own decisions. Support our mission today. Still, DeSantis’ claim that "almost 60%" of outstanding student debt comes from graduate school is overstated. How DeSantis got the number DeSantis press secretary Christina Pushaw referenced an article from the Poynter Institute for Media Studies (which owns PolitiFact). The article centered on how Biden could move to relieve student loan debt and cited the Brookings Institution, which said, "56% of the outstanding student debt is owed by households that hold graduate degrees." The key distinction is that the Brookings data focused on households with debt. Many households have undergraduate debt even though someone in the household also has a graduate degree. It doesn’t mean that all the debt held was spent on graduate school. 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 "Assuming that all student loans in a household are graduate school debt if anybody in the household has a graduate degree significantly overstates the amount of graduate school debt," Mark Kantrowitz, a student loan expert, told PolitiFact. So what’s the right number? The Congressional Budget Office looked at the student debt picture in 2017. Of $1.4 trillion in total debt, CBO said, about 60% was spent during undergraduate school. The remaining 40% of outstanding student loan debt was spent during graduate school. So, DeSantis has it almost exactly backward. A majority of the federal student loan dollars disbursed during the 2020-21 school year were borrowed by undergraduate students, per a report from College Board, a nonprofit education group. According to the College Board, 55% of bachelor’s degree recipients graduated with debt, holding an average debt level of more than $25,000. Though an undergraduate student, on average, borrows less money than their graduate school counterparts, the pool of people seeking a graduate education is far smaller. Our ruling DeSantis said "almost 60%" of student loan debt "is graduate school debt." He’s got it backward. About 60% of the outstanding student loan debt came from undergraduate school, according to a 2017 analysis from the Congressional Budget Office. On average, graduate students borrow more money than their undergraduate counterparts, but more people pursue undergraduate degrees. DeSantis’ statement contains an element of truth but ignores critical facts that would give a different impression. We rate it Mostly Fals

NBC News “covered up Hunter Biden laptop story. Billionaire Elon Musk, who says his offer to purchase Twitter is based on his desire to protect free speech, tweeted an unfounded accusation about NBC News’ coverage of Hunter Biden, President Joe Biden’s son. Musk tweeted on May 2 that NBC News "covered up" the story about Hunter Biden’s laptop. It was his response to remarks by Mehdi Hasan, an NBC News show host who called Musk a "petulant & not-so-bright billionaire" and said Musk would hand over Twitter to the far-right. The laptop saga began in October 2020, when the New York Post reported that a computer that appeared to belong to Hunter Biden had been dropped off at a Delaware repair shop in 2019 and was shared with Rudy Giuliani, at that time the personal attorney to then-President Donald Trump. When the New York Post story was published, other news outlets were unable to verify the laptop’s existence or contents. NBC News reported in October 2020 that the reason it wasn’t providing in-depth coverage of the laptop story was simple: "Most mainstream news organizations, including NBC News, have not been granted access to the documents (from the laptop). NBC News asked by email, text, phone call and certified mail, and was ultimately denied." At that time, NBC News said its reporters were not given the kind of access that would have allowed them to verify the authenticity of the documents from the laptop. In March 2022, the New York Times and Washington Post both reported that emails from the laptop had been authenticated. Following those stories, NBC News also reported on new developments in a federal investigation of Hunter Biden, which involves documents from his laptop. But Musk did not include any of that context when tweeting a response to the remarks from NBC’s Hasan. Hasan, in the clip that Musk reacted to, said that a pro-QAnon, pro-neo-Nazi faction of the Republican Party is "poised to expand dramatically" after the 2022 midterm elections, and Trump also potentially could be re-elected president in 2024. 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 If those things happen, Hasan said, "we may look back on this ... as a pivotal moment, when a petulant & not-so-bright billionaire casually bought one of the most influential messaging machines & just handed it to the far-right," referencing Musk’s purchase of Twitter. Musk initially replied, "NBC basically saying Republicans are Nazis …" He then added, "Same org that covered up Hunter Biden laptop story, had Harvey Weinstein story early & killed it & built Matt Lauer his rape office. Lovely people." But NBC News reported in October 2020 that it had "sought to obtain the documents on the alleged Hunter Biden laptop, but (had) been rebuffed." The story noted that Giuliani’s attorney allowed an NBC News correspondent to review some of the materials in person, but that without taking possession of the documents, the news outlet was unable to conduct "the sort of forensic analysis that might help authenticate the emails and documents." NBC News’ 2020 story also said that while the documents from the laptop were alleged to show that Hunter Biden used his father’s influence to get lucrative business deals in Ukraine and China, "the Wall Street Journal and Fox News — among the only news organizations that have been given access to key documents — found that the emails and other records don’t make that case." Our ruling Musk tweeted that NBC News "covered up" the story about Hunter Biden’s laptop. NBC News reported in 2020 that its reporters attempted to cover the laptop story but were not given the kind of access that would have allowed them to verify the authenticity of the documents from the laptop. NBC News said it was not among the select few news organizations that had been given access to key documents. NBC News said its lack of in-depth reporting in 2020 on the laptop was due to people in Trump's circle trying to limit access to the information. That’s not the same as covering up the story. Musk’s tweet gives the impression that NBC News had all the relevant information and chose not to disclose it, and that’s not accurate. We rate this claim Fals

“There are 63 million abortions a year in this country. Abortion rates and the number of overall abortion procedures have been declining in the U.S. over the last decade, data show. But if you were watching a May 3 segment of Fox News’ The Five, you might have walked away with a much different impression as Judge Jeanine Pirro dramatically overstated how many abortions are performed each year. "And my stats that I have," she said, "are that there are 63 million abortions a year in this country. Those are the stats that I heard. That’s a little too much!" Indeed, in a nation where the U.S. Census shows the population of women considered to be of estimated child-bearing age (15 to 44) is about 64.5 million, that would be rather surprising. The actual estimated number of abortions performed in the U.S. each year is much lower than what Pirro claimed. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimated 629,898 abortions occurred in 2019. The CDC collects data from state health departments that volunteer the information. This 2019 total does not include data from California, Maryland or New Hampshire. Approximately 862,320 abortions were reported in 2017, according to the Guttmacher Institute, a research organization that promotes reproductive health and abortion access. Guttmacher’s 2017 report is the organization’s most recent analysis of abortion data collected from health care facilities that perform the operation. The number of abortions performed each year has been steadily declining over the last decade, according to the Guttmacher Institute. From 2011 to 2014, the number of abortions conducted dropped by 6%. From 2014 to 2017, the number of abortions decreased another 7%. When PolitiFact reached out to Fox News for comment, a spokesperson said Pirro was referencing a Fox News article that reported 63 million abortions have occurred in the U.S. since the Supreme Court’s 1973 ruling in Roe v. Wade that legalized abortion nationwide. That’s a significant distinction Pirro did not make on the show; she said there were 63 million abortions "a year." 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 The Fox News article cited an analysis by the National Right to Life Committee as the source for the 63 million estimated abortions over the last 49 years. The NRLC says it made this estimation based on data from the Guttmacher Institute and the CDC. The Guttmacher Institute told PolitiFact that it has not compiled the total number of legal abortions performed since 1973, but it has estimated the pregnancy, birth and abortion rates for women aged 15-44 from 1973 to 2017. Our ruling On a May 2 Fox News segment, Pirro said, "there are 63 million abortions a year in this country." This claim vastly overstates the number of abortions conducted in the U.S. each year. The Guttmacher Institute reported there were roughly 862,320 abortions in 2017. CDC puts the 2019 figure at around 629,898. Pirro appears to have inaccurately referenced an estimation made by the NRLC that 63 million abortions have been performed since the Roe v. Wade decision was handed down in 1973. We rate this claim False. RELATED: Fact-checking 5 claims in the leaked Supreme Court draft opinion on Roe v. Wade RELATED: What would state laws look like in a post-Roe worl

“A STOLEN ELECTION: State totals minus illegal ballot trafficking numbers give President Trump decisive victories in AZ, GA, MI, PA, and WI. The Gateway Pundit, a conservative blog that has promoted false claims about President Donald Trump winning the 2020 election is again saying that Trump won in key states. Trump lost the 2020 election to President Joe Biden, and allegations of a rigged election have been refuted by audits, judges, and officials in Trump’s administration. A headline in the Gateway Pundit on April 24 said: "A STOLEN ELECTION: State Totals Minus Illegal Ballot Trafficking Numbers Give President Trump Decisive Victories in AZ, GA, MI, PA, and WI." The post claims: "President Trump won in a blowout. Now we have the proof." 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 article is written by editor Jim Hoft, who uses testimony from True the Vote, a national conservative poll-watching organization founded in 2010 that has spread misinformation in the past, to make his case. According to Hoft, the group testified to members of the Wisconsin Assembly that 7% of ballots left in ballot drop boxes in Wisconsin were "likely fraudulent." However, True the Vote told Wisconsin lawmakers that they aren’t alleging that the ballots were illegal, but that the process was abused. Hoft takes True the Vote’s disputed claims of an abused process and goes further, saying that 7% of the ballots shouldn’t be counted. Hoft subtracts 7% of each state’s total number of mail-in and early returned ballots from Biden’s total votes to come to the conclusion that Trump won. In two hours of testimony in front of the Wisconsin Assembly’s Committee on Campaigns and Elections on March 24, True the Vote explained why they think that 7% of mail-in ballots were "trafficked" in Wisconsin, Georgia, Arizona, Michigan, and Pennsylvania, or collected by paid operatives and placed in drop boxes. They also allege that there were inaccurate voter rolls and other problems. The group came to this conclusion by looking at location data from cell phone users who made repeat visits to drop boxes and to the headquarters of nongovernmental organizations that were engaged in get-out-the-vote efforts, as well as video surveillance. When asked by lawmakers, the group refused to identify the nongovernmental organizations. 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 But the Wisconsin Elections Commission said that cell phone data showing that people are repeatedly near a ballot drop box, alone, is not evidence of a crime. Kenneth Mayer, a professor of political science at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, said Hoft’s conclusions are "fundamentally dishonest." Mayer said that "ballot harvesting" is a pejorative term and implies fraudulent activity where none has been found. "From beginning to end, it’s a dishonest foundation," Mayer said. "There’s no truth to any of it." Ballot collection or "ballot harvesting," involves the gathering of absentee ballots from voters, sometimes by paid operatives, and delivering them to drop boxes or voting locations. The practice was permitted in Wisconsin in the 2020 election, though whether it can continue is the subject of a court case expected to be decided in June. Wisconsin’s vote totals have been affirmed in multiple investigations. The Associated Press investigated every potential case of voter fraud in six battleground states, including Wisconsin, and found that the disputed ballots represented just .15% of Biden’s margin of victory in those states. The article published in December found that the disputed ballots did not indicate any intent to rig the election, and that in "virtually every" case, individuals were acting alone to cast additional ballots. Hoft did not respond to a message sent through his website. Our ruling A Gateway Pundit headline claims "A STOLEN ELECTION: State totals minus illegal ballot trafficking numbers give President Trump decisive victories in AZ, GA, MI, PA, and WI." The blog post’s assertions rest on the testimony of True the Vote, a conservative poll-watching organization. The group told Wisconsin Assembly members that they weren’t alleging that the votes were illegal, but that the process was abused. Gateway Pundit assumed that all of the mail-in ballots True the Vote cast doubt on are illegal and should be thrown out, and that all of them were for Biden. This claim is not accurate. We rate this False. RELATED: All of our fact-checks about elections RELATED: The faulty premise of the ‘2,000 mules’ trailer about voting by mail in the 2020 electi

“White House physician demands Biden’s immediate resignation following his ‘obvious’ cognitive decline. Misinformers frequently share video clips of President Joe Biden with his actions or comments taken out of context — implying that he shakes hands with thin air, or portraying him as confused. Now, a social media post falsely suggests someone with official access to Biden’s medical information is calling for him to resign. "White House physician demands Biden’s immediate resignation following his ‘obvious’ cognitive decline," says an April 30 post 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.) The post, which does not cite or link to a source for its claim, mischaracterizes who has called for Biden’s resignation. The current White House physician, Dr. Kevin O’Connor, said in November that Biden is fit to carry out his duties. O’Connor’s assessment followed a full medical evaluation. There is no evidence, such as news reports, that O’Connor has expressed concern about Biden’s cognitive abilities. However, U.S. Rep. Ronny Jackson, who was the White House physician under former Presidents Barack Obama and Donald Trump and is now a Republican representing Texas’ 13th Congressional District, has called for Biden’s resignation, saying he has declined cognitively. 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 Jackson was the subject of a years-long investigation by the Department of Defense, which found that he "made ‘sexual and denigrating’ comments about a female subordinate, violated the policy on drinking alcohol on a presidential trip and took prescription-strength sleeping medication that prompted worries from his colleagues about his ability to provide proper medical care," the Associated Press reported in March 2021. Jackson and other Republican lawmakers have demanded that Biden take a cognitive assessment. Their efforts are part of a years-long campaign by Trump and his allies to paint 79-year-old Biden as weak and senile. Our ruling A Facebook post says, "White House physician demands Biden’s immediate resignation following his ‘obvious’ cognitive decline." The post misleads about who has called for Biden’s resignation; it is not the current White House physician. The current physician has said Biden is fit to carry out the duties of his office. The demand came from a former White House physician, who is not Biden’s doctor and who has joined a chorus of Republican voices that try to paint Biden as senile. We rate this claim False.

“Paying taxes is optional!! Allowing a shopper with fewer items to cut in front of you when you’re in the checkout line with your groceries is optional. Pausing to hold the door open for someone is optional. Ordering a dessert when you’re out to dinner is optional, too. Paying taxes in the U.S., however, is not optional — no matter what you might hear from videos circulating online. One such video appeared in an April 23 Facebook post, with a text overlay that falsely proclaimed: "Paying taxes is optional!!" The video, which originated on TikTok in mid-April, shows a man nodding and pointing to some sort of pamphlet while a voice narrates. "Those in power have a big secret," the voice says. "Paying tax is optional." He goes on to claim that people aren’t obligated to pay fines or appear for court dates, among other things. Just before the video cuts off on Facebook, the narrator mentions the concept of a "straw man." 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.) Despite long-standing claims to the contrary, paying your taxes isn’t voluntary or optional. It’s required by U.S. law — a fact the Internal Revenue Service makes clear on its website. "Section 1 of the Internal Revenue Code clearly imposes a tax on the taxable income of individuals, estates, and trusts," reads the site. "Failure to pay taxes could subject the non-complying individual to criminal penalties, including fines and imprisonment, as well as civil penalties." The law is just as direct. It breaks down each type of taxpayer — married individuals filing joint returns, heads of households, unmarried individuals and others who must pay taxes — and lists the tax imposed on each person based on their income. 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 subsequent section of the code says people "shall pay such tax" to the IRS when it is due. Choosing not to pay the taxes you owe could result in fines, criminal charges or your property being seized, among other things. Tax evasion is a felony. Very few people go to jail for tax crimes, but it has happened. In 1931, mobster Al Capone was famously sentenced to 11 years in federal prison for tax evasion and prohibition charges. The IRS has a response to the "straw man" conspiracy, too: It won’t get you out of paying your taxes. It’s an old argument that the agency has been dismissing for more than 15 years. Promoters of the straw man conspiracy believe that along with every birth certificate and social security number issued, the U.S. government sets up a fake identity or corporate trust in a newborn’s name. As a result, that person’s rights — and their obligations, including tax bills — are split between the physical person and the ones assigned to the baby’s fake identity or corporate shell account — also called a "straw man," by the theory’s supporters. "These people argue that they’re not subject to U.S. laws or taxes because their tax bill is made out to a legal entity with a well-funded bank account that shares their name but isn’t actually them," explained a History.com article. "If you’re confused," the article said, "that’s because conspiracy theories don’t usually make sense." The IRS said in 2005 that taxpayers "cannot avoid income tax on the erroneous theory that the government has created a separate and distinct entity or ‘straw man,’ in place of the taxpayer and that the taxpayer is not responsible for the tax obligations of the ‘straw man.’" "The argument has no merit and is frivolous," read the IRS bulletin. In a 2014 publication titled "The Truth About Frivolous Tax Arguments," the IRS said: "The notion of secret accounts assigned to each citizen is pure fantasy." Our ruling A video claimed that "Paying taxes is optional!!" Claims that a secret "straw man" account exempts you from paying taxes are tied to a complex, persistent and unfounded conspiracy theory. Federal law dictates who owes taxes, how much is owed and when a tax payment is due. Failing to pay the taxes you owe could result in fines, criminal charges or your property being seized. We rate this claim Pants on Fir

Conservatives gained Twitter followers after the company announced its deal with Elon Musk because "Twitter lifted a broad anti-conservative, anti-Trump shadow ban. Soon after Tesla CEO Elon Musk struck a deal to buy Twitter, many prominent users of the platform noticed dramatic swings in the number of followers they had. Several outspoken conservatives gained thousands of followers. On the left, some lost followers in droves. Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, gained more than 50,000 new followers the day after Musk’s April 25 announcement, according to Social Blade, a social media analytics tracker. Former President Barack Obama, the most followed person on Twitter, dropped thousands of followers in the same time. A USA Today analysis of the official congressional Twitter accounts for 529 members of the House and Senate found that 72% of the Republican accounts picked up followers in the 24 hours after the announcement, while all but two Democratic accounts lost followers. Twitter said in a statement to PolitiFact and other news organizations that the follower count fluctuations in either direction were because of new accounts signing up and existing accounts deactivating, rather than any company action. But that answer hasn’t satisfied everyone. On his primetime TV show, Fox News host Sean Hannity offered a different explanation for the boosts to conservative accounts — one involving a nefarious Silicon Valley conspiracy. "It's almost as if Twitter employees lifted a broad anti-conservative, anti-Trump shadow ban, which we all knew was taking place anyway, in an effort to cover their tracks before the new boss takes over," Hannity said in the April 27 segment. "Now, Twitter claims that there's nothing nefarious at play here, but they've said that all before." Shadow-banning, generally speaking, means making someone’s posts invisible to everyone but them or otherwise limiting their reach on the internet. The Fox News host, whose own Twitter account gained more than 165,000 followers in the three days after Twitter announced Musk’s purchase, referenced the company’s decision shortly before the 2020 presidential election to limit sharing options on an unverified New York Post story about a laptop belonging to Hunter Biden, the son of President Joe Biden. But Hannity provided no evidence to prove that the bumps to conservatives’ follower counts happened because Twitter employees had lifted a "shadow ban" — or that the platform had ever been systematically suppressing conservative accounts in such a way. A Fox News spokesperson pointed to the USA Today analysis of the follower count fluctuations. "We don’t have any systematic studies providing evidence of a shadow ban," said Anjana Susarla, a Michigan State University professor who has studied information systems, social media analytics and the economics of artificial intelligence. "It does appear that the fluctuations are organic and driven by shifts in the user base of Twitter." No evidence of shadow ban Caroline Orr Bueno, a postdoctoral research associate at the University of Maryland who has looked into the recent follower count changes, said what she and other online researchers have seen suggests that conservatives added followers because people responded to the Musk news by joining Twitter, creating new accounts or logging into old accounts that were long dormant. Orr Bueno told PolitiFact that she reviewed preliminary data on the Twitter followers behind a number of accounts belonging to conservative political figures and media outlets such as Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis and Breitbart News. Of those who newly followed those accounts in the 24 hours after the Musk deal became public, about 60% had created their profiles that week. Featured Fact-check Tucker Carlson stated on October 27, 2022 in a TV segment The United States is "about to run out of diesel fuel ... by the Monday of Thanksgiving week." By Andy Nguyen • November 7, 2022 "This does not support the idea that the increase in followers among many top conservative accounts was due to accounts being reinstated or ‘surfaced’ after being shadowbanned," Orr Bueno said. There is also no evidence that Twitter changed any policies following the announcement of the Musk takeover, Orr Bueno said. In fact, various news organizations reported that Twitter had locked down its employees’ abilities to make changes to the platform in light of the acquisition. The Twitter page of Elon Musk is seen on a computer in Sausalito, Calif., on April 25, 2022. (AP) Hannity’s claim echoes years of accusations from Republicans, including former President Donald Trump, that Twitter has shadow banned their content. Those allegations ramped up in 2018, after Vice reported that Twitter was limiting the visibility of some prominent Republicans in the automatic drop-down lists that generate when users start typing in the platform’s search bar. But Twitter attributed the autofilling problem detailed in the Vice report to a glitch and quickly fixed it. Shortly after, then-Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey called into Hannity’s radio show and told him, "We do not shadow ban according to political ideology or viewpoint or content. Period." The company’s website says the same: "Simply put, we don’t shadow ban! Ever." Some recent research has supported that stance, including a 2021 New York University study that called conservative allegations of censorship "unfounded." One Twitter study from 2021 found that right-leaning news outlets were algorithmically amplified more than left-leaning news outlets, and that tweets from right-leaning accounts outpace tweets from left-leaning accounts in the U.S. and other countries. The study was peer-reviewed. An April study from researchers at Yale University, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and the University of Exeter followed 9,000 accounts, half Republican and half Democrat, for six months. The authors found that Republican accounts were more likely to be suspended, but they said the divide was not conclusive evidence of "political bias" because "users’ misinformation sharing was as predictive of suspension as was their political orientation." "I know of no academic research that concludes there is a strong systemic bias — liberal or conservative — in how social media platforms identify what to show to users or in how they enforce their terms of service in content moderation decisions," Steven L. Johnson, associate professor of commerce at the University of Virginia, told PolitiFact in March. Some Republicans, including Trump, have had accounts suspended, restricted, or marked with fact-checking labels. But those penalties have generally resulted from specific violations of Twitter’s community guidelines, including its rules around spreading COVID-19 misinformation. Twitter also has policies against spam and platform manipulation, the enforcement of which has in the past led some users to notice sharp and sometimes sudden drops in their follower counts. Our ruling Hannity said that conservatives gained Twitter followers after the company announced its deal with Musk because "Twitter lifted a broad anti-conservative, anti-Trump shadow ban." Hannity provided no evidence that right-leaning accounts on Twitter were subject to a shadow ban before Musk agreed to buy the company, or that prominent conservatives saw their follower counts spike because such a ban was "lifted" as employees "cover(ed) their tracks." Twitter locked down employees’ abilities to make changes to its platform after announcing the deal with Musk, according to news reports. The company said that the follower count fluctuations were organic, triggered by people creating and deactivating accounts. Independent researchers have said the same. We rate Hannity’s statement Fals

Jackie Chan is dead Celebrities are regularly killed off on social media in spite of the fact that they are alive and well in real life. A new entry in this particular genre of misinformation was circulating online on May 2. "Rest in peace to the great legend that made our childhood extra ordinary," a Facebook post said. "Jackie Chan." 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 the actor and martial artist but did not immediately hear back about the post. However, we found no evidence to corroborate it. The account that posted it is a page that describes itself as "just for fun," and says "pleasee support me and my pagee thank you sweetheart’s." 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 Jackie Chan’s verified Facebook page, meanwhile, says nothing about his supposed passing, nor gives any indication that something is amiss. Chan posted most recently on April 27, writing to remember an actor who had actually died: Kenneth Tsang. Chan shared a similar message on his verified Twitter account and on his website on the same date. There were no announcements of this death on either of those platforms either. Chan has been the subject of death hoaxes before. RELATED VIDEO In March 2011, a post on his Facebook account said: "Jackie is alive and well. He did not suffer a heart attack and die, as was reported on many social networking sites and in online news reports. Jackie is fine and is busy preparing for the filming of his next movie." Rumors that he was dead appeared online in March of this year, too. IMDb shows that multiple movies that Chan is involved with are in post- or pre-production, and he’s credited as a producer on several upcoming films. We rate this death hoax Pants on Fir

“The President of Ukraine owns a $35 million home in Florida and has $1.2 billion in a overseas bank account. A Facebook post shared false claims about Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, including the allegation that he owns a $35 million home in Florida. The April 17 post was shared by Nicolas Tetrault, a former Canadian politician, and features a TikTok video of a screenshot of another social media post. "The president of Ukraine owns a 35 million dollar home in Florida, and has $1.2 billion in [an] overseas bank account," the post in the TikTok video read. "Zelenskyy owns 15 homes, three private planes and has a monthly income of 11 million dollars." The post implies Zelenskyy misappropriated Ukrainian aid money to buy the homes and planes. In a caption with the video, Tetrault echoed the post’s sentiments and also falsely claimed Zelenskyy was the cousin of billionaire philanthropist George Soros — which PolitiFact rated Pants on Fire. Tetrault’s post has since been deleted, but it’s a claim that still circulates on social media. 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 video does not provide proof to back up its claims, and the TikTok account that shared it no longer exists. The earliest mention of the claim we could find on the internet was from a post on Feb. 23, 2022, on a website called EPrimeFeed. The site appears to only publish posts written by anonymous authors, and the claim was published the day before Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. The post only cites the Nezygar channel on the messaging app Telegram as the source of the claim and offers no other evidence to corroborate the allegation. A 2018 investigation by the investigative journalism site Proekt found the Nezygar channel was controlled by the Russian government. Featured Fact-check Viral image stated on October 22, 2022 in an Instagram post A CNN headline shows Uganda’s president saying he doesn’t support Ukraine because it would be “disgusting.” By Ciara O'Rourke • October 24, 2022 Tetrault appeared to provide context in his post by mentioning the Panama Papers and quoting an unnamed source about Zelenskyy’s use of offshore companies. The Panama Papers were a series of documents made public in 2016 from the offshore law firm Mossack Fonseca. The papers detailed how the wealthy and powerful were able to hide their money and circumvent taxes. However, Zelenskyy was not named in the Panama Papers and the unnamed source Tetrault used was from an investigation done by the Organized Crime and Corruption Reporting Project, or OCCRP, on the Pandora Papers. Similar to the Panama Papers but larger in scope, the Pandora Papers were a trove of financial documents made public in 2021 that outlined how wealthy individuals used offshore tax havens and, in some cases, money laundering to hide their assets. The papers revealed Zelenskyy and several of his allies oversaw several offshore companies that were formed as early as 2012, the OCCRP reported. The companies were used over the years by people close to Zelenskyy to purchase several expensive properties in London. The Pandora Papers don’t reveal how much money the offshore companies held, nor were there any mentions of a $35 million home in Florida, private planes or Zelenskyy having a monthly income of $11 million. However, the documents did reveal some of his assets included three offshore companies, property and cars. An internet search of property records in Florida yielded no results for anything connected to Zelenskyy or the offshore companies named in the Pandora Papers. We did not find Zelenskyy’s name on any deed or mortgage records. Our ruling A now-deleted Facebook post shared the claim that Ukraine President Zelenskyy owned a $35 million home in Florida among several other assets. The claim appears to have originated from a Russian-backed source, and no other corroborating evidence for the claim could be found. While leaked financial documents showed Zelenskyy owned several offshore companies and other assets like cars and property, they made no mention of a Florida home. We rate this claim Fals

Sen. Mark Kelly voted “for benefits to illegals. Sen. Mark Kelly, D-Ariz. is back on the ballot this year after winning a special election in December 2020. An ad by a national Republican group is challenging his reelection and attacking his voting record on benefits for immigrants illegally in the country. The National Republican Senatorial Committee’s ad begins with the narrator saying Kelly "votes the party line in Washington and says the opposite when he’s home in Arizona." The ad goes on to make a number of claims, including that Kelly voted "for benefits to illegals." We asked the NRSC for evidence and it pointed us to two votes related to the stimulus checks provided during the COVID-19 pandemic. We found the NRSC claim is not accurate since none of Kelly’s votes on the issue made it possible for immigrants who were in the country illegally to become eligible for the stimulus checks. NRSC's ad "Against Arizona" Who was eligible for the Economic Impact Payments? Over the course of the pandemic, Congress has approved three rounds of stimulus checks. Each of these has had slightly different eligibility criteria. Immigrants in the country illegally largely have not been eligible for any of the payments. According to the IRS, to be eligible for any of these checks, people must have filed their taxes using a Social Security number, which immigrants illegally in the country generally do not have. The IRS issues Individual Taxpayer Identification Numbers to people who aren’t eligible to have a Social Security number so they can pay income taxes. This can include immigrants in the country legally or illegally. What is Kelly’s voting record on the issue? In February 2021, Sen. Todd Young, R-Ind., introduced an amendment "to establish a deficit-neutral reserve fund" that he said would "ensure that any new round of economic impact payments does not go to those in this country illegally." Kelly voted in favor of the amendment, breaking away from most Democrats who voted against it. 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 A deficit-neutral reserve fund is often used by legislators to "express support for a cause and there is often no follow-up legislation," Steven S. Smith, a political science professor at Washington University, told PolitiFact via email. "They are inconsequential in the vast mast of cases." A day after this vote, Kelly voted to strike the text of three provisions from the proposed federal budget, including the deficit-neutral reserve fund that he had previously supported, the NRSC said. Kelly’s vote, however, didn’t change the qualifications for the stimulus checks. Because the vote was in reference to a deficit-neutral reserve fund, its inclusion in the federal budget would not have had any impact on the eligibility qualifications laid out for stimulus checks under the American Rescue Plan, which already didn’t include immigrants in the country illegally. The second vote cited by the NRSC was on an amendment to the American Rescue Plan presented by Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas. The amendment sought to "ensure that the 2021 Recovery Rebates are not provided to illegal immigrants." Kelly voted "No" on that amendment, and the amendment was defeated. NRSC spokesperson T.W. Arrighi issued a statement on Kelly’s vote, saying: "Senator Kelly voted with Republicans a few weeks ago against a provision to allow stimulus checks for illegal immigrants. Today, he flip-flopped and stood with Bernie Sanders, Chuck Schumer and Senate Democrats to send Americans’ taxpayer dollars to illegal immigrants." However, the amendment was largely symbolic, since the American Rescue Plan, as proposed by Democrats, already prevented immigrants in the country illegally from being eligible for the checks. The American Rescue Plan, like previous legislations, required that people have Social Security numbers in order to get a check. It’s also worth noting that immigrants illegally in the country are generally ineligible for most federal benefits, such as the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program. Our ruling A video ad from the NRSC claimed Kelly voted "for benefits to illegals," citing two votes related to the stimulus checks sent out during the COVID-19 pandemic. However, immigrants in the country illegally, for the most part, have not been eligible for any of the three versions of stimulus checks sent out during the pandemic since a Social Security number is required for eligibility. Neither of the two votes cited by the NRSC changed these eligibility requirements. The statement is not accurate. We rate it Fals

Matt Dolan sponsored Michael Bloomberg's “red-flag gun confiscation law, letting the people reporting your social media posts send SWAT teams to your house to take your guns. Did a Republican U.S. Senate candidate sponsor legislation to allow citizens to send SWAT teams to confiscate guns from gun owners? That’s the attack made by a gun-rights group against Matt Dolan, an Ohio state senator who’s seeking the GOP nomination for U.S. Senate in Ohio’s May 3 primary. In a minute-long video ad, Ohio Gun Owners said that another candidate for the Republican nomination, former Ohio state treasurer Josh Mandel, would expand gun rights. Then the ad alluded to 2020 Democratic presidential candidate Michael Bloomberg, a gun control advocate. It claimed that Dolan "sponsored Bloomberg's red-flag gun confiscation law, letting the people reporting your social media posts send SWAT teams to your house to take your guns." This description of the bill distorts how a policy Dolan sponsored would have worked. Red-flag laws, which have been adopted in some states, provide a mechanism for a court to order that guns be taken from people who exhibit dangerous behavior before they harm themselves or others. An Ohio bill that Dolan sponsored, which did not become law, would have required a court to order gun confiscations. But it would have applied to people being evaluated for involuntary hospitalization, not to people in the community at large. It would not have allowed for citizens to direct SWAT team confiscations based merely on a person’s social media posts. Red-flag laws require court review Under red-flag laws — also known as extreme risk protection order laws — police or citizens can petition a court for an order removing guns from a person who is in the community. Nineteen states and the District of Columbia have adopted such laws, according to the Giffords Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence. That includes 14 laws that came after the 2018 mass school shooting in Parkland, Florida, according to Stateline, a project of the Pew Charitable Trusts. In December 2019, Bloomberg, a former New York mayor, proposed a number of gun-control measures, including a federal red-flag law, as part of his presidential campaign platform. Dolan’s proposal different than red-flag In October 2019, Dolan introduced a gun bill known as "STRONG Ohio" in the wake of a mass shooting in Dayton. It was known as Republican Gov. Mike DeWine’s bill. It did not receive a vote and did not become law. DeWine initially had indicated that his gun bill would include a red-flag provision, but one was not included, disappointing gun-control advocates. At the time, DeWine’s administration said it opted not to include a red-flag provision because one that protected gun owners’ due process proved "inadequate and unworkable." Instead, DeWine proposed expanding the state's "pink slip" system, which places mentally ill Ohioans in hospitals for up to 72 hours, to include people dealing with chronic alcoholism or drug dependency. After a hearing, a court could decide to take away that person’s guns. Featured Fact-check Liquid Death stated on October 27, 2022 in an ad In Georgia, it's "illegal to give people water within 150 feet of a polling place" and "punishable by up to a year in prison." By Tom Kertscher • November 7, 2022 Writing about the bill at the time, Dolan suggested that this provision was essentially the same as a red-flag law, but it was taking a "constitutional route to achieve the same goals." Dolan wrote: "SB 221 builds upon current Ohio law, which allows a person to report an individual to authorities for an involuntary exam assessing threatening behavior, mental illness and/or addiction. The results of the medical exam are then utilized to, first, determine if medical intervention is needed to treat the individual, and, second, if the individual is mentally unfit to have access to firearms during this treatment. ... "If, after a full due-process hearing, a court finds the individual should be prohibited from having a gun, law enforcement or family members can, under court order, safely remove the firearms from the individual." Ohio Gun Owners responded to PolitiFact’s request for evidence behind its claim by alluding to the pink slip system. But the group did not provide any other supporting information. We didn’t receive a reply from Dolan’s campaign. In states with red-flag laws, guns can be taken temporarily from a person who is reported to police as being dangerous until a court hearing is held on whether the guns should be removed for a longer period. The Ohio law applies only when a person is being considered for forced hospitalization for, for example, mental illness. There is no factual basis to idea that, under the Ohio bill, a gun owner’s guns could have been taken away — by SWAT teams or by any other law enforcement means — simply due to a person reporting the gun owner’s social media posts to authorities. Court orders must be issued. Even with the more expansive red-flag laws, a judge or other judicial official such as a court commissioner hears a request from police or a citizen and decides whether to issue a preliminary order without holding a hearing or notifying the gun owner on whether the gun owner’s guns should be seized. These orders are temporary and last a couple of days to a few weeks, depending on the state. The gun owner then has a chance to make his or her case at a hearing before a judge decides on a final order. That order commonly lasts for a year. Ohio race could help decide Senate control The Ohio Senate seat is opening because Republican Rob Portman, who was elected in 2010, is not seeking reelection. Besides Dolan and Mandel, the Republican candidates include businessman Mike Gibbons, former Ohio Republican Party chair Jane Timken and author and venture capitalist J.D. Vance. The leading Democratic candidates are U.S. Rep. Tim Ryan and consumer protection attorney Morgan Harper. Overall, the race is rated by campaign watchers as "leans" Republican, "likely" Republican and "solid" Republican. Our ruling Ohio Gun Owners claimed that Dolan "sponsored Bloomberg's red-flag gun confiscation law, letting the people reporting your social media posts send SWAT teams to your house to take your guns." Dolan sponsored a bill in Ohio, which did not become law, that would have allowed for guns to be taken from a person if a court determined, in certain situations, that person was a danger to himself or others. The bill would not have allowed for confiscations by SWAT teams based on citizens reporting a person’s social media posts. We rate the claim False. RELATED: Fact-checks in the 2022 Ohio Senate race RELATED: The race for the Ohio U.S. Senate seat: A guide RELATED: Fact-checking ads in the 2022 electio

We’ve reduced crime to its lowest level in 27 years Orland Park Mayor Keith Pekau claims the village’s crime is the lowest it has been in 27 years. Since Pekau first announced his GOP bid last year for Illinois’ 6th Congressional District, he has repeatedly touted Orland Park’s low crime numbers. "We’ve reduced crime to its lowest level in 27 years," Pekau said in a recent Facebook campaign ad with more than 88,000 views. So we decided to check. One of Pekau’s campaign spokesman said the mayor was referring specifically to index crimes, which include larceny, theft, motor vehicle theft, homicide, burglary, rape, aggravated assault, robbery and arson. These crimes are reported to the FBI to create their annual crime index. Illinois includes human trafficking in their list of index crimes. When asked for evidence to back Pekau’s claim, the spokesman sent a presentation former Orland Park Police Chief Joe Mitchell gave to the Village Board during a meeting earlier this year. The chief showed the board a chart showing the number of crimes each year from 1996 through 2021. In 1996, there were 1,295 index crimes reported, compared to 628 in 2021. We also checked the chief’s numbers with the Federal Bureau of Investigation, which collects crime statistics data from law enforcement agencies throughout the nation. The chief’s numbers match, at least through 2020. The village’s 628 reported crimes in 2021 have not yet been officially reported by the FBI. Never in the past 27 years have there been fewer reported crimes in Orland Park, the statistics show. Mitchell told the board he credited his police force, new technology and community engagement for the downward trend.Mitchell also said a "crucial" tool has been a stepped up social media campaign called, "Wanted Wednesdays" in which the community is asked to help track down suspects. Featured Fact-check Instagram posts stated on October 15, 2022 in Instagram post Seattle authorities are investigating a string of serial killings. By Michael Majchrowicz • October 17, 2022 Wanted Wednesday: It was all a BLUR! A victim was pickpocketed at the local Jewel grocery store. What a SPECTACLE. I-RIS we knew who they were. Don't LASH out, but if you recognEYES them, call 708-349-4111 or email [email protected] #wantedwednesday #orlandparkpolice pic.twitter.com/y7eCxpYyiz— Orland Park Police Dept (@OrlandParkpd) January 6, 2021 The report showed crime generally fluctuated over 25 years, including a spike in violent crime in 2017 — the year Pekau took office. The 35 reported violent crimes in 2017 was more than in any other year between 2012 and 2021, according to statistics provided by the police department. We also reached out to Orland Park Police to determine whether any changes in police tactics or policies may have contributed to the downturn of reported crimes, but our phone messages were not returned. Just because reported crimes are down in Orland Park, that doesn’t mean there is no crime problem. Consider the Orland Square Mall, which continues to be the "busiest beat" for criminal related offenses according to the most recent OPD annual report. After several instances of shoplifting and brawls — some of which included gunfire, the mall owner Simon Property Group, Inc. implemented a first-ever curfew last year. After 3 p.m. on Fridays and Saturdays, anyone younger than 18 must now be accompanied by an adult. Ruling Pekau claims crime in Orland Park is at its lowest level in 27 years. Index crimes are currently at their lowest, but the crime problems in some areas remain. Pekau also did not mention the high number of violent crimes reported in 2017, the year he took office. We rate this claim True. TRUE – The statement is accurate and there’s nothing significant missin

The “Franklin scandal” broke in 1989 “when hundreds of children were apparently flown around the US to be abused by high ranking ‘Establishment’ members. A recent Facebook post talks about a supposed scandal involving the abuse of hundreds of children in the 1980s as fact. But it’s been investigated and found baseless by multiple grand juries. "Research eventually led to the Franklin scandal that broke in 1989 when hundreds of children were apparently flown around the US to be abused by high ranking ‘Establishment’ members," said a November 2021 Facebook post that continues to get traction on the social media platform. 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.) In late 1988, after the failure of the Franklin Community Federal Credit Union in Omaha, Nebraska, rumors started to spread that money from the union had been used to pay for child prostitution. "Businessmen, media personalities, lawmen and educators," were among those implicated, as well as Lawrence E. King Jr., who headed the credit union and was an affiliate of the National Black Republican council, an affiliate of the Republican Party, the Washington Post reported at the time. Featured Fact-check Instagram posts stated on October 15, 2022 in Instagram post Seattle authorities are investigating a string of serial killings. By Michael Majchrowicz • October 17, 2022 King, who was also accused of embezzling millions from the credit union, called the sexual allegations against him "garbage." The Post in 1990 reported the allegations were "based on still unverified reports from half a dozen young people who reportedly have described being auctioned as love slaves, flown to the coasts for wild parties, or plied with drugs and alcohol as part of a bisexual bacchanal." A county grand jury in Nebraska concluded the "lurid reports of child sex abuse, drug trafficking, pornography, and political intrigue" were a "carefully crafted hoax," the New York Times reported in 1990. The grand jury didn’t identify who was suspected of engineering the hoax but indicted two people on grounds they had given perjured testimony. A couple months later, a federal grand jury agreed that the allegations were unfounded. We rate this post False.

“Tylenol is the #1 cause of acute liver failure in the US with 27% of people dying & kills at least 100,000 per year from its use. You probably don’t spend much time thinking about the safety of the bottle of Tylenol tucked inside your medicine cabinet, but a post circulating on social media seems to want you to do just that. "Did you know that Tylenol is the #1 cause of acute liver failure in the US with 27% of people dying & kills at least 100,000 per year from its use?" read the April 21 Facebook post. It also alleged Tylenol is unsafe for pregnant women and children and concluded by promoting the use of herbal remedies instead. 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.) PolitiFact found no evidence to suggest Tylenol itself is the No. 1 cause of acute liver failure in the U.S. And there are simply too few overdose-related deaths per year to ever reach 100,000 per year. (Screengrab from Facebook) Acetaminophen, the main active ingredient in Tylenol, is a commonly used fever reducer and pain reliever. It is the most common drug ingredient in the U.S. and each week 23% of adults use a medication that contains acetaminophen, according to the Consumer Healthcare Products Association. Tylenol contains acetaminophen, but so do many other over-the-counter drugs, such as NyQuil, DayQuil and Excedrin. As with all medications, some people might have an allergic reaction, and everyone has to follow the dosage instructions. The label on a box of regular strength Tylenol, for example, warns of the potential for severe liver damage if the medication is taken incorrectly. Annette Reichel, a spokesperson for Tylenol, said the drug has over 60 years of use to show that it is safe. "When used as directed at recommended doses, Tylenol does not cause acute liver failure," Reichel said. "However, per the Tylenol (over-the-counter) Drug Facts label, severe liver damage may occur if an individual takes more than 4000 mg of acetaminophen in 24 hours." For Extra Strength Tylenol, that means liver damage may occur if someone took two 500-milligram caplets over the recommended dose within a single day. That’s not a lot of pills, a fact that has raised concerns that the dosage guidelines should be tighter. That doesn’t, however, change the data problems with this claim. Acetaminophen and liver damage Acetaminophen has been tied to acute liver failure, the condition mentioned in the post. In fact, research referenced by the U.S. Food & Drug Administration shows that acetaminophen is the No. 1 cause of acute liver failure in the U.S. 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 Many medications contain acetaminophen, however, meaning that Tylenol, by itself might not be the leading cause of acute liver failure. Dr. William Lee, a professor of internal medicine at the University of Texas Southwestern Medical School, has researched the connection between acetaminophen and acute liver failure for more than 20 years. His research into acetaminophen and acute liver failure has continued to show that acetaminophen overdose, both accidental and intentional, is the "leading cause of acute liver injury and acute liver failure in the developed world." "I think that’s a little specious to blame it on Tylenol, specifically, because (acetaminophen) is such a ubiquitous product," Lee said. About 1,600 to 2,000 cases of acute liver failure occur in the U.S. each year, according to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and Lee’s research. The condition is considered rare. Far from all cases are fatal. One 2005 study conducted by Lee and University of Washington Medical Center researchers found that of 275 patients who were diagnosed with acetaminophen-induced acute liver failure, 178 patients (65%) survived, 74 (27%) died without transplantation and 23 (8%) underwent liver transplants. That 27% mortality finding could be the origin of the 27% in the Facebook post, but the finding was not linked to Tylenol specifically. From 1990 to 1998, FDA research indicated there were about 458 deaths per year related to acetaminophen-associated overdoses. Even if each of the people who died from overdosing on acetaminophen had taken Tylenol — and there is no indication that that is the case — that number is still nowhere near the 100,000 deaths the post alleges. Lee said the most he has found is about 250 acute liver failure cases per year — only some were due to acetaminophen, and fewer still were fatal. Even assuming his nationwide registry missed cases, "you’re never going to get up to" 100,000 deaths per year. "There’s no way that’s correct," Lee said. He said that there are many people who use acetaminophen medications safely every day to manage chronic pain. When people follow the dosing limitations included with the medication, "they’re never going to get into trouble with that level of medication," Lee said. Our ruling A post claimed that "Tylenol is the #1 cause of acute liver failure in the US with 27% of people dying and kills at least 100,000 per year from its use." Acetaminophen is the active ingredient in Tylenol and hundreds of other medications. Acetaminophen overdose is the leading cause of acute liver failure in the U.S., but the condition is rare — there are around 2,000 cases annually — and not always fatal. About 450 deaths per year are related to acetaminophen-associated overdoses, according to the FDA. That number is nowhere near 100,000 deaths — and there is no reason to think that each of those deaths was due to Tylenol, specifically. We rate this claim Fals

“Hillary Clinton is in jail at Gitmo at the moment. Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton eulogized her friend and predecessor, Madeleine Albright, at Albright’s funeral service on April 27. According to an unfounded Facebook post, Clinton was locked up at Guantanamo Bay the next day. "Hillary Clinton is in jail at Gitmo at the moment," the April 28 post said. But like the claims of Clinton’s incarceration and even death at Guantanamo Bay that came before this one, it’s unfounded and false. 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 On April 28 — the day of her supposed jailing in Cuba — she posted on Facebook about Hololcaust Days of Remembrance and recalled a visit she made to Jerusalem in 2009. Later that day, she shared a photo of herself paying tribute to Albright and recalled a recent phone call with her fellow former secretary of state. On April 29, Clinton tweeted an appeal to Americans to consider sponsoring a Ukrainian family fleeing from the warzone there. Understandably, she didn’t post anything on social media about being detained, because she wasn’t. There are no news reports to support this unfounded claim, nor any other credible sources. We rate it Pants on Fir

“Elon Musk just fired the entire Twitter board of directors. On April 25, Twitter announced that it had agreed to sell the company to entrepreneur Elon Musk for approximately $44 billion. The news was cheered by some of the social media platform’s critics. When, on April 28, a Facebook post started to circulate declaring that Musk had just "F-I-R-E-D the entire Twitter board," some users gloated. "GOOD," one account said. Another just posted multiple laughing while crying emojis. But others still were skeptical that this latest development was accurate. 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 Twitter about the claim but did not immediately hear 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 But Musk doesn’t own Twitter yet. The deal won’t be final until shareholders vote to approve it. Twitter hasn’t said when that vote will take place, but there’s some speculation it could happen at the company’s annual meeting on May 25. On April 18, before the board agreed to sell Twitter, Musk tweeted that director salaries "will be $0 if my bid succeeds," saving approximately $3 million annually. But it’s not accurate that Musk just fired the board. We rate that claim False.

“Italian football agent Mino Raiola has died after suffering from an illness. UPDATE, May 3, 2022: On April 30, two days after Mino Raiola refuted premature claims of his death, his family announced that he had died. Publication of this fact-check preceded that announcement. Mino Raiola, a powerful and high-earning soccer agent, has been hospitalized in Milan, Italy, with an undisclosed medical condition. He is not, however, dead, despite online rumors falsely describing his demise. "Italian football agent Mino Raiola has died after suffering from an illness," read an April 28 Facebook post featuring a Raiola’s photo and the dates 1967-2022. "RIP." 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 Raiola was alive enough to tweet his "current health status for the ones wondering" later that day. "Pissed off," he said. "Second time in 4 months they kill me. Seem also able to ressuscitate (sic)." RELATED VIDEO This followed comments from Dr. Alberto Zangrillo at the San Raffaele hospital in Milan who said "I’m outraged by the phone calls from pseudo-journalists speculating on the life of a man who is fighting to survive," the Guardian reported. The newspaper said that Raiola "is understood to have been living with a serious illness since January." We rate this post False.

Elon Musk tweeted, “The fact that an 18 year old can't take out a $10,000 business loan” but “can take out a $100,000 student loan tells you everything you need to know. An image making its rounds on social media shows a purported tweet from Tesla CEO Elon Musk lamenting the logic of letting an 18-year-old amass six figures of student debt but not allowing them to acquire a business loan. "The fact that an 18 year old can't take out a $10,000 business loan. But can take out a $100,000 student loan tells you everything you need to know," reads an April 25 Facebook post showing the supposed tweet (poor grammar included). 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.) Musk has, on occasion, made national headlines for bizarre remarks on social media. Shortly after announcing a majority stake in Twitter, for example, Musk referred to himself as being in "goblin mode." But PolitiFact found no evidence that Musk tweeted this comparison of restrictions for business loans and student loans for young adults. The purported tweet did not appear on Musk’s official Twitter, and we could not find an archived version. 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 provided no defining information for the tweet, such as a date or a time stamp. Our search of the internet turned up another version of the quote that wasn’t attributed to Musk and used different loan figures. We found copies of it on Twitter going back to at least Feb. 8, 2021. Musk did tweet on Dec. 28, 2019, that he worked his way through college and ended up with around $100,000 in student debt. But that’s not the same tweet that’s being circulated here. We rate this claim Fals

Cannabis reform "is supported by the majority of the residents of our state, including a majority of Republicans. The effort to make marijuana legal at the federal level gained ground as the U.S. House passed a measure April 1, 2022 that would eliminate criminal penalties for anyone who manufactures, distributes or possesses the substance. The proposal faces an uncertain future in the U.S. Senate, but a Wisconsin state senator who has advocated for similar reforms in the state argues the time is right for such a move. "The people of Wisconsin are ready for cannabis reform," state Sen. Melissa Agard, D-Madison, said in an April 11, 2022 tweet. "It is supported by the majority of the residents of our state, including a majority of Republicans." The last part of the tweet caught our attention. There have long been differing views on permitting marijuana for medicinal uses, when compared to outright legalization. Has the needle on legalization really moved that far? Poll results When asked to provide backup for her claim, Agard’s office cited a Marquette Law School poll of 802 registered Wisconsin voters taken from Feb. 22 to 27, 2022. It has a margin of error of 3.8 percentage points for the full sample. A summary of the poll noted that "support for legalization of marijuana has grown since the question was first asked in 2013, with 61% now in favor of legalization and 31% now opposed." It also noted that support has grown in each partisan group since that time, with a slim majority of Republicans now supporting legalization. According to the poll, 51% of those who identified as Republican supported legalization, while 42% were opposed and 7% undecided. (In 2013, the situation was the virtual opposite – 43% support, 51% opposed). In the new poll, among Democrats, 75% supported legalization, with 19% opposed. Another 5% said they didn’t know. Charles Franklin, director of the Marquette Law School Poll, said Agard’s statement "is basically right, but depends on whether ‘Republican’ includes those who say they are independent but lean Republican or not." Franklin said that for many purposes the MU poll includes leaners with partisans, but "for other analysis we keep them separate." In this case, the 51% figure included independents who lean Republican. Indeed, those who say they are "Republican" are still just slightly more opposed to legalization, by 0.6 percentage points. The "leaners" are much more likely to support legalization, which dramatically shifts the over picture. Party Legal Illegal Don’t know 1 Rep 46.5 47.1 6.43 Featured Fact-check Tim Michels stated on October 24, 2022 in News conference Tony Evers “wants to let out between 9,000 and 10,000 more” Wisconsin prisoners By Madeline Heim • November 4, 2022 2 Lean Rep 59.2 33.6 7.20 3 Ind 60.2 27.6 11.5 4 Lean Dem 79.6 16.9 3.52 5 Dem 71.5 20.8 6.51 Barry Burden, director of the Elections Research Center at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, in an email to PolitiFact Wisconsin, noted cannabis reform can mean many different things including changing regulations about buying, selling, and using marijuana for either medicinal or recreational purposes. "What share of Wisconsinites support changing laws surely depends on exactly what kind of reform is being proposed," Burden said. "It appears that Democrats and Independents in Wisconsin are generally supportive of legalization but that Republicans' opinions probably depend more on the kind of reform being considered." National poll The results of the Wisconsin poll are on par with residents across the United States. A CBS News poll released April 20, 2022, found that two-thirds of Americans want recreational marijuana use to be legal under federal law and in their own state. And most people said they wouldn't mind if a licensed marijuana business opened in their neighborhood. Most Democrats, liberals, independents and moderates favor legalization under federal law, the poll found, but Republicans and conservatives are split on the issue, mainly based on age. In terms of supporting legalization, 79% of Democrats, 67% of independents and 49% of Republicans were in favor. Opposed were 21% of Democrats, 33% of independents and 51% of Republicans. The picture changes when age is added to the equation for Republicans. When looking just at Republicans under age 45, some 59% said it should be legal and 41% opposed legalization. For Republicans over age 45, some 44% said it should be legal, and 56% said it should not be legal. Our ruling Agard claimed cannabis reform "is supported by the majority of the residents of our state, including a majority of Republicans." Recent polling of Wisconsin residents found 61% in favor of legalization and 31% opposed. Among Republicans, 51% supported legalization, while 42% were opposed. But that comes with a footnote: To reach the 51% level, one has to include those who identify as Republican, as well as those who lean Republican. This is often done in polling, so it’s not surprising here. But it is worth noting. We rate the claim True. 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' });

“Alkaline foods” can heal the body of cancer Anyone confronting a cancer diagnosis is eager to find information that might help their prognosis. But the internet can be a tricky resource, with some less-than-accurate advice for people desperate for ways to stay healthy. A recent Facebook post falls into that misleading category, claiming that "alkaline foods" can heal a number of ailments, as vague as pain as serious as cancer. 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 so-called alkaline diet sometimes comes up in connection with cancer treatment and prevention strategies. It’s based on the theory that some foods cause your body to produce more acid, which is harmful. Because some studies have shown that cancer cells thrive in highly acidic environments, the idea behind this diet is that consuming certain foods and drinks can change your body’s acid level, making it inhospitable for cancer. But there are a couple big catches. 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 First, according to the MD Anderson Cancer Center, the studies that suggest acidic environments help cancer cells grow relied on cells in a dish — "they do not represent the complex nature of how tumors behave in the human body." Second, "there’s no way the foods you eat can alter the pH level of your blood," senior clinical dietitian Maria Petzel says on the center’s website. UC San Diego Health nutrition expert Traci Roberts said on the university’s website that the lungs and kidneys are largely responsible for controlling the pH levels of our blood. What that all means is that while the diet can improve your overall health, and even help lower your cancer risk — it encourages healthy eating like consuming more vegetables and fruits, drinking lots of water and cutting back sugar, alcohol, meat and processed foods — it won’t heal your body of cancer, as the post claims. There’s no one diet or food that can cure cancer, according to MD Anderson. But what you eat can affect how you feel with or without a cancer diagnosis. We rate the claim that an alkaline diet can cure cancer False.

“Disneyland estates have been used for MK-ULTRA mind control, human trafficking, occult rituals, and parading sexual deviants. Myths and conspiracy theories about Walt Disney and his namesake Disneyland have long abounded on the internet, but they’ve heated up recently since the Disney company’s chief executive criticized a Florida law that curbs classroom instruction about sexual orientation and gender identity. Among other claims about "Walt Disney the dark occultist" and "Disney’s magical Kingdom," a recent Facebook post said that "Disneyland estates have been used for MK-ULTRA mind control, human trafficking, occult rituals, and parading sexual deviants." 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.) While Disney biographer Neal Gabler once said "the truth about Walt Disney seems much more complicated and nuanced than either his enemies or supporters would have you believe," we couldn’t find credible evidence that Disney is using its theme parks for MK-Ultra, a Cold War-era CIA mind control program, human trafficking, occult rituals, or sexual deviancy. Featured Fact-check Instagram posts stated on October 15, 2022 in Instagram post Seattle authorities are investigating a string of serial killings. By Michael Majchrowicz • October 17, 2022 In March, news broke that four Disney employees were among 108 people arrested in connection with an undercover human trafficking operation in Florida. One of those employees is accused of sending inappropriate pictures of himself and messages to an undercover detective posing as a 14-year-old girl, and two others were charged with prostitution. But there was no indication these alleged crimes occurred at Disney resorts. We’ve previously fact-checked and found false the claim that Disney CEO Bob Chapek was arrested for human trafficking. Under scrutiny, these theories are just that. We rate this post False.

Says J.D. Vance said, “People who voted for Trump voted for him for racist reasons. Of the five Ohio Republicans hoping to be their party’s nominee for U.S. Senator, four openly angled for the endorsement of former President Donald Trump. Trump picked "Hillbilly Elegy" author and venture capitalist J.D. Vance. Less than a week before the May 3 primary, Club for Growth Action, a super PAC backing one of Vance’s competitors Josh Mandel, ran an ad that said Trump got it wrong with Vance. Here’s the transcript: Vance on video: The elites were right about Donald Trump, right. I'm a never Trump guy. Male actor: Has Trump seen this? Newscast clip: President Trump tweeting a surprise endorsement of Mitt Romney for his run for … Female actor 1: How'd that turn out? Male actor: Look, I love Trump, but he's getting it wrong with J.D. Vance, too. Vance on video: I might have to vote for Hillary Clinton. Vance on video: People who voted for Trump voted for him for racist reasons. Male actor: Where does he get off saying that? Female actor 2: We've got our own eyes in our own ears. Female actor 1: J.D. Vance is a fraud. The clip that caught our ear was of Vance saying, "People who voted for Trump voted for him for racist reasons." There’s an obvious video edit in that section, and we wanted to see what the ad left out. Featured Fact-check America First Legal stated on November 1, 2022 in an ad “Kamala Harris said disaster aid should go to non-white citizens first." By Tom Kertscher • November 5, 2022 Turns out, it was a deceptive edit that changed the meaning of Vance’s words. The full context shows Vance didn't mean all Trump voters The video comes from an on-stage discussion with Vance in 2017 at the University of Chicago’s Institute of Politics. The theme was America in the Trump era, and it’s worthwhile to see both how the interviewer teed up his question, and how Vance answered it. "Where do you think race played into all this?" the interviewer asked. "Because I think the sort of myth is that all these Trump supporters are vehement racists and anti-immigrant. And so where do you think it played in?" "Race definitely played a role in the 2016 election," Vance said. "I think that race will always play a role in our country. It's just sort of a constant fact of American life. "And definitely some people who voted for Trump were racists, and they voted for him for racist reasons. I always resist the idea that the real thing driving most Trump voters was racial anxiety or racial animus, partially because I didn't see it." Vance goes on to say that the primary reason most people voted for Trump was his focus on jobs. "That was the core thesis of Trump's entire argument," Vance said. "And so it strikes me as a little bizarre to chalk it up to sort of racial animus. Because, one, the country is less racist now than it was 15 years ago. And we weren't electing Donald Trump 15 years ago. And two, that wasn't the core part of his message, and that wasn't what a lot of his voters were really connecting with." How the edits leave a misleading impression The Club for Growth attack ad made small but telling edits in Vance’s words. Someone watching the ad heard, "People who voted for Trump voted for him for racist reasons." The full version was, "Definitely some people who voted for Trump were racists, and they voted for him for racist reasons. I always resist the idea that the real thing driving most Trump voters was racial anxiety or racial animus." First, the ad cut his first word, "some." That made it sound like Vance was talking about all Trump voters. The next edit is subtle. It deletes "were racists, and they." This makes the statement more blunt. But the most misleading edit was dropping Vance’s very next sentence: "I always resist the idea that the real thing driving most Trump voters was racial anxiety or racial animus." Club for Growth vice president for communication Joe Kildea rejected the idea that the edits changed Vance’s meaning. Our ruling A Club for Growth Action ad said Vance had said, "People who voted for Trump voted for him for racist reasons." In the full interview from which those words were drawn, Vance allowed that some people voted for Trump for racist reasons, but he said most people voted for Trump for his policies on jobs. Vance rejected the idea that racism played much of a role in Trump’s win. The edited version of Vance’s words gave a very different spin than what he actually expressed. We rate this claim False.

“War Begins — F-35, F-16 and MiG-29 NATO intercept and destroy Russia Jets in Polish air space. "War Begins," read an April 27 Facebook post featuring a video with a grab bag of footage of various aircraft flying. Of course, war is well underway following the Russian invasion of Ukraine. But this post suggests that the conflict has escalated to a world war. "F-35, F-16 and MiG-29 NATO intercept and destroy Russia Jets in Polish air space," 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.) That’s because this claim "is false," said Dawn Murty, a spokesperson for NATO’s Allied Air Command. Featured Fact-check Viral image stated on October 22, 2022 in an Instagram post A CNN headline shows Uganda’s president saying he doesn’t support Ukraine because it would be “disgusting.” By Ciara O'Rourke • October 24, 2022 "Allied Air Command can confirm that there has been no incursion by Russian jets into Allied airspace," Murty said. We found no news reports or credible sources to support the Facebook video’s claim. NATO regularly publishes updates on its website when its jets intercept other aircraft. RELATED VIDEO In December 2020, for example, NATO announced that its air forces across Europe had scrambled more than 400 times that year to intercept unknown aircraft approaching Alliance airspace. Most of those missions — almost 90% of them — were in response to flights by Russian military aircraft. It most recently announced that it intercepted (but did not destroy) two groups of Russian military aircraft on Feb. 3. This happened over the Barents Sea and off Scotland; the planes didn’t enter allied airspace, NATO said at the time. We rate this post False

“The Red Cross sells your donated blood to hospitals for $150 and then that hospital charges you thousands for a blood transfusion. Regular blood donors probably don’t think twice when they receive texts or calls from the American Red Cross encouraging another donation, but they may raise their eyebrows at claims on social media that suggest the Red Cross is making a profit off those donations. "Today I learned the Red Cross sells your donated blood to hospitals for $150 and then that hospital charges you thousands for a blood transfusion," read a screenshot of a tweet shared on Facebook. "I hate it here." The April 18 post about the nonprofit 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 Red Cross sells donated blood to hospitals, but the fees the Red Cross charges hospitals are used to recover the costs related to the blood collection, said Emily Osment, a Red Cross spokesperson. "The Red Cross charges hospitals and plasma manufacturers the costs associated with the recruitment and screening of potential donors, the collection of blood by trained staff, the processing and testing of each unit of blood in state-of-the-art laboratories and the labeling, storage and distribution of blood components," she said. Osment did not confirm whether the Red Cross sells blood to hospitals for $150, as the social media posts claimed. What blood collection centers charge hospitals Dr. Claudia Cohn, the Association for the Advancement of Blood & Biotherapies’ chief medical officer, said hospitals pay centers that collect blood, such as the Red Cross, based on private contracts. In 2019, hospitals paid, on average, $215 per unit of red blood cells, according to data from the 2019 National Blood Collection and Utilization Survey, which asked community-based blood collection centers and hospitals about blood donors, donations and the use of donated blood. Ge Bai, a Johns Hopkins University health policy and management and accounting professor, said the exact price a hospital pays the Red Cross for a unit of donated blood "depends on the price negotiated between a specific hospital and Red Cross." "In order to stay financially sustainable, Red Cross cannot afford to lose money when selling blood to hospitals," she said. Donated blood is rarely offered to hospitals for free, she 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 The price that blood collection centers charge hospitals also varies across cities and states. Labor costs and office space rents are higher on the coasts, for example, and those costs get passed on to the hospitals, Slate reported in 2006. Blood transfusions costs for hospitals, patients The Red Cross says the average red blood cell transfusion is about three units of blood. Cohn said that for hospitals, the cost of a transfusion reflects the expenses of procuring the blood itself and the costs for the labor, equipment, laboratory tests and subspecialized medical services required to administer blood to patients. Bai said that blood storage and the overhead costs of the hospital also influence the cost of a blood transfusion. Ultimately, Cohn said, for a routine blood transfusion a hospital could charge a patient approximately between $1,000 and $3,500, "depending on the specific medical needs of a patient." Yale Global Health Review in 2016 reported that for some organ transplant recipients, the charge for blood transfusions can exceed $3,800. Johns Hopkins Hospital in 2017 estimated that the average charge to patients for its blood transfusion service was about $3,671. These fees don’t necessarily mean that patients will pay thousands of dollars for a blood transfusion. "For publicly insured patients, the price is statutorily determined and hospitals cannot change it," Bai said. "For privately insured patients, the price is negotiated between the hospital and the patient’s insurance plan." For uninsured patients, George Washington University Hospital’s patient cost estimator indicated a patient would likely be charged about $1,269 for a blood transfusion — although they’re more likely to pay $508 out-of-pocket after a "self-pay" discount. A "self-pay" discount often refers to the price a patient without insurance is asked to pay for common outpatient procedures, and it can be lower than the price negotiated by insurance companies. Our ruling A Facebook post claimed that "the Red Cross sells your donated blood to hospitals for $150 and then that hospital charges you thousands for a blood transfusion." The Red Cross did not confirm to PolitiFact whether it charges hospitals $150 for blood it has collected from donors. The nonprofit charges hospitals for the blood so that it can cover the collection costs. In 2019, hospitals paid blood collection centers about $215 per unit of red blood cells. What hospitals charge patients for transfusions varies, but that figure can be in the thousands of dollars. What patients end up paying out of pocket can vary, depending on their health insurance plans and insurance status. The post isn’t that far off in terms of dollar amounts, but needs clarification and context. We rate the post Mostly Tru

Wearing foot patches can help adults grow inches in weeks A widely-viewed video on Facebook quickly cuts between images and graphics to draw in people wishing they were taller with the promise of quick, easy growth. How? According to the video, patches placed on the soles of your feet that could make you grow several inches within two weeks. The post also shares a link to where you can buy the patches that supposedly "triggers growth hormones in the pituitary gland" and "increases your height even in adulthood." Does it sound too good to be true? Apparently: 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.) Todd Milbrandt, an orthopedic surgeon and associate professor of orthopedics and pediatrics at the Mayo Clinic, told Gizmodo in 2019 that "no adult can increase their height without surgery, period." 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 Even adults with endocrine abnormalities, such as gigantism, which causes excessive growth, would only grow until about age 25, Milbrandt has said. There are limb-lengthening procedures, but that involves a lot more than sleeping with patches on your feet. Think: breaking your leg bones and stretching them out. Barring that, after puberty, nearly everyone shrinks with age. We rate this post False

A video shows “satanic death cult high priestess” Oprah Winfrey condoning and promoting “pedophilia and sex trafficking. A recent Facebook post, which describes talk show host Oprah Winfrey as a "satanic death cult high priestess," claims that she condones and promotes "pedophilia and sex trafficking." As evidence, the post points to a TikTok that opens with a clip that shows Winfrey describing the confusing point of view of a seven-year-old child being physically molested and manipulated by their molester. "Even if you don’t have a name for what that is, it feels good," Winfrey said, "And when I first said this years ago people were like, ‘you're crazy,’ because everyone wants to believe that it’s like sexual assault and you’re being thrown up against a wall and you’re being raped, and I have said for years if the abuser is any good, you won’t even know it’s happening." The TikTok video was shared on Facebook, where 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.) Winfrey’s comments are authentic, but they’ve been taken out of context. She wasn’t condoning or promoting the sexual assault of children — she was condeming it, and discussing how some children may not even realize they were being abused until years later because they were groomed by their abusers. She made the comments during a 2019 HBO special called "After Neverland," in which she interviewed Wade Robson and James Safechuck, who accused singer Michael Jackson of sexually assaulting them as children. (Jackson’s estate has denied the allegations.) 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 Winfrey had previously said something similar when she talked to People magazine about being sexually abused when she was a child. "It happened to me at 8, and then 10, and then 11, and then 12, 13, 14," she said. "You don’t have the language to begin to explain what’s happening to you. That’s why you feel you’re not going to be believed. And if the abuser, the molester, is any good, they will make you feel that you are complicit, that you were part of it. That’s what keeps you from telling." The TikTok goes on to mention João Teixeira de Faria, better known as John of God, a Brazilian man accused in 2018 of sexually abusive behavior at his "healing center." Before those allegations emerged, he was the subject of a 2010 profile on Winfrey’s show, and she interviewed him at his center in 2012. In a statement to the New York Times in the wake of the sexual abuse claims involving de Faria, Winfrey said: "I went to Brazil in 2012 to tape an episode of ‘Oprah’s Next Chapter’ that explored the controversial healing methods of John of God. The episode aired in 2013. I empathize with the women now coming forward and hope justice is served." The TikTok also highlights Winfrey’s friendship with entertainment mogul and sex offender Harvey Weinstein. After news about allegations against Weinstein broke in 2017, Oprah wrote on Facebook that she was "processing the accounts of Harvey Weinstein’s hideous behavior" and that she hadn’t "been able to find the words to articulate the magnitude of the situation." She also said: "Thanks to the brave voices we’ve heard this week, many more will now be emboldened to come forward EVERY time this happens." But none of this amounts to evidence that Winfrey condones and promotes pedophilia and sex trafficking. To the contrary, she has repeatedly spoken out against it and, as is the case with "After Neverland," sought to raise awareness of its harms. We rate this claim False.

Elon Musk suspended Bill Gates from Twitter Shortly after Tesla CEO Elon Musk reached a deal to purchase Twitter, a viral social media rumor took off that falsely claimed Musk, the world’s richest man, had immediately banned from the platform another man who once held that title: Bill Gates. "Damn Elon moves quick," said one widely shared tweet, which included a fake screenshot that purported to show an "account suspended" notice on Gates’ Twitter account, @BillGates. The same image also appeared in posts on Facebook and Instagram, 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.) Some posts were labeled as jokes. Others were not. A Twitter spokesperson confirmed to PolitiFact that the company has not taken enforcement action against the Microsoft founder’s account. The @BillGates account remains active on the site. Gates has tweeted three times since the Musk deal was announced. A spokesperson for Gates also confirmed that the rumors of his suspension were false. 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 There were other telltale signs that the image was fake. It showed Gates’ profile image, written bio, follower count and other account details still on his page. But these details are typically removed or grayed out on suspended Twitter accounts, as they were on the @realDonaldTrump account belonging to former President Donald Trump and the @mtgreenee account belonging to Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, R-Ga. Only the user’s Twitter handle remains visible after a suspension, along with a notice that reads, "Account suspended. Twitter suspends accounts that violate the Twitter Rules. Learn more." Plus, the deal with Musk is expected to officially close later in the year, according to reports. The New York Times reported that Twitter’s CEO estimated it could take three to six months. Musk has tweeted criticism of Gates in recent days, but he has not signaled his intention to suspend Gates from the platform he’s set to acquire. Musk said he hopes "even my worst critics remain on Twitter, because that is what free speech means." We rate claims of Gates’ suspension Fals

Photo of unbroken windows proves war in Ukraine is fake An image of overturned cars in front of what looks like a building is spreading online as evidence that the war in Ukraine is a hoax. "I want to buy Ukrainian windows," text under the image says. "I would like to place an order for these high quality super tough windows from Ukraine, that remained intact and unmarked after the explosion of a Russian bomb that turned over all these cars. Please throw in also some of that same render as on the house, that remained undamaged and clean after the explosion." "Everything is fake," read one Instagram post that shared the image. 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.) Doing a reverse image search, we found that the photo was taken by Associated Press photographer Rodrigo Abd in Bucha, Ukraine, on April 4. A caption of the picture, published on a NBC News affiliate’s website, says: "A Ukrainian soldier walks with children passing destroyed cars due to the war against Russia." 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 We also found the photo on Abd’s Instagram page. There, he wrote: "Ukrainian soldier walks with a group of kids next to destroyed cars." A blast radius is not infinite — the damage stops somewhere — but there’s evidence that these cars were destroyed by Russian military forces on the ground in Bucha, not by an explosion. RELATED VIDEO Photographer Emanuele Satolli, who took photos at the same scene pictured in the Instagram post, told the Greek fact-checking outlet Ellinika Hoaxes that he "met several citizens and everyone told me that the cars had been overturned by Russian tanks." Plenty of other photos Abd shot in Bucha show shattered windows, rubble from devastated buildings, streets in ruins, and human corpses — all the real toll of a real war. Claims that the war in Ukraine is fake are inaccurate and ridiculous. That’s our definition of Pants on Fire.

“DeSantis erases Disney’s tax exempt law. Will cost Disney $200 Mil in taxes. Per year! Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis signed a bill to repeal a decades-old agreement that allowed the Walt Disney Company to operate as an independent government around its 25,000-acre theme park complex. The April 22 move came after Disney, the state’s largest employer, voiced opposition to legislation barring classroom instruction on sexual orientation and gender identity in kindergarten through third grade, which could affect students in older grades as well. It is unclear whether Florida’s actions could have financial implications for Disney that stretch beyond its Orlando-area theme parks. Still, social media users were quick to make conclusions. We follow the facts and share what we learn so you can make your own decisions. Support our mission today. "DeSantis erases Disney’s tax exempt law. Will cost Disney $200 Mil in taxes. Per year," read an April 21 caption alongside a photoshopped image of DeSantis standing in front of a trash can with Mickey and Minnie Mouse’s heads peeking out. 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 grammatically problematic statement propped up many inaccuracies about the impact of the new law, and it mischaracterized the privileges the tax district originally awarded Disney. Disney did not respond to PolitiFact’s request for comment. Disney already pays taxes in Florida Reedy Creek, a special taxing district for the Walt Disney World Resort that acted with the authority of a county government, was created in 1967 to lure the entertainment giant to Orlando. Under the agreement, Disney was responsible for building and maintaining municipal services like power, roads, and fire protection — which ensured that the residents of Orange and Osceola counties would not have to pay for such services. Disney's most significant benefit from the arrangement was not financial but rather the autonomy to develop the 25,000 acres it owns in Central Florida without much of the oversight other developers typically have. Though the deal provided Disney with several privileges, it did not make the theme park tax-exempt. Disney World contributed more than $780 million in state and local taxes in fiscal year 2021, according to a company disclosure. 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’s claim that Disney will now have to pay $200 million in taxes annually appears to be based on the false premise that Disney wasn’t already paying taxes. The $200 million figure seems to be derived from state Rep. Spencer Roach, a Republican from North Fort Myers. He told NBC News that Disney had avoided around $200 million in property taxes that surrounding counties could have collected. The article noted that Roach’s Democratic colleagues and officials in Central Florida questioned his math and the claim that Disney has not paid property taxes. Roach did not respond to our request for comment. "There’s this perception that Reedy Creek somehow gave Disney property tax breaks," said Scott Randolph, Orange County’s tax collector. "It does not do that." Under the new law, Disney’s deal with Florida ends June 1, 2023. The dissolution of the Reedy Creek district will likely have financial consequences for Orange and Osceola counties unless officials take future action, according to the state Senate’s financial impact analysis. For example, the district’s bond debt could be transferred to those counties, the analysis said. Fitch Ratings, a credit rating provider, estimates that debt is $1 billion. The new law might also make those counties responsible for services previously covered by the company, like fixing roads or providing law enforcement. Disney paid $105 million for those services, according to tax filings submitted to Florida’s Department of Revenue. "The bill will have an indeterminate fiscal impact on residents and businesses currently served by a special district dissolved by the bill," the Senate analysis said. "Such residents and businesses may experience a change in services previously provided by the special district and related assessments and taxes imposed." At a news conference, DeSantis rebuffed these concerns. He said he has "everything thought out," alluding to future legislation. Our ruling A Facebook post said DeSantis "erased Disney’s tax exempt law. Will cost Disney $200 Mil in taxes. Per year!" DeSantis did not "erase" any tax-exempt status for Disney. That misconstrues the special taxing district status that is in the process of being removed. We could not find evidence to substantiate the $200 million tax figure cited in the claim. The financial impact of the legislation on Disney’s tax bill remains unclear. We rate this claim Fals

In 2021, “11,201 pounds of fentanyl were seized by Customs and Border Protection, which is enough to kill every American nearly seven times over. The United States is experiencing a major influx of a synthetic opioid called fentanyl, and the drug is being blamed for a surge in deaths. Recent data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention shows that of the more than 100,000 people who died from drug overdoses in the U.S. between May 2020 and April 2021, almost two-thirds were linked to fentanyl or similar synthetic opioids. In an April 1 press release, U.S. Rep. Claudia Tenney, R-N.Y., raised the alarm about fentanyl being smuggled into the United States. "In Fiscal Year 2021 (FY21), 11,201 pounds of fentanyl were seized by Customs and Border Protection, which is enough to kill every American nearly seven times over," Tenney said. Tenney argued that the Biden administration should back off its intention to terminate Title 42, a public health order that has been in place since March 2020 that allows officials to expel migrants at U.S. land borders to prevent the spread of the coronavirus. (On April 26, the administration said it would abide by a judge’s order to keep Title 42 in place for now.) We won’t offer a view on whether extending Title 42 would reduce the prevalence of fentanyl in the United States. However, we decided to take a closer look at Tenney’s statement about fentanyl and how deadly it is. Tenney’s office did not respond to requests for comment. On the scale of fentanyl confiscations, Tenney correctly cited the data. U.S. Customs and Border Protection figures show that 11,201 pounds of fentanyl were seized nationwide during fiscal year 2021, just as Tenney said. This represented an increase of 134% over the previous fiscal year. Most of it was seized at the southwest border at official ports of entry. But could it really kill every American nearly seven times over? There’s little question that fentanyl is a deadly substance. It’s up to 50 times more powerful than heroin, and up to 100 times stronger than morphine, according to the CDC. Many overdoses are occurring because "drug dealers have been mixing fentanyl with other drugs including heroin, methamphetamine, and cocaine" due to its low cost and potency, according to the Drug Enforcement Administration. This heightens the risk of a fatal dose. 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 Experts say that two milligrams is a widely accepted lethal dose for fentanyl. To vet Tenney’s math, we reached out to Lewis S. Nelson, a professor and chair of the Department of Emergency Medicine at Rutgers New Jersey Medical School and director of its division of medical toxicology. Tenney’s numbers, Nelson said, are basically on target. Nelson said that 11,201 pounds amounts to 5,080,688 grams, or 5,080,688,000 milligrams. If 2 milligrams is a lethal dose, then the amount seized would equal 2,540,344,000 lethal doses. The projected U.S. population for 2022 is roughly 332.4 million, so the amount seized would be enough to kill every American 7.64 times over, which is close to what Tenney said. There’s one caveat: There is some variation in the lethal dose for body size and tolerance from past exposure. In 2019, in looking at a similar claim, PolitiFact West Virginia interviewed Timothy J. Pifer, the director of the New Hampshire State Police Forensic Laboratory and a specialist on fentanyl and its lethality. He said that some bigger individuals with higher levels of past exposure might only die with a 3-milligram dose, rather than 2 milligrams. In addition, Pifer said, how pure the fentanyl is can make a difference in its lethality. In all, these variations could change the math on the margins. Still, simply taking the statement as a way to understand the scope of the fentanyl being seized, Tenney’s calculations are reasonable. Our ruling Tenney said that in 2021, "11,201 pounds of fentanyl were seized by Customs and Border Protection, which is enough to kill every American nearly seven times over." She is correct that 11,201 pounds of fentanyl were seized nationwide in 2021, and she’s essentially accurate about how deadly that supply could be. Using a standard fatal dose of 2 milligrams, the amount seized in 2021 would have been enough to kill every American 7.64 times over. The fatal dose could vary depending on body size, past exposure to fentanyl, and purity, possibly affecting the calculation on the margins. We rate the statement Mostly Tru

“Marines are investigating 3 ancient pyramids discovered in Antarctica. An old conspiracy theory about pyramids in Antarctica has new legs. According to a blog post being shared on Facebook, "Marines are investigating 3 ancient pyramids discovered in Antarctica." The post appears on a site titled, "Weird but true." In fact, it’s not. 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 The U.S. Marine Corps did not immediately respond to PolitiFact’s questions about the blog post. But claims about these supposed pyramids have been around since at least 2016, according to Snopes, which looked into the alleged discovery a year later. In reality, there’s just one, and it’s a mountain. "This is just a mountain that looks like a pyramid," Eric Rignot, a professor of Earth system science at the University of California, Irvine, and a senior research scientist at NASA, told LiveScience in 2016. "Pyramid shapes are not impossible — many peaks partially look like pyramids, but they only have one to two faces like that, rarely four." The mountain doesn’t have a formal name, but it’s one of many peaks in the continent’s Ellsworth Mountains. Mauri Pelto, an environmental science professor at Nichols College, told LiveScience that freeze-thaw erosion likely caused the pyramid-like shape of this mountain and others, such as the Matterhorn in the Alps. We rate this post False.

You can “reverse HIV naturally. The title of a video circulating on Facebook has a big lure: "How to reverse HIV naturally," it says. "Take notes and improve your life." The video itself does not offer an explicit roadmap for how an individual could supposedly reverse the human immunodeficiency virus, or HIV, which makes people vulnerable to other infections and disease and can lead to AIDS. But it does suggest that scrubbing certain foods from diets, such as "unnatural sugars," is key. "HIV was an invention created by the west," a man in the video 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.) HIV came from a virus in a chimpanzee in Central Africa that was "probably passed to humans when humans hunted these chimpanzees for meat and came in contact with their infected blood," according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. 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 virus has existed in the United States since at least the 1970s. There is no cure, but HIV is treatable — medicine that effectively reduces the amount the virus in someone’s body. According to the CDC, most people can get the virus under control within six months. If it’s left untreated, however, HIV can lead to AIDS. "The human body can’t get rid of HIV," HIV.gov plainly says on its site. Eating a healthy diet supports overall health, and helps people maintain their immune systems, according to the National Institutes of Health. And good nutrition also helps people with HIV maintain a healthy weight and absorb the medicines needed to keep the virus under control. But it won’t reverse the virus. We rate this post False.

“Congratulations to Ruben, knighted by the Queen. Now goes by the name, Sir Ruben. The picture looks too good to be true: Queen Elizabeth II is shown placing a sword on the shoulder of a black cat, who appears to bow his little head in respect. "Congratulations to Ruben, knighted by the Queen," says the caption. Ruben is an influencer cat from Exeter who is famous for wandering around the city. According to his website, he has been retrieved from more than 40 different addresses, including hospitals, care homes, schools, and private residences. The black cat has more than 15,000 followers on Facebook and the claim that he was knighted at Buckingham Palace was shared on his profile on April 1. Although the date originally indicated that the post was a joke, the image has since circulated without that context. 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.) Unfortunately, Ruben was not really made a knight by the queen. 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 photo of the knighting of Simon Russell Beale was edited to replace the English actor with the feline. The expressions and postures of the guards in the two images match exactly, and the pattern of the carpet in the royal chamber strangely disappears right where Beale was located in the original photo, indicating that the image was edited. It would be difficult for Ruben, or any other animal, to be knighted by the British queen. The rules published by the government department that oversees the knighting process do not mention animals. They say that the award is given to "people" for achievements in culture, sports, business, and other areas. The cat would have a better chance with the Norwegian king, who knighted a penguin in 2008 that had served as an unofficial mascot of the King’s Guard. Our ruling An image shared on Facebook claimed that Ruben, an influencer cat from Exeter, was knighted by Queen Elizabeth II, becoming Sir Ruben. The image was edited to replace Simon Russell Beale, an actor who was knighted in 2019, with the black cat from Exeter. The edited photo was shared on Ruben’s Facebook page on April Fools’ Day. Regrettably, we rate the image Fals

Says a Fox New chyron said the Snickers candy bar is changing its texture because of “cancel culture. In April, rumors started to spread on social media that the chocolate coating on Snickers candy bars would no longer have the textured tops that some people call veins. The brand quickly weighed in. "Good news, contrary to what's trending on Twitter... THE VEINS REMAIN!" Snickers’ verified account tweeted on April 19. But a few days later, what looked like an image from Tucker Carlson’s Fox News show was circulating online. In the image, the chyron — the text that appears in the lower area of the screen — says "cancel culture: Snickers removing beloved ‘d--- vein.’" 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.) This image isn’t authentic. It appears to have been created on a website where people make their own memes. 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 couldn't find any evidence that Carlson talked about the candy bar’s "veins," though he did mention Snickers during a Jan. 21 episode in which he criticized M&M’s for rebranding its mascots. (Both Snickers and M&M’s are products of Mars Wrigley.) "M&M’s, thank heaven, have become more inclusive," Carlson said in the segment. "Will Snickers bars be next? Non-binary chocolate, we’ve got details." In November and December, he also mentioned Snickers in connection with inflation. We rate claims that this is an authentic Fox chyron False.

“The same system that kept you in the dark about Ghislaine Maxwell…doesn’t mind live-streaming Johnny Depp’s trial. Actor Johnny Depp is in the midst of a trial in the defamation case he made against his ex-wife, Amber Heard, and some news organizations have been streaming it live online. On social media, some users called out what they seem to consider a double standard in how the "system" is treating this case versus the case against Ghislaine Maxwell, who was convicted of sex trafficking a minor. "The same system that kept you in the dark about Ghislaine Maxwell and her client list doesn’t mind live-streaming Johnny Depp’s trial," one such post said. 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’ve checked a similar comparison before. 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 In 2021, PolitiFact looked at the claim that the media televised the trial of Kyle Rittenhouse "because he is a ‘white supremacist shooter’" while limiting coverage of Maxwell’s trial to "some cartoon drawing." We rated that Mostly False, because while Rittenhouse’s trial was televised and Maxwell’s wasn’t, the claim implied that the coverage was handled differently because of the nature of the crimes and the people involved. That was wrong then, and it’s wrong in this case, too. Rittenhouse was tried in state court in Wisconsin, where cameras are allowed inside the courtroom. Maxwell was on trial in federal court, where in most instances, cameras and recording devices aren’t allowed. That’s been the case for decades. However, the trial was covered widely in the media. Many reporters were in the courtroom taking notes to file stories later, providing live updates as the trial unfolded, filming segments outside for television broadcast coverage, and more. Depp’s trial is taking place in Fairfax Circuit Court in Virginia, where the decision to allow cameras in the courtroom is left to the judge presiding over the case. We rate claims about a double standard Fals

Former Gov. Pat McCrory appointed liberals to the North Carolina Textbook Commission, which “mandated textbooks” pushing critical race theory A conservative education group is attacking Republican U.S. Senate candidate Pat McCrory, claiming that while McCrory was North Carolina’s governor, he orchestrated the teaching of critical race theory in the state’s classrooms. "As governor, Pat McCrory put liberals in charge of the state textbook commission, appointing a Democrat majority," the narrator says in an ad paid for by School Freedom Fund, a political action committee tied to Club for Growth Action. "His commission mandated textbooks written by radical, woke professors pushing critical race theory, teaching our kids to hate America." Club for Growth Action has spent millions of dollars attacking McCrory and boosting U.S. Rep. Ted Budd, who is endorsed by former President Donald Trump. Budd, McCrory and former U.S. Rep. Mark Walker are the top GOP candidates hoping to replace Sen. Richard Burr, who will retire at the end of his term this year. McCrory campaign spokesman Jordan Shaw said the School Freedom Fund ad is "one of the most disgustingly false ads in recent memory" because it misrepresents how textbook commission members are appointed and how their recommendations reach classrooms. He said that "CRT wasn’t an issue at the time, and (McCrory) is on record multiple times as being strongly opposed to CRT being taught in our schools." McCrory’s campaign is calling on Budd and his supporters to publicly rebuke the ad. Yet, the claim about McCrory is spreading. North Carolina Lt. Gov. Mark Robinson, who has endorsed Budd, made a similar claim in an ad for Club for Growth saying: "Pat put liberals in charge of state textbooks." The ad misleads on several fronts. McCrory did appoint Democrats to the state’s textbook commission, but the claim glaringly omits significant context: State law requires the governor to appoint someone nominated by the state education superintendent — who is elected separately from the governor. During McCrory’s time as governor, the superintendent was a Democrat. The ad also overstates the role of the North Carolina Textbook Commission. It doesn’t "mandate" textbooks. It reviews and approves books that can be used in the classroom. Ultimately, local school districts and schools have final say over which books are read as part of a curriculum. Let’s go through the claims in the ad. Appointing a commission The ad says McCrory "put liberals in charge of the state textbook commission, appointing a Democrat majority." When we reached out to the School Freedom Fund to support this claim, Club for Growth spokesman Joe Kildea cited a 2014 blog post by the conservative John Locke Foundation. Its education expert reported that McCrory had appointed 22 new people to the textbook commission: 11 Democrats and four Republicans. For more specific records, PolitiFact North Carolina has reached out to the boards and commissions division of the governor’s office, but hasn’t heard back. McCrory hasn’t refuted the party affiliations of the people he appointed to the textbook commission. He has pointed out, however, that state law requires the governor to appoint textbook commission members who are nominated by the state superintendent of public instruction, an elected position. During the entirety of McCrory’s tenure, that position was held by June Atkinson, a Democrat who was elected three times to the seat before losing to a Republican in 2016. State law requires the textbook commission to be a mixture of teachers, school administrators, and parents from each of the three levels of grade school: elementary, middle and high school. The governor is allowed to reject the superintendent’s nominee, according to Blair Rhoades, a spokeswoman for the North Carolina Department of Public Instruction. "What the governor can’t do is approve someone who has not been recommended by the superintendent," Rhoades said. 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 other words, McCrory could only appoint someone who had been nominated by Atkinson. ‘Mandated’ books The ad says the commission "mandated textbooks written by radical woke professors pushing critical race theory, teaching our kids to hate America." This distorts how textbooks are approved for public schools. The state textbook commission doesn’t "mandate" books be read in North Carolina classrooms, as the ad says. North Carolina has at least one board of education in each county, and state law gives those boards discretion over which books are used in the classroom. Here’s how the process works: The textbook commission reviews potential textbooks for grade school students. The state education board considers the commission’s recommendations and then votes on whether to approve a textbook for use in North Carolina’s public schools. Local school boards then create their class curriculums by selecting textbooks from a list of options approved by the state board. As for critical race theory, the ad leaves out details about its origins and exaggerates how it’s typically taught. CRT is a broad set of ideas about systemic bias and privilege that has roots in legal academia. However, it’s often mischaracterized by conservative politicians who fear that its teachings might lead students to a more liberal worldview. Although CRT has been around since at least the 1970s, it was elevated in public discourse in 2019 after the New York Times’ 1619 Project, which is critical of school portrayals of slavery and offers lesson plans for teaching about it in school. The 2020 murder of George Floyd by a Minnesota police officer who was filmed kneeling on Floyd’s neck as Floyd died inspired months of racial justice demonstrations across the country and stoked widespread national conversation about the role systemic racism plays in modern lives and throughout history. Then-President Trump denounced CRT in a September 2020 memo to federal agencies, describing it as "divisive, anti-American propaganda. McCrory left office in 2016. Contrary to the claims by Trump and the School Freedom Fund ad, education experts say the theory doesn’t explicitly teach students "to hate America" or make them feel guilty. Several quotes that appear on-screen during the ad are from a writer for National Review, a conservative outlet that’s critical of CRT. The ad also features footage of a professor saying the constitution is "soaked in slavery." The audio is from Rebecca Edwards, a history professor at Vassar College in New York who co-authored a textbook flagged by the School Freedom Fund. The quote comes from a podcast Edwards recorded in January 2021. Our ruling The School Freedom Fund ad says Pat McCrory "put liberals in charge" of the North Carolina Textbook Commission, which "mandated textbooks." McCrory appointed registered Democrats, but did so because state law limits his options to people nominated by the state education superintendent — an office controlled by an elected Democrat throughout his tenure. The Textbook Commission doesn’t "mandate" textbooks. Its role requires it to place textbooks on a menu of approved reading materials for local school boards to choose from. The ad contains an element of truth but ignores other critical facts about the state’s education laws that would give voters a different impression. We rate it Mostly Fals

Hepatitis outbreak in kids may be related to Johnson & Johnson COVID-19 vaccine An outbreak of acute hepatitis with unknown origin has sickened dozens of children, most in Europe and North America. Now some on social media are falsely portraying its spread as a side effect of COVID-19 vaccines. An Instagram post on April 22 shares a screenshot of a tweet that suggests the hepatitis outbreaks are related to the Johnson & Johnson vaccine. It reads, "Until proper long term safety studies are done, it is every healthcare providers (sic) duty to assume it is related." The tweet reads, "Kids are getting hepatitis. It’s being caused be (sic) an adenovirus. J&J had an adenovirus vector. Couldn’t possibly be related." 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.) At least one child has died and 17 have received liver transplants among the 169 cases in 11 countries involving children ages one month to 16 years old as of April 23. The vast majority of the cases are in the United Kingdom, according to the World Health Organization. It said adenovirus is a possible cause for the outbreak, but that investigations are ongoing. Hepatitis is an inflammation of the liver that can be caused by viruses, among other things, according to the CDC. Adenoviruses are common viruses that can cause a range of cold-like symptoms, the CDC said. It was detected in at least 74 of the hepatitis cases, the WHO said. 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 The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention issued an emergency alert on April 21 because of an outbreak involving nine children in Alabama. The agency urged doctors to test for adenovirus infection in hepatitis cases and report them. The CDC did not respond to a request for comment. The Johnson & Johnson vaccine is a viral vector vaccine that uses an adenovirus, but it cannot replicate and make you sick, according to the Mayo Clinic. What’s more, it has not been administered to children — the vaccine is only approved for people 18 and older. Further, claims of a connection to any COVID-19 vaccines are not supported, the WHO said, because "the vast majority of affected children did not receive COVID-19 vaccination." The UK Health Security Agency also said there is no link to a COVID-19 vaccine because none of the confirmed cases in the UK are known to be in patients who have been vaccinated. Most of the hepatitis cases there involve children under 5, they said. No vaccines have yet been approved for children under 5. Our ruling An Instagram post alleges that a recent outbreak of hepatitis in children is related to the Johnson & Johnson COVID-19 vaccine. Health officials at the WHO and in the UK said there is no connection to any vaccine because most of the cases involved children who aren’t vaccinated. The J&J vaccine is not approved for anyone under 18, and children under 5 are not eligible for any available COVID-19 vaccine. We rate this claim Fals

"We have (people detained by ICE) that have to be seen within 24 hours, while veterans are seen within months Texas land commissioner candidate Tim Westley recently compared health screenings for immigrants to medical appointment wait times for veterans. Westley, a former teacher who faces state Sen. Dawn Buckingham, R-Lakeway, in the May 24 Republican runoff, tweeted a TikTok clip from a March 30 interview where he made the comparison. He said, "When we talk about illegal immigration, and we have illegal immigrants that have to be seen within 24 hours, while veterans are seen within months. And here's the catch ... not only are they seen within 24 hours — it's mandatory that they're seen within 24 hours — the funding that they're being seen with falls under the Department of Veterans Affairs." When asked for his sources, Westley wrote he knows about veterans' wait times from personal experience. Westley said in the interview he served in the U.S. Army and the Texas National Guard. His campaign sent links and excerpts from a Department of Veterans Affairs FAQ and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement Health Service Corps website page. He also credited a source he declined to name for his claim about immigrants detained by ICE. The care systems for immigrants in ICE custody and for veterans are run by different federal departments and Westley was relying on two different metrics in making his comparison: he was referring to standards of care for immigrants, which aren't always followed, and access to care for veterans. Westley's sources The border and veterans are two issues that have dominated the campaign for land commissioner. The Texas General Land Office owns land near the border and current commissioner George P. Bush authorized the construction of a border wall on state-owned land. The office also houses the Texas Veterans Land Board, which oversees loans for veterans, land sales, veterans nursing homes, and cemeteries. However, veterans' health care is a federal service provided by the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs. Westley's campaign pointed to an ICE Health Service Corps standard requiring initial health screenings to be administered within 12 hours and health assessments within 14 days. The agency website indicates this initial health screening means basic health tests, such as a COVID-19 test, taking vital signs, and tuberculosis infection screening. The health assessment includes a physical examination with vision screening and mental health screening questions. The campaign specifically pointed to a paragraph on the website: "Detainees identified as high-risk during the intake process are triaged to a higher level of care immediately. If at any time a patient verbalizes an issue such as, 'I feel very bad' or 'I don’t have the medicine I need' a nurse or mid-level practitioner contacts a higher level medical provider, usually a physician, so that the patient is seen within 24 hours." There are some additional standards for migrants to be seen by a health professional within a certain period of time, according to the 2019 National Detention Standards for ICE. These pertain to mental illness and disabilities, health assessments for minors, triaging a request for medical services, and mental health referrals for victims of sexual abuse or abusers. But these are all internal directives set by the agency, not a statute or regulation, said attorney Briana Perez with the Refugee and Immigrant Center for Education and Legal Services, which provides legal services for migrants in detention centers. Perez said these standards are often not followed, and there is little legal recourse for when medical services are not provided. "What I can say, high level, is that everyday we interact with clients who are suffering in detention and not getting appropriate care," Perez said. Perez said the group often sees clients with serious, treatable health conditions that can be detected, such as high blood pressure and diabetes, but they are not receiving medical attention and wait for long periods after requesting to see a doctor. Perez said her clients often have told her that health professionals are just giving them pain pills for their conditions. Some migrants have been told by health professionals to wait until they are released to get care elsewhere, which can be as much as several months, Perez said. 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 "The problems are exacerbated for individuals who speak a language other than English or Spanish because of language barriers and lack of access to interpreters to express health concerns," Perez said. New York-based organization Human Rights Watch in 2017 and 2018 reviewed and reported on cases in which people in ICE custody did not receive adequate medical care and died. In 2020, a whistleblower alleged inadequate medical care and unnecessary gynecological surgeries at Irwin County Detention Center in Georgia. In 2021, the Department of Homeland Security announced it would no longer use that detention center. Federal government reports in 2020 and 2021 found instances of inadequate medical care, and in one Arizona detention center an understaffed medical unit took an average of over three days to respond to detainee sick call requests. Westley compared initial health screenings with veterans' medical appointments Comparing the health systems for veterans and migrants in ICE detention centers is not an apples-to-apples comparison. Nationally, veterans referred to care at Veterans Affairs health care locations are seen by a medical professional in approximately 40 days on average in 2021, said Kevin Griffith, professor of health policy at Vanderbilt University Medical Center. They are generally seen faster within the VA system versus referral from a private provider and wait times vary depending on the service and location. Veterans in Texas wait an average of 38 days for referrals, Griffith said. This is slightly longer than the private sector's average wait time in Texas of 36 days. "There's certainly variation both geographically and within specialty," Griffith said. "There's certain specialties that are seen faster, or a VA medical center might have a greater capacity. One thing that has come up frequently in our research is that the wait times between the VA and the private sector are well correlated. So, areas that tend to have a longer VA wait time tend to just be medically underserved areas in general." Wait times for new patients at veterans affairs primary care facilities vary. As of April 6, the wait time for the Corpus Christi VA Clinic was an average of 30 days and the Austin VA Clinic an average of 20 days, according to Veterans Affairs' website. But the average wait time for an optometry appointment for new patients at the Austin VA clinic is 106 days. Law requires the department to have internal policies for wait times of 20 days for primary care and 28 days for specialty care. "Unfortunately, these standards are arbitrarily set. Many veterans, actually most, do not get seen within that time period. But it's perhaps because the standard is a bit of a reach, because the private sector isn't even close to meeting those wait times either," Griffith said. Funding ICE health services Westley pointed to a paragraph on an ICE document that defined the role of a Veterans Affairs center in ICE detention health services. The document indicates the VA Financial Services Center provides financial services to federal customers, and the center has an agreement with ICE to provide medical claims processing services that are in turn reimbursed by the Department of Homeland Security. A Veterans Affairs public affairs representative from the Dallas office wrote that the Financial Services Center provides services for a fee and does not receive annual appropriations from Congress. DHS "pays for" its medical care by providing funding to the Financial Services Center. Our ruling Texas land commissioner candidate Tim Westley said, "When we talk about illegal immigration, and we have illegal immigrants that have to be seen within 24 hours, while veterans are seen within months." In follow-up emails, Westley specified he was referring to health screenings administered by ICE and the triaging system. Immigrants in ICE custody do not have quick access to medical care, though the agency's goal is to identify potential health issues by administering health screenings within 12 hours and health assessments within two weeks. Veterans wait an average of just over a month for referrals to medical professionals, though some may wait longer depending on the service they need and geography. Detention facility health services and veterans' medical services are dissimilar and unrelated, and comparing the two is not an apples-to-apples comparison. We rated this claim Fals

A video shows the Russian warship Moskva exploding Widespread videos claiming to show the explosion that sank the Moskva, the premier Russian Black Sea warship, continue to rack up views across social media, even though the videos show the wrong ship. One such video was uploaded to TikTok on April 14, the same day the missile cruiser sank. Russia and Ukraine offered differing explanations: Ukraine claimed that it took out the ship with missiles, a position supported by U.S. officials, while Russia blamed a fire on board and only recently acknowledged casualties. The TikTok video has since amassed more than 16.5 million views. Other versions of the same video, with similar captions falsely claiming it shows the Moskva, also appeared on other platforms such as Twitter and Facebook. "Russian warship ‘Moscow’ went to hell," one tweet said. "Very fast!" 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 The footage seen in the viral videos predates the Russian war on Ukraine by almost a decade. Researchers and fact-checkers at Bellingcat, Reuters, Snopes and other organizations quickly identified the original source of the footage. Reverse image searches show the video was taken off the coast of Norway in 2013. The Norwegian Navy blasted one of its own decommissioned ships with a missile as part of a military exercise meant to test out new weaponry. The same video was published online in 2013 by CNN, Military.com, and South West News Service, a British news agency. "That is some serious Scandinavian firepower right there," CNN’s John Berman said in a June 2013 TV segment that played the footage. "That’s the Norwegian Navy blowing up one of its own ships to test out a new long-range stealth missile." We rate this miscaptioned TikTok post Fals

Bath and Body Works products are not recommended during pregnancy because they are suspected of “damaging fertility or the unborn child. It can feel nerve-racking to navigate the world while pregnant. There are loads of rules and recommendations on what you can and can’t consume, activities you can and cannot do. So when social media posts pop up that claim popular products like fragrance mists or lotions can cause fertility issues, it’s easy to panic. But is it warranted? "Did you know that Bath & Body Works products are actually not recommended to use while pregnant?" one April 18 post shared on Facebook begins. "Neither did I because I never thought to read their safety data sheets. Straight from their safety data sheet it reads and I quote, ‘suspected of damaging fertility or the unborn child’ and, ‘may cause damage to organs through prolonged or repeated exposure.’" The post links to a safety data document for the company’s Winter Candy Apple home fragrance refill. "The products that have been … glorified FOR YEARS because ‘they smell good’ or, ‘they have the best candles’ have a warning label that could harm an unborn child, a woman’s hormones AND their organs?" the user asked. 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 appears to be a spin-off of claims about the company’s products that first appeared on TikTok in January. The document does include warnings about skin irritation, infertility and organ damage, but these types of disclosures aren’t new or limited to Bath & Body Works, and they aren’t aimed at typical consumer use. To sell products in certain states, home fragrance companies are required to put these types of disclosures on their websites. 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 But the safety warnings are not intended for consumers, Bath & Body Works told PolitiFact. They are meant for large manufacturers and first responders in case they come into contact with large vats of a chemical or product. "Every Bath & Body Works product undergoes extensive review to ensure safety. Safety Data Sheets, like the one in the social media post, do not reflect the safety of products when used as directed," the company said in an emailed statement to PolitiFact. "Bath & Body Works posts these sheets to assist manufacturing companies and emergency personnel who need to know how to handle, store or dispose of large quantities of chemicals in industrial and manufacturing settings. "As with any product a customer may use during pregnancy, we encourage them to consult a doctor if they have specific questions," the company added. The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists told PolitiFact that it has no official recommendation about pregnant women not using Bath & Body Works products. Dr. Christopher M. Zahn, the organization’s chief of clinical practice and interim chief of health equity and quality, called the claim false and lamented how medical misinformation like this can create unnecessary fear and confusion. "Just because information is online or on social media doesn’t mean that it is true, or based on any reliable medical evidence," Zahn said. "It is a sad reality that some people intentionally disseminate false information or simply decide to share unproven medical allegations without confirming the truth." Our ruling A Facebook post claims that Bath & Body Works products are not recommended to use while pregnant and points to warnings of infertility and organ failure. Although the warnings do appear in a company safety data document, there is no official recommendation for pregnant women to not use Bath & Body Works products. The disclosures aren’t aimed at consumers, the company said, and are typical and required for home fragrance companies. The purpose of safety sheets is to assist manufacturers and emergency personnel who need to know how to handle, store or dispose of large quantities of chemicals. We rate this claim Fals

“Most Americans favor keeping Title 42 in place. A North Carolina senator says President Biden is on the verge of ending an immigration-related pandemic policy that most Americans support. The Biden administration recently announced plans to lift what’s known as Title 42, a public health law that allows border officials to expel certain immigrants without giving them a chance to apply for asylum. Unaccompanied children and some others are exempt from the rule. Title 42 has been controversial since former President Donald Trump enacted it at the start of the pandemic in 2020. Critics of the rule say it’s inherently xenophobic, while supporters see it as a tool that’s necessary for managing both the coronavirus and the influx of immigrants at the southern U.S. border. U.S. Sen. Thom Tillis, R-N.C., says he’s working with other Republicans to try to keep Title 42 in place after the Biden administration’s May 23 expiration date. In an April 7 press release with U.S. Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., Tillis claimed that Biden’s decision is out of step with voters’ priorities. "Most Americans favor keeping Title 42 in place, so I hope we can agree that we should maintain this policy and protect our country from a surge of illegal immigration over the next few months," Tillis said in the press release. Is it true that "most Americans" want to keep Title 42 in place? Polling by Morning Consult and Politico suggests Title 42 might be popular, but polling experts say it’s difficult to make declarative statements about the law without more data. A separate poll conducted by an immigrant rights group found support for Biden’s position, but experts said it had its own shortcomings. Morning Consult poll To support Tillis’ claim, his office pointed to the Morning Consult poll, which was released April 6. The survey of 2,003 registered voters was conducted between April 1 and 4 and had an unweighted margin of error of plus-minus 2 percentage points. Morning Consult, a market research company, reported that 56% of respondents oppose the decision to remove the border controls implemented by the Trump administration. The group has a "B" rating with FiveThirtyEight, a website that conducts opinion poll analysis and grades political pollsters. A "B" rating means the company is generally reliable but its polling methodology isn’t as good as firms with "A" ratings. Polling experts told PolitiFact North Carolina that, due to the way the question was phrased in that poll, they’re not confident the results offer a clear reflection of people’s beliefs about Title 42 specifically. Here’s how Morning Consult phrased its question about Title 42: "As you may know, the Trump administration implemented border controls at the U.S.-Mexico border in March 2020 in order to slow the spread of COVID-19. These controls allowed border officials to quickly expel migrants seeking to enter the U.S. for protection. The Biden administration will remove these border controls on May 23rd. Do you support or oppose the Biden administration removing these border controls?" 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 The inclusion of Trump and Biden’s names may have caused some voters to skip over consideration of the rule and side with their preferred politician, polling experts said. David McLennan, a political science professor at Meredith College in Raleigh, North Carolina, said he was "troubled" by the wording of the question "because it does not reference the CDC Title 42 directive, instead making it appear to be more of a political issue between Trump and Biden." Andrew E. Smith, director of the University of New Hampshire’s Survey Center, doubted whether many respondents had much knowledge of the Title 42 policy before they were asked the question. "But they do know Donald Trump and Joe Biden, and it is no surprise that Biden voters support the change and Trump supporters oppose it as the names are cues to how they should respond," he said in an email. Polling experts noticed a pattern between support for Title 42 and support for Biden more generally. Asked whether they approve or disapprove of the job President Joe Biden is doing, 55% of respondents said they disapprove — almost the same number of respondents who said they want to keep Title 42 in place. "Since almost everything now is just a surrogate for ‘us’ or ‘them,’ I’d argue that question is essentially another form of asking about presidential approval," Janine Parry, a University of Arkansas political science professor, said in an email. Smith noted that the poll didn’t ask voters questions to determine if they were familiar with the Title 42 policy. "So there is no way of assessing, in my opinion, what Americans know or don’t know about the original policy, let alone their support for changing it." PolitiFact NC reached out to Morning Consult seeking comment on the experts’ criticisms, but didn’t receive a response. The group conducted another poll on the issue between April 8-11, after Tillis’ comment. It found that 54% of respondents support Title 42. But, again, the question included references to Biden and Trump. Another poll A poll released on Feb. 22 by the National Immigration Law Center’s Justice Fund omitted the names of politicians when asking about Title 42. The poll, which surveyed 802 likely voters, asked if respondents supported or opposed ending "the practice of using COVID as a reason to deny asylum seekers entrance to the U.S." Fifty-two percent said they supported ending the policy. But experts found issues with that poll too. McLennan noticed that the respondents included a higher percentage of women and people with higher education levels than one would expect. Smith said the Justice Fund poll, like the Morning Consult poll, failed to determine whether people were familiar with the policy before asking about it. Questions from both polls "assume a level of knowledge about the topic that is likely not there, certainly among most people." Our ruling Tillis said "Most Americans favor keeping Title 42 in place." One poll of 2,003 registered voters found that 56% of them want to keep Title 42 in place. However, polling experts say the phrasing of the question wasn’t ideal in that it invoked the names of Trump and Biden. Another poll, which did not use such names, found that 52% of respondents opposed Title 42. Tillis’s statement has some truth to it but lacks key information about the issue that would leave a different impression. We rate it Half Tru

Brian Kemp and Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger “perhaps in collusion with the Radical Left Democrats” are attempting to “unseat” U.S. Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene A day before a court hearing on whether U.S. Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, R-Ga., should be removed from the ballot in her bid for reelection, former President Donald Trump accused two prominent Republican officials of trying to unseat the congresswoman. Greene is an ally of Trump. "The Governor of Georgia, Brian Kemp, and Secretary of State, Brad Raffensperger, perhaps in collusion with the Radical Left Democrats, have allowed a horrible thing to happen to a very popular Republican, Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene," Trump wrote in an April 21 statement. "She is now going through hell in their attempt to unseat her, just more of an election mess in Georgia…" Trump appears to be referencing a challenge filed by Free Speech for People, a group of voters seeking to remove Greene from the ballot. Greene, who has promoted falsehoods that Democrats stole the 2020 election, faces multiple primary challengers in the Republican-leaning district. The group says that Greene’s statements before the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol should disqualify her under a section of the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution which says that public officials cannot serve in future federal, state, or military office if they engaged in "insurrection or rebellion." As secretary of state, Raffensperger is required under state law to forward any such voter challenge to an administrative law judge. A judge held a hearing on the matter on April 22, which was underway as of this writing. We asked Trump’s spokesperson for their evidence that Kemp and Raffensperger colluded with Democrats to remove Greene and did not receive a response by our deadline. We found no evidence to support that theory. Trump has targeted the Georgia Republican officials after they didn’t go along with his efforts to overturn the 2020 presidential election. Raffensperger and Kemp certified the results, as required by state law. Trump is backing Republican challengers to both officials — former U.S. Sen. David Perdue is running against Kemp, while U.S. Rep. Jody Hice is running against Raffensperger in the May 24 primary. How voters are attempting to get Greene booted from the ballot Greene has not been charged with any offenses stemming from the Jan. 6 attack. The challenge filed by the voters relies on statements Greene made, such as the day before the Capitol attack, calling for a "1776 moment" — a nod to the American Revolution. During the April 22 hearing, Greene said she was calling for a "peaceful" demonstration and not violence. A judge rejected a similar effort to bar U.S. Rep. Madison Cawthorn, R-N.C., from running for reelection, but the case is under appeal. Challenges have also been filed related to the candidacy of some Arizona Republicans. 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 Under Georgia law, a voter may file a written challenge with the secretary of state. The official must then refer the matter to an administrative law judge, who reports their findings to the secretary of state. Then the secretary of state "shall determine if the candidate is qualified to seek and hold the public office" and can remove the candidate’s name from the ballot. If the ballots have already been printed, notices are placed at polling places advising voters of the disqualification of the candidate. So far, then, Raffensperger has followed the process required under state law. It doesn’t mean he agrees with the challenge; he’s simply obligated to pass the complaint on to a judge. In fact, state law would have allowed Raffensperger to challenge Greene’s candidacy directly — but he didn’t do that. "In sum, we have had no active role in the challenge to (Greene’s) candidacy at this point," said Raffensperger’s spokesperson, Ari Schaffer. "Considering we make the final decision, it would be inappropriate to comment early on in the process." Meanwhile, we found no evidence that Kemp would play a role in this process at all. We emailed a spokesperson for Kemp to ask if he had taken any action and did not receive a response by our deadline. Attorneys for the voters who filed the challenge told PolitiFact they had no evidence to support Trump’s charge of collusion.. "The governor has no role in the process," Ron Fein, legal director for Free Speech for People, told PolitiFact. "Counsel for petitioners have not interacted with Kemp at all, or Raffensperger except through the bureaucratic technicality that the complaint was filed with him." Our ruling Trump said Kemp and Raffensperger "perhaps in collusion with the Radical Left Democrats" are attempting to "unseat" Greene. A group of voters filed a challenge with Raffensperger to remove Greene from the ballot. Under state law, Raffensperger is required to forward that challenge to an administrative law judge, and he did so. As governor, Kemp has no role in this process. We rate this statement False. RELATED: All of our fact-checks of Trump RELATED: What Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene has said about election fraud, QAnon and other conspiracy theories’ RELATED: All of our fact-checks about electio

"For four years, I was a full professor at the University of Pennsylvania. During a visit to North Carolina A&T State University in Greensboro, N.C., President Joe Biden broke the ice with his audience by saying he shared some common ground with members of the university community. "I've been to a lot of university campuses," Biden said April 14. "Matter of fact, for four years, I was a full professor at the University of Pennsylvania. And this is really an impressive place with a lot of impressive students." A reader asked us to fact-check whether Biden really was a full professor for four years. Biden served as Benjamin Franklin Presidential Professor of the Practice at the University of Pennsylvania between his tenure as vice president and the start of his presidential campaign. However, the duration of the position was closer to two years than four, since he was on leave while running for president. Also, his duties might not conform to the full range of activities that the public might associate with the term "full professor," including teaching semester-long classes, conducting independent research, and handling administrative responsibilities. The White House did not respond to requests for comment. According to the university’s faculty handbook, the rank of practice professor "is confined to a small number of untenured full-time professorships" in certain schools at Penn that permit the addition to the faculty of "distinguished, highly experienced individuals who have achieved success in their fields and whose skills and knowledge are essential to the educational process at both the undergraduate and graduate levels." The handbook describes the "primary" activity of a practice professor as teaching, though they may also "supervise independent studies and internships, serve on committees and attend school faculty meetings." According to the tax forms he has released, Biden received more than $900,000 from the university for holding the position between 2017 and 2019. His post "involved no regular classes and around a dozen public appearances on campus, mostly in big, ticketed events," the Philadelphia Inquirer reported. Specifically, the Inquirer reported, Biden’s appearances included "three Q-and-As with Penn president Amy Gutmann, panel discussions on immigration and cancer, a talk about his book, a lecture to a Wharton class, and public conversations with former Mexico President Felipe Calderon and former United Kingdom Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg, according to a tally by the student newspaper, the Daily Pennsylvanian." As part of the post, Biden also established the Penn Biden Center for Diplomacy and Global Engagement in Washington for the university. Biden’s professorship included affiliations with the Annenberg School for Communication, Penn’s School of Arts and Sciences, and the Wharton School. 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 However, shortly after Biden’s appointment was announced in 2017, Kate Bedingfield, a Biden spokesperson, told The Daily Pennsylvanian that Biden would not be teaching regular classes. Joe Biden at a forum on the opioid epidemic at the University of Pennsylvania on April 11, 2019. (AP) Biden was the first individual to hold the Franklin professorship, and his tenure overlapped with the second holder: former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, a Republican. Biden and Bush held at least two joint events on campus, the Inquirer reported. Biden went on an unpaid leave of absence in April 2019, when he became a presidential candidate, meaning that his time as an active holder of the professorship was about two years, not four as Biden said in his North Carolina speech. PolitiFact asked the University of Pennsylvania about the differences between Biden’s position and those of a rank-and-file full professor. "Penn has many different models of professorships," Ron Ozio, the university’s director of media relations, told PolitiFact. "Not all are tenure-track and involve teaching regular classes. Some are clinicians, some are researchers, and others are professors of the practice, the category that applied to President Biden." Ozio added that the university was satisfied with Biden’s tenure. Biden was "phenomenally successful," Ozio said. "He helped to expand the university’s global outreach, while sharing his wisdom and insights with thousands of Penn students through University-wide events, talks and classroom visits." Our ruling Biden said, "For four years, I was a full professor at the University of Pennsylvania." Biden served as a "professor of the practice" at the University of Pennsylvania. However, the duration of his position was closer to two years, since he was on unpaid leave while running for president. His duties of his particular professorship did not include the same degree of teaching, research, and administrative responsibilities that some would associate with someone holding a position as "full professor." We rate the statement Half Tru

“J.D. Vance called for higher taxes. Early voting is under way in Ohio, and Republican-on-Republican attacks continue in the U.S. Senate race, with Mike Gibbons hitting J.D. Vance over taxes. "J.D. Vance called for higher taxes," the narrator said in a Gibbons TV ad. Vance is an author and venture capitalist. He has not called for tax increases broadly, only for certain corporate leaders and corporations. Vance backs some corporate tax hikes The ad is based on a tweet that Vance posted in April 2021 in reply to CBS News reporter Ed O’Keefe. Gibbons’ campaign did not reply to our request for information, but Vance’s tweet is cited in the ad. O’Keefe tweeted about a "first-of-its-kind call between more than 100 top corporate leaders" on "how to respond to proposed changes in state voting laws." On the call were top leaders of airlines, media, law and investment, O’Keefe said. Vance replied: "Raise their taxes and do whatever else is necessary to fight these goons. We can have an American Republic or a global oligarchy, and it’s time for choosing. "At this very moment there are companies (big and small) paying good wages to American workers, investing in their communities, and making it easier for American families. Cut their taxes. No more subsidies to the anti-American business class." Vance, whom former President Donald Trump endoresed, has also embraced tax increases for certain corporations. "By all means, let’s cut the taxes of the companies that invest in our country," Vance says on his campaign website: "But we’re going to raise taxes on companies that ship jobs overseas and use their money to fund anti-American radical movements. If these companies are going to wage war on America, it’s time America wages war on them." Featured Fact-check Tim Ryan stated on November 1, 2022 in a town hall event “J.D. Vance said nothing about” the attack on Paul Pelosi. By Jon Greenberg • November 3, 2022 Vance spokesperson Taylor Van Kirk told PolitiFact that Vance "has advocated for cutting taxes on companies who create jobs in America and wants to raise taxes on companies who are anti-American and who ship out jobs to China." We didn’t find any instances of Vance calling for other tax increases. Ohio race could help decide Senate control The Ohio Senate seat is opening because Republican Rob Portman, who was elected in 2010, is not seeking re-election. Besides Gibbons, a businessman, and Vance, the Republican candidates include Ohio state Sen. Matt Dolan, former Ohio state treasurer Josh Mandel and former Ohio Republican Party chair Jane Timken. As of April 19, the Real Clear Politics polling average put Mandel in the lead at 21%, followed by Gibbons at 19.3% and Vance at 14%. In a poll of likely GOP voters conducted April 13 to April 14 by Trafalgar Group, Mandel led with 28%, followed by Vance at 22.6% and Gibbons at 14.3%. The leading Democratic candidates are U.S. Rep. Tim Ryan and consumer protection attorney Morgan Harper. Overall, the race is rated by campaign watchers as "leans" Republican, "likely" Republican and "solid" Republican. Our ruling Gibbons said in an ad that Vance "called for higher taxes." This is partly true. Vance has called for tax hikes on certain corporate leaders and corporations. But he has not called for tax increases broadly. We rate Gibbons’ statement Half True. RELATED: Fact-checks in the 2022 Ohio Senate race RELATED: The race for the Ohio U.S. Senate seat: A guide RELATED: Fact-checking ads in the 2022 electio

"As Ohio treasurer, Josh Mandel loaned your money to Chinese business interests, and Mandel opposed a bill holding Communist China accountable when they cheated and stole American jobs. When verbal sparring between candidates nearly gets physical, you wouldn’t expect it to let up as primary election day draws near. In the race for the U.S. Senate in Ohio, you’d be right. During a debate in March, Republicans Mike Gibbons and Josh Mandel literally got toe-to-toe after Mandel accused Gibbons of making millions from business dealings related to Chinese companies. Now, with early voting underway for the May 3 Ohio primaries, Gibbons accused Mandel of being "weak on China" — a theme common in 2022 campaigns across the country. In a video ad on Facebook and Instagram, the narrator said: "As Ohio treasurer, Josh Mandel loaned your money to Chinese business interests, and Mandel opposed a bill holding Communist China accountable when they cheated and stole American jobs." On the money lending part of the claim, Gibbons cites the investment of Ohio public funds in companies such as U.S.-based Exxon and Apple, which many Americans are invested in. The companies do business in China, but they are multinational corporations, not Chinese companies. Mandel indicated in 2012 that he opposed tariffs on China as proposed in 2011 federal legislation, saying he preferred diplomacy to dissuade China from manipulating its currency. Money not loaned to ‘Chinese business interests’ To back the first part of the ad’s claim, Gibbons’ campaign cited to PolitiFact investments made by the State Treasury Asset Reserve of Ohio while Mandel was treasurer, from 2011 to 2019. STAR Ohio is a fund consisting of pooled assets from Ohio government subdivisions, including counties, municipalities and school districts. The fund is administered by the treasurer. Citing STAR Ohio’s 2018 annual report, Gibbons’ campaign pointed to investments the fund made in Toyota Motor Credit Corp., Exxon Mobil Corp., JPMorgan Securities, Credit Suisse AG, MetLife Funding Inc. and Apple Inc. The campaign argued that at the time, each company had business operations in China or did business with companies in China. The companies or the parent companies are multinational corporations based outside of China, not "Chinese business interests." Toyota is based in Japan; Credit Suisse AG is based in Switzerland; and Exxon, JPMorgan, MetLife and Apple are based in the United States. David Dollar, an expert on China's economy and U.S.-China economic relations at the Brookings Institution, said the companies "cannot be characterized as Chinese business interests. Their shareholders would mostly be from the USA and other developed countries, not China." ‘Opposed a bill holding China accountable’ On the second part of the ad’s claim, the Gibbons campaign referred to a 2011 federal bill that would have pressured China to allow its currency to appreciate. Featured Fact-check Tim Ryan stated on November 1, 2022 in a town hall event “J.D. Vance said nothing about” the attack on Paul Pelosi. By Jon Greenberg • November 3, 2022 By manipulating the value of its currency, China can gain a competitive advantage over American manufacturers by keeping its export prices low. A weaker yuan, relative to the U.S. dollar, means Chinese goods can be exported more cheaply to the United States, because each dollar in sales revenue translates to more yuan back in China. Supporters argued that Chinese "cheating" on the issue cost the United States more than 1.6 million jobs. The Gibbons campaign cited a 2012 Cleveland Plain Dealer story in which Mandel, in his first run for U.S. Senate, indicated opposition to the bill. The bill would have moved the U.S. toward imposing tariffs on countries that manipulate their currency, but more hurdles would have had to have been cleared, said Derek Scissors, an expert on the Chinese economy and trade policy at the American Enterprise Institute. The newspaper reported that Mandel believed China manipulated its currency and should be held accountable through diplomatic means. "We must be vigilant in taking them on and making sure they play by the rules. At the same time, my approach would be a diplomatic approach, not a legislative approach," Mandel said. The bill passed the Senate but was not taken up by the House. Mandel’s campaign did not reply to our requests for comment. Ohio race could help decide Senate control The Ohio Senate seat is opening because Republican Rob Portman, who was elected in 2010, is not seeking reelection. Besides Mandel and Gibbons, the Republican candidates include Ohio state Sen. Matt Dolan, former Ohio Republican Party chair Jane Timken and "Hillbilly Elegy" author J.D. Vance. The leading Democratic candidates are U.S. Rep. Tim Ryan and consumer protection attorney Morgan Harper. Overall, the race is rated by campaign watchers as "leans" Republican, "likely" Republican and "solid" Republican. Our ruling Gibbons claimed in an ad that Mandel, as Ohio’s state treasurer, "loaned your money to Chinese business interests and Mandel opposed a bill holding Communist China accountable when they cheated and stole American jobs." Mandel led a state fund that invested public money in multinational corporations such as U.S.-based Exxon and Apple that do business in China, but are not based there. Mandel indicated he did not support a 2011 bill that would have allowed for imposing tariffs on countries that manipulated their currency. But he suggested holding China accountable through diplomatic efforts. Gibbons’ statement contains an element of truth but ignores critical facts that would give a different impression. We rate it Mostly Fals

Says he has “always” believed “in a woman’s right to choose. The political career of U.S. Rep. Charlie Crist, a Democratic candidate for Florida governor, spans three decades, three party affiliations and multiple positions on sensitive issues. On April 12, Shannon Cake of WPTV in West Palm Beach quizzed Crist on his political evolution, specifically where he currently stood on LGBTQ rights and abortion. While Crist readily admitted that he had changed his position on gay marriage, he said his stance on whether women should have the right to obtain an abortion hadn’t changed. "I believe in a woman’s right to choose. I always have," Crist said. "I am still pro-life — meaning I am for life. I hope most people are, and I think it’s important to understand the distinction." Cake pushed back at his use of "pro-life," because it doesn’t precisely describe the political discourse surrounding abortion. Crist maintained that he was "for life" and also supported women’s right to choose. PolitiFact has fact-checked claims related to Crist’s view on abortion more than five times. It’s difficult to condense to a sound bite. Crist’s stance has been consistently inconsistent. He’s called himself both "pro-life" and "pro-choice" throughout his career, defining them on his own terms. As a raft of new abortion laws take hold in Republican-led states across the U.S. — including Florida — we wanted to take a fresh look at Crist’s record. Let’s examine the evidence. Crist was ‘pro-choice’ at the start of his career When Crist arrived on Florida’s political scene in 1992 — then a Republican from St. Petersburg, running for the state Legislature — his stance on abortion was less murky: the decision should rest with women, not the government. Crist told the Miami Herald that he did not support state-funded abortion. Such rhetoric reappeared throughout much of his early career in the Florida Senate. In 1995, Crist broke from party lines to vote down a measure that would have imposed a 24-hour waiting period for women to obtain an abortion. At the time, Crist argued that his position fell in line with Republican tendencies to favor small government involvement. As he began to eye a national office, his support for abortion rights grew more conditional. In March 1998, Crist expressed opposition to late-term abortion and voted with the Senate to override former Gov. Lawton Chiles’ veto of a bill aimed at prohibiting the procedure. Later, in a bid for a U.S. Senate seat in 1998, Crist wrote in a questionnaire for the Tampa Bay Times that he was "pro-choice, but not pro-abortion." Thus began the argument that though he didn’t personally favor the procedure, he didn’t aim to strike it down. This position was further cemented when Crist said he wouldn’t back a constitutional amendment to prohibit abortion. He lost that race. Crist re-cast himself as ‘pro-life’ in the 2006 gubernatorial race As he geared up to run for Florida governor in 2006, Crist re-cast himself more simply as "pro-life." Featured Fact-check Rebekah Jones stated on October 26, 2022 in a post on Instagram Document shows Rebekah Jones “demonstrated” a violation of Florida’s Whistleblower Act. By Sara Swann • November 1, 2022 During the Republican primary, one of Crist’s opponents cast doubt on his position on abortion, releasing a campaign ad that labeled him "pro-choice." Crist’s campaign called it false and fired back with an ad that claimed Crist was "pro-life." Still, Crist’s remarks on abortion continued to puzzle "activists on both sides of the abortion debate," according to the Miami Herald. On the one hand, he publicly expressed opposition to the procedure. On the other, he said he wouldn't support repealing the U.S. Supreme Court decision, Roe v. Wade, that made it legal. In 2006, Crist routinely said politicians shouldn’t put "themselves in the place of physicians." However, during that campaign, Crist also told a priest he would sign a bill prohibiting abortions except when the mother’s life was at stake. Crist won the Republican nomination and became governor of Florida for four years. His second bid for the U.S. Senate introduced more flexibility on abortion. In the 2010 Republican U.S. Senate primary, Crist’s campaign released a statement that he would "fight for pro-life legislative efforts." When his primary chances soured, Crist left the Republican Party and continued an unsuccessful run for the Senate seat with no party affiliation. Before he left the governor’s office, Crist vetoed legislation that would have required women to get an ultrasound before opting to have an abortion, saying he found it "punitive." Crist’s position on abortion becomes more clear after 2012 Out of office in 2012, Crist endorsed former President Barack Obama for re-election in an op-ed for the Tampa Bay Times and complained about the Republican Party pitching "so far to the extreme right on issues important to women." A few months later, Crist officially signed papers to become a Democrat for an unsuccessful bid for governor against Republican Rick Scott. On the now-defunct website for his 2014 campaign, Crist stated: "Charlie supports a woman’s right to make her own health care decisions — as governor, he vetoed a measure that required women seeking an abortion to have an ultrasound, a law that Rick Scott signed. Charlie believes that government should stay out of personal health decisions between a woman and her doctor." Recently, when Gov. Ron DeSantis signed legislation banning most abortions after 15 weeks of pregnancy, Crist denounced the move, using a similar rationale. Crist’s campaign also pointed to his congressional record. In 2017, Crist voted against legislation that aimed to prohibit abortion after 20 weeks of pregnancy. He also voted against efforts to defund Planned Parenthood, a nonprofit organization that provides health care services, including abortion. Crist is one of multiple Democrats running in the Aug. 23 primary for governor. The winner will face DeSantis in November. Our ruling Crist said in a TV interview that he has "always" believed "in a woman’s right to choose." That’s wrong. It’s difficult to summarize Crist’s views on abortion over three decades in a nutshell, because he has expressed conflicting statements. But he has made some remarks that went against the choice to have an abortion, including in 2006 when Crist told a priest that he would sign a bill prohibiting abortion except when the mother’s life was at stake. In 2010, his campaign said that Crist would "fight for pro-life legislative efforts." There are other times when Crist made statements in favor of abortion access, such as when he said he would not be in favor of repealing Roe v. Wade. But on the whole, he takes it too far when he says he "always" supported a woman’s right to choose an abortion. We rate this statement False. PolitiFact researcher Caryn Baird contributed to this repor

Dr. Anthony Fauci said lockdowns are a method for coercing people to comply with COVID-19 vaccinations A social media post misleads by showing a truncated version of a comment from Dr. Anthony Fauci that is missing context. An April 19 post on Facebook suggests that Fauci said lockdowns are a method for coercing people to comply with COVID-19 vaccinations. The post shows a screenshot of a headline that says, "Fauci: ‘You use lockdowns to get people vaccinated,’" from conservative news site the Daily Wire. The caption says, "That's called tyranny." The post also includes a meme showing the character Fred from Scooby Doo unmasking Fauci to reveal the emblem of the Chinese Communist Party. The meme gives the disturbing appearance of resembling a beheading. 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.) But Fauci’s comment was taken out of context — in an MSNBC interview, he was talking specifically about vaccine efficacy and uptake in China, where there is an ongoing lockdown. And he did not indicate at any point in his 90-second reply that lockdowns should be used as a tool of coercion, as the post implies. He made the remark during an April 14 interview with Andrea Mitchell on MSNBC, in reply to a question about China’s current approach to COVID-19. At the 6:54 mark in the video, Mitchell asked, "How concerning is the outbreak in China?" and mentioned the ongoing, near-total lockdown in Shanghai. Part of Fauci’s reply was, "You use lockdowns to get people vaccinated so that when you open up, you won't have a surge of infections, because you're dealing with an immunologically naive population to the virus, because they've not really been exposed because of the lockdown." He went on to say, around the 8:25 mark, that people in China are not well-protected by vaccines — in part because China is using less effective vaccines than many other countries — and that its most vulnerable population, older people, are not vaccinated. His observations about vaccinations in China are borne out by recent reporting. 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 China "is struggling with two problems as it faces its worst COVID-19 surge since the start of the pandemic," according to an April 20 story in the Financial Times. The problems are "the sluggish take-up of booster doses — authorities said this week that only 57 per cent of people over 60 have been fully vaccinated with three jabs — and homegrown vaccines that are much less effective than foreign-produced jabs." But the first portion of Fauci’s comment — that "you use lockdowns to get people vaccinated" — was seized upon by people such as Dr. Simone Gold, a founder of America’s Frontline Doctors, which became famous for voicing coronavirus conspiracy theories. Gold tweeted on April 19, "Fauci is essentially admitting that lockdowns were used to condition and control the public—putting people in such a heightened state of desperation for freedom as to compel us to take the vaccine." The story that the Facebook post references, from the Daily Wire, gives a more complete accounting of Fauci’s comments, but it also gives the misleading impression that Fauci is a supporter of China’s style of lockdowns. For example, the story quotes a fragment of one of Fauci’s comments — that China’s type of strict lockdowns would never be able to be implemented in the United States, "although that prevents the spread of infection" — even though Fauci never said or implied that the U.S. should employ those types of lockdowns. Our ruling A Facebook post suggests that Fauci said lockdowns are a method for coercing people to comply with COVID-19 vaccinations. The claim includes a truncated version of Fauci’s comments that was taken out of context. In his 90-second reply, he talked specifically about vaccine efficacy and uptake in China, where there is an ongoing lockdown. And Fauci did not indicate at any point that lockdowns should be used as a tool of coercion, as the post implies. We rate this claim False

“Inflation has gone up every month of the Biden presidency and just hit another 40-year high. Prices are increasing for everything from gas at the pump to the chicken at the grocery store. That means the reason driving those increases – inflation – has become a major talking point, especially for politicians. And especially for Republicans, who want to pin the blame for rising prices on Democrats and President Joe Biden. U.S. Rep. Mike Gallagher, R-Green Bay, weighed in on the matter, and framed the increases around Biden’s time in office. "Inflation has gone up every month of the Biden presidency and just hit another 40-year high," he said in an April 12, 2022 news release. Is he right? Inflation is indeed high, and has steadily been increasing When asked for more backup for the claim, Gallagher’s office shared a link to an April 10, 2022 article from NBC News, which noted that inflation has risen every month since Biden took office – and that the inflation rate is the highest it’s been in 40 years. His office also shared a link to data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, showing the Consumer Price Index (which serves as a measure of inflation) for the last 20 years. The graph shows that the index started climbing in April 2020, with a steep increase in January of 2021. That, of course, is when Biden took office. Before we dig deeper, it’s important to note two things. First, economists and experts say inflation is driven by a wide variety of factors, including a surge in demand for services and goods, and consumers who are willing to pay more for them. In this case, it includes supply chain issues prompted by COVID-related problems such as a drop in the production of items such as cars, couches and even gas, according to a Jan. 10, 2022 New York Times article. But inflation can also be driven by consumers spending more money, as people are doing following the stimulus checks received during the coronavirus pandemic. "The indefatigable shopping is helping to keep price increases brisk," the NYT article said. Second, inflation has been creeping up for quite a long time, and continued that trend under former President Donald Trump, just as it has under Biden. As an April 20, 2022 factcheck noted, inflation did increase after Biden took office, especially following the passage of the American Rescue Plan, which included $1,400 payments to every American, $360 billion for state and local governments and $242 billion in expanded unemployment benefits, among other funding. Jim Johannes, an emeritus professor of banking and finance and the director of the Puelicher Center for Banking Education at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, said looking at charts from the Federal Reserve Economic Data (FRED) website shows that the inflation rate is indeed at its highest point in 40 years, sitting at about 8.5% as of March. That is, prices in March 2022 were 8.5% higher than in March 2021. The last time the rate was that high was in 1981. As far as the inflation rate rising every month of Biden’s presidency, Gallagher’s claim deserves an asterisk on that point as well. Here is the breakdown: February 2021: 1.7% March 2021: 2.7% 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 April 2021: 4.2% May 2021: 4.9% June 2021: 5.3% July 2021: 5.3% August 2021: 5.2% September 2021: 5.4% October 2021: 6.2% November 2021: 6.8% December 2021: 7.1% January 2022: 7.5% February 2022: 7.9% March 2022: 8.5% According to FRED data, there was a slight plateau between June 2021 and September 2021, but other than that, inflation has indeed increased every month since Biden took office. "I think the factual statement as in the inflation rate going up every month of the Biden administration, the answer would be, with a slight exception of a few months in 2021, the answer is yes," Johannes said. Our ruling In a news release, Gallagher claimed: "Inflation has gone up every month of the Biden presidency and just hit another 40-year high." Looking at economic data, it’s true that the rate of inflation is the highest it’s been since the 1980s. And inflation has, indeed, been on the rise under Biden – though Gallagher glosses over a slight plateau in mid-2021. What’s more, the increase – which, to be sure, has gotten much steeper – began before Biden was sworn in, under Trump. That leaves us with a claim that is accurate, but needs clarification or additional information. That’s what we call Mostly True. 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' });

Lilibet, baby daughter of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, "made her first appearance with the queen. Lilibet, baby daughter of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, Prince Harry and Meghan Markle, is only 10 months old, but so far, various claims have said she didn’t exist and that she met the queen. Neither is true. Lilibet "made her first appearance with the queen," says the caption on a video posted on Facebook on April 18. 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 Duke and Duchess stopped in the United Kingdom en route to The Hague, in the Netherlands, for the Invictus Games, which the Duke founded to help injured and sick military personnel and veterans. 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 couple’s two children "did not accompany their parents to Europe on this trip, which means the Queen still has not met the newest addition, Lilibet ‘Lili’ Diana Mountbatten-Windsor," the Independent, a British newspaper, reported on April 16. It was the first time the couple had visited Europe together since moving to California in 2020, after they stepped down as senior royals. The claim also said "chaos erupt(ed) at (the) palace," because Lilibet "had perfect black skin." Markle, who is biracial, said in a 2021 interview that when she was pregnant with her first child, a member of the royal family talked to Harry about "concerns and conversations about how dark his skin might be when he was born," according to Time magazine. A Facebook video says Lilibet "made her first appearance with the queen," but the baby has not met Queen Elizabeth yet. We rate this claim False.

Arnold Schwarzenegger slept on the ground in front of a bronze statue of himself because he had been turned away from a hotel A viral photo of Arnold Schwarzenegger tells a sob story about the actor-turned-governor. But in reality, the photo was a joke, and it was debunked years ago. The photo posted on Facebook on April 14, 2022, shows Schwarzenegger wrapped in a sleeping bag, lying on the ground in front of a bronze statue of himself. The caption says Schwarzenegger had been turned away from a hotel because it was full. "So he brought a blanket... and fell asleep under the statue... and asked people to take pictures of it…," the caption says. "Arnold wanted to send an important message.. that when he was in power and had a position.. everyone praised him and the hypocrites.. and when he lost this position, they forgot him and did not fulfill their promise to him." 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 photo was a joke, media outlets reported at the time it was taken, in 2016. Schwarzenegger posted the photo on his Facebook, Instagram and Twitter accounts on Jan. 15, 2016. He captioned it, "How times have changed." 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 People magazine’s headline the same day read, "Arnold Schwarzenegger posts funny photo of himself ... next to a statue of himself." The story also said the photo is "bound to make you chuckle." Similarly, E! News reported at the time that Schwarzenegger "poked a little fun at himself." The claim was previously debunked in 2019 and 2021. The statue where the photo was taken is in front of the Greater Columbus Convention Center in Ohio, site of the annual Arnold Sports Festival that is named after Schwarzenegger. At the time of the photo, Schwarzenegger was in Columbus for a movie he was filming, "478," according to People. Schwarzenegger did not sleep on the ground in front of a bronze statue of himself because he had been turned away from a hotel. We rate the claim Fals

“The price of insulin increases as waistlines increase. At the end of March, after the House passed a bill that would cap the cost of insulin at $35 per month for insured consumers, Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., tweeted about why he voted against the legislation. "Insulin price increases have more to do with increased consumer demand than the bad behavior of Big Pharma, which I am quick to condemn," Gaetz wrote. He continued, in a 10-part Twitter thread, to offer weight loss as a potential solution to insulin costs rather than capping prices: "90-95% of people with diabetes have type 2 diabetes, which ‘can be prevented or delayed with healthy lifestyle changes, such as losing weight, eating healthy food, and being active.’ Arbitrary price controls are no substitute for individual weight control. Since 2000, the number of diabetes cases in the U.S. has nearly doubled. The demand for insulin has increased and the requisite price increase has followed suit. In other words, the price of insulin increases as waistlines increase." The tweet picked up attention on social media and from news outlets, but we wondered whether there was any connection between demand for insulin and the rising cost of the drug. One economic principle states that, for some products, if demand increases, prices will follow. Does that hold true for insulin, a drug that millions of Americans need to survive? We contacted Gaetz’s office to ask for the evidence to back up his claim but received no response. So we asked the experts to explain what’s going on with insulin prices. Types of diabetes and treatment Insulin was first discovered in 1921 and patented two years later. The hormone is essential for people with Type 1 diabetes because their pancreas no longer makes natural insulin, needed to regulate blood sugar. An extremely high blood sugar level can be deadly. These patients make up about a tenth of the total number of people with diabetes in the country. Some patients need to inject insulin often, at least twice a day. The majority of people with diabetes, however, have Type 2, which has been linked to obesity. Excess weight may interfere with the body’s ability to effectively use insulin, leading to high blood sugar levels. "As obesity increases, diabetes increases as well," said Dr. Paresh Dandona, a professor at the University at Buffalo’s medical school who studies diabetes. But many of these patients are not prescribed insulin as a treatment. Around 30% of people with Type 2 diabetes use insulin when other drug options are not successful in treating the disease, Dandona said. For some Type 2 patients, exercising and a healthier diet "may help reduce the insulin dose, but it doesn't eliminate its use." How insulin drug pricing works Drug pricing experts said there’s no question that insulin’s list price (the amount charged to consumers and their health plans) has risen over the past decade. A 2020 study found that the list price of insulin products increased by 262% from 2007 to 2018, while a 2021 study found that from 2014 to 2018 the list price of insulin products increased by 40%. Is there a reason the price has ballooned? Not really, said the experts, except that the manufacturers and other stakeholders benefit from higher list prices. For example, pharmacy benefit managers — which manage prescription drug benefits on behalf of health plans — are paid based on the rebate amount they get from insulin manufacturers. If they can negotiate a more favorable spot for a manufacturer’s insulin on a drug formulary list (a plan’s list of covered drugs), they receive a bigger rebate. Insurance companies also benefit from higher prices, because they collect a higher amount from a patient’s portion of cost sharing and can also reap rebates from the pharmacy benefit managers. In addition, consumers have little bargaining power because insulin is typically an essential purchase. "The insulin manufacturers set prices based on whatever the market will bear, not based on demand for their products," said Dr. Jing Luo, an assistant professor of medicine at the University of Pittsburgh whose research focuses on drug pricing and use. However, the pharmaceutical industry disagrees with this assessment. PhRMA, the trade industry group representing pharmaceutical companies, told KHN that while it acknowledges drug manufacturers are responsible for raising the list price of insulin, the manufacturers aren’t reaping the benefits of the price increase. Instead, manufacturers are forced to raise the list prices to provide bigger discounts and rebates to the insurers and pharmacy benefit managers. But PhRMA argues that manufacturers are not receiving higher profits because of higher list prices. "Rebates lower what health plans pay for insulins by roughly 84% and these savings should be shared with patients at the pharmacy," said Brian Newell, a PhRMA spokesperson. "Until we fix this broken system, patients will continue to face high costs for insulin." Although in general economic terms, high demand can cause prices to rise because it is difficult to push out enough of a product, production isn’t an issue with insulin because it’s easy to ramp up supplies and there’s not a set amount of insulin that can be made, said Matthew Fiedler, a fellow at the USC-Brookings Schaeffer Initiative for Health Policy. So, demand for insulin shouldn't affect prices. 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 "Production costs are unlikely to change very much when more people buy insulin since production can be scaled up fairly easily, at least in the long run," Fiedler wrote in an email. "In fact, production costs could conceivably fall when more people buy insulin if manufacturers respond by developing more efficient production techniques." Ultimately, the list price for insulin is set by the manufacturers, and they along with every player in the drug pricing system benefit from higher prices, except for the consumers who have to purchase it to survive, said the experts. "As we are all aware, increased demand does indeed drive up prices. This is especially true for commodities," said Luo. "Unfortunately, brand-name prescription drugs like insulin are priced far differently than simple commodities." Would weight loss help reduce insulin costs? In his Twitter thread, Gaetz said that diabetes cases have almost doubled since 2000. That is true. According to data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, about 12 million Americans were diagnosed with diabetes in 2000. In 2018, the number of new diagnoses had risen to about 27 million. But a diabetes diagnosis is not always related to a person’s weight or overall health, especially for those with Type 1 diabetes, who are dependent on insulin treatment for life. "In fact, those with Type 1 diabetes are usually very thin," said Dr. Eron Manusov, a professor in the medical school at the University of Texas, Rio Grande Valley. In addition, most people with diabetes have Type 2, which is linked to weight gain but not always treated with insulin. Other factors can play a role in the risk of developing Type 2 diabetes, such as genetics, lifestyle and age, Manusov said. Alleviating and treating diabetes is not as simple as eating healthier and exercising more, Dandona said. If everyone ate the same healthy diet and exercised the same amount, some people would still become diabetic because a person’s genes and the environment they grew up in matter, he added. "To expect that somehow magically that insulin requirements will vanish if patients lose weight is really talking in cuckoo land," Dandona said. The experts concluded that although insulin list prices and diabetes cases have risen along the relatively same timeline, they’re unrelated. "While higher obesity rates have likely increased diabetes prevalence, it is doubtful that this has had much effect on insulin prices," said Fiedler, the health economist. "Also, obviously none of this is to say that reducing obesity or reducing diabetes is a bad thing. It just does not have much to do with insulin prices one way or the other." How is Congress addressing insulin prices? The House bill would cap the cost of insulin at $35 per month for individuals who have private insurance or for those on Medicare. However, the bill does nothing to help the uninsured who need insulin. Democrats unanimously supported the legislation, as did 12 Republicans. But there was significant opposition, with 193 Republicans voting against it, including Gaetz. The bill now goes to the Senate, where members are considering other strategies to control insulin prices. Details are in the works. Our ruling Gaetz said the reason for the rising cost of insulin was because more people were being diagnosed with diabetes, thus increasing demand for the product. And he pegged that rise in diabetes cases to the increase in the number of people who are overweight in the U.S. Health economists and diabetes experts told us that though he is right that diabetes cases are on the rise, Gaetz’s overall point is not accurate. His statement is based on a cause-and-effect argument that doesn’t exist. They said the increase in insulin prices is not tied to great demand for insulin or to production problems that pressure creates. In addition, although the rising prices come as more cases of obesity are reported, medical experts said they are not necessarily related. Many people who are overweight and develop Type 2 diabetes are not treated with insulin and the experts point out that many other factors help determine whether an individual will develop diabetes. We rate this statement Fals

Vladimir Putin “ended the Rothschild's control over Russia by nationalizing the Russian centralized bank. Russia’s ongoing attack on Ukraine has given new life to a false claim first shared on social media in 2018. The Facebook post from March 14, 2018, shows a portrait of Russian President Vladimir Putin seated in a chair, along with a caption that reads, "Just in case you’re wondering why they hate him." Text in the image credits Putin with a few things, including that he "ended the Rothschild's control over Russia by nationalizing the Russian centralized bank." 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.) Contrary to the claim, Putin was not responsible for the nationalization of the Russian centralized bank, which took place in 1917, according to the Bank of Russia. And evidence does not support the claim that the Rothschild family or its companies ever had control over Russia. The family’s banking business has had an office in Russia since the 1990s — though it recently suspended operations — but it has no oversight over the country’s currency or monetary policies, which are controlled by the Bank of Russia. The Rothschild family has long been the target of conspiracy theories, and their wealth is believed to have inspired the anti-Semitic trope that Jewish people "control" the world’s money. The entity now known as the Bank of Russia was founded in 1860, and in 1917, "after a decree was adopted … about the nationalization of banks, a state monopoly on banking was announced," according to the bank's website. The bank is the sole issuer of currency in Russia and sets the country’s monetary policies. Featured Fact-check Viral image stated on October 22, 2022 in an Instagram post A CNN headline shows Uganda’s president saying he doesn’t support Ukraine because it would be “disgusting.” By Ciara O'Rourke • October 24, 2022 Beginning in the 1800s, the Rothschild family operated banks in five European cities. But the family no longer has the same kind of global power it did in the 18th and 19th centuries, PolitiFact reported in 2019. "With no monolithic house, the Rothschild name has connections to a number of independent business ventures (that) have investments in mining, energy, farming, real estate and winemaking," according to PolitiFact. One of the banks that retains the family name — previously known as Rothschild Group but now called Rothschild & Co. — had been operating in Russia since 1994, according to a 2016 Reuters article. But the company has now suspended its activities in the country, Bloomberg reported in March. Our ruling A Facebook post says Putin "ended the Rothschild's control over Russia by nationalizing the Russian centralized bank." Putin did not nationalize the Russian centralized bank; that occurred in 1917. Evidence does not support the claim that the Rothschild family had control over Russia. The family’s banking business has had an office in Russia since the 1990s — though it recently suspended operations — but it has no oversight over the country’s currency or monetary policies, which are controlled by the Bank of Russia. We rate this claim False

Joe Biden's spending “has sent prices skyrocketing. Jane Timken, a candidate in Ohio’s Republican U.S. Senate primary, casts herself as a "mom on a mission." She seeks to blend a pro-Trump agenda with a focus on kitchen table issues. In a recent ad, she targeted inflation and President Joe Biden’s policies. "Joe Biden's wasteful spending has sent prices skyrocketing," Timken said in the April 13 ad. "Now, everything from groceries to gas and meals with our families costs more." The ad shows a headline from an article in the conservative National Review "Inflation soars to four-decade high." We decided to look at how much of an impact Biden’s spending had on prices. We reached out to Timken’s office and did not hear back, but this criticism of Biden generally refers to passage of the $1.9 trillion American Rescue Plan. The March 2021 Democratic bill included $1,400 payments to about 85% of Americans, $360 billion for state and local governments, and $242 billion in expanded unemployment benefits, among other things. As lawmakers worked on the measure, some economists, including Larry Summers, a top official under President Barack Obama, warned that the bill would lead to inflation. Fiscal conservatives joined in the warning. "The American Rescue Plan was far larger than the economy could support," said Marc Goldwein with the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, a group that promotes lower deficits. In the months that followed, inflation has taken off in the U.S. In March, prices were 8.5% higher than 12 months earlier. Even filtering out the cost of food and energy, which can rise and fall quickly, inflation still ran at a yearly rate of 6.4%. !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"); How much of this can be put at Biden’s feet? Some, but not all of it, experts say. "With no American Rescue Plan, we would still have inflation above the Federal Reserve’s target of 2% to 3%," Goldwein said. The post-COVID-19 inflation story is more complicated than just federal spending. Other forces, including changes in the labor market, rising global energy and commodity prices, supply chain dysfunction and the war in Ukraine have all contributed to higher prices. Estimating the impact of the American Rescue Plan No magic formula can reveal precisely how much the American Rescue Plan fueled inflation, but the general consensus is that it was a contributor. Some economists estimate that it added two percentage points to the rate, some say it added up to four percentage points. Put another way, out of the 8.5% rate in March, the measure accounted for something between one quarter to one half of inflation. Economist Dean Baker, with the left-leaning Center for Economic and Policy Research, puts the number at about two percentage points. "My main basis for saying this is that other wealthy countries, without remotely comparable stimulus packages, have seen comparable jumps in their inflation rates," Baker said. Baker looked at Europe to help tease out the global inflation drivers from the American ones. Douglas Holtz-Eakin, president of the conservative-leaning American Action Forum, also compared the U.S. with Europe. Between the first and last quarters of 2021, European inflation went up three points. In the same period, U.S. inflation rose more than four points. 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 !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"); Several inflationary forces affected nearly every nation. COVID cut into the supply of workers and goods. Businesses struggled to find employees. Manufacturers couldn’t get the parts they needed — the shortage of microchips was a prominent example. Both dynamics pushed prices higher. The resurging economy outstripped the supply of oil and natural gas, leading to higher energy costs. As the pandemic eased, the economic recovery also triggered shortfalls in the supply of grains and other farm products. "Europe had to deal with the supply-side, the broken supply-chains and the rest," Holtz-Eakin said. "They did not do stimulus to the extent we did, and they still got inflation." Holtz-Eakin pointed to the moment when the U.S. and Europe parted ways — in the second quarter of 2021. That was right after passage of the American Rescue Plan. About half of the U.S. increase of four percentage points "you can easily attribute to the stimulus," Holtz Eakin said. Other economists estimate higher impacts. Michael Strain with the free-market-oriented American Enterprise Institute put the figure at about three points for 2021. Harvard economist and former Obama administration official Jason Furman said it could be as high as four points in 2022. Sorting out effects of the war and the pre-Biden spending Going forward, it’s likely to get harder to tease out the inflationary impact of the American Rescue Plan. Russia’s attack on Ukraine disrupted a world economy that was still sorting itself out after COVID. Sanctions aimed at cutting Russia’s energy revenues sent oil and gas prices soaring. The war’s crippling hit on Ukraine’s agricultural sector, combined with sanctions (Russia is a major wheat producer), has raised the prices of basic goods like wheat and sunflower oil. Baker says that in ordinary times, with the bulk of the stimulus already spent, the economy would be on its way toward balance. "However, the special factors of the pandemic and war prevent that," Baker said. "And of course, oil is a big part of the problem." Another complicating factor is the effect of the spending that came before Biden took office. Two bipartisan COVID-relief packages cost over $3 trillion. Goldwein said it all contributed to inflation, though he thinks the American Rescue Plan added more, because it came as the economy was already springing back. Holtz-Eakin also said that the earlier spending was more in line with the level of economic damage due to the pandemic. There is concern that companies are profiting from inflation, and fueling it further. Baker said corporate profits are high, but he’s neither surprised by the trend, nor does he see anything conspiratorial at hand. "The way you ration demand is with higher prices," Baker said. "This might be a good argument for higher corporate taxes, since they have been the big winners, and there clearly are competitiveness problems in many industries, but I don't think that is the story of the current inflation." Our ruling Timken said Biden's spending "has sent prices skyrocketing." The 2021 American Rescue Plan Act added about $1.9 trillion to the economy, and economists across the political spectrum say that it spurred inflation. They differ on the precise scale of its impact, with estimates ranging from two to four additional points out of the current inflation rate of about 8.5%. However, none of the experts we reached, liberal and conservative, said Biden’s actions were responsible for all of the inflation. Past government spending, COVID’s disruptions to labor markets, energy prices and supply-chains also played significant roles. Most recently, the war in Ukraine has made a challenging situation worse. We rate this claim Half True. CORRECTION (April 25, 2022): This fact-check was corrected to say the March 2021 Democratic bill included $1,400 payments to about 85% of American

A photo shows students in Lviv celebrating Adolf Hitler’s birthday Adolf Hitler was born on April 20, 1889, and amid misinformation connecting Ukrainian President Volodymr Zelenskyy to Nazi symbolism, and false claims that Ukraine is orchestrating a genocide against ethnic Russians, comes a rumor that students in Lviv were photographed celebrating the German dictator’s birthday. "Just Lviv," one April 20 tweet that has since been removed said. "Just schoolchildren. Just celebrated Hitler’s birthday. In Ukraine, in which, as you know, there is no Nazism." "#Ukraine #Lviv Hitler’s birthday celebration," another tweet said. Both tweets show an aerial photo of dozens of people holding balloons and forming the number 55. 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 (Screengrab from Twitter) Anyone confusing this shape for a swastika is mistaken. While the the numbers are made with straight lines like a swastika — lacking the curve that’s often used to write the number five — the angles are off. The two ends of both fives point in the same direction, whereas each end of a swastika points in a different direction. But what’s more, this photo wasn’t taken in Lviv in 2022. It was shot in Penza, Russia, in 2016, to celebrate the 55th anniversary of Cosmonautics Day. RELATED VIDEO A Russian TV station posted a news broadcast of the event on YouTube that year. An English translation of the title says, "On Cosmonautics Day, participants of the flash mob in Penza lined up in the number ‘55.’" The "55" can be seen at the 47 mark, and it’s followed by an image of Yuri Gagarin, a Soviet pilot who became the first person to orbit the earth on April 12, 1961. We rate this post Pants on Fire!

After Russia invaded Ukraine, Google Maps “opened all military and strategic facilities in Russia. Pigeons, airplanes, satellites and drones have long been used to produce aerial photos that guide military action on the ground. But in recent years, these images have moved beyond military circles. They are sometimes also being shared on social media to push false information and influence public perception of wars. Before Russia invaded Ukraine in February, satellite images were used to track the massing of Russian troops around Ukraine. Then they were used to reveal the movement of Russian tanks towards Kyiv, to expose the destruction caused by the war across Ukraine, and to document the atrocities committed by Russian forces in Bucha. Some satellite images have been shared with false information. That was the case with a Facebook post published on April 18 that claimed that Google Maps started publishing images of secret Russian facilities in unprecedented high resolutions. "Google Maps has opened all military and strategic facilities in Russia," including "naval bases, launch pads, and command posts," the post said. "This symbolic act allows anyone to ‘wander’ through secret places in Russia." The post includes four satellite images that supposedly show Russian military facilities and assets in unprecedented detail. PolitiFact confirmed that one of the images shows a Russian aircraft carrier, and The Verge confirmed that a second image is of a Russian military facility, but it’s unclear if the other images in fact show Russian military sites and assets. 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.) Featured Fact-check Viral image stated on October 22, 2022 in an Instagram post A CNN headline shows Uganda’s president saying he doesn’t support Ukraine because it would be “disgusting.” By Ciara O'Rourke • October 24, 2022 At the request of governments, Google presents blurred images of military facilities in some countries, including Belgium, France, and Germany, to hide sensitive information. And the company can sometimes start providing sharp images of areas that were previously presented as blurred, once restrictions are lifted. But Google told PolitiFact that it has not recently made any "blurring changes" to its satellite images of Russia. PolitiFact asked Google if those images had always been available with that level of detail, but did not get a response to that question. Some of the images of Russian facilities that social media users say are now suddenly visible have been available for years in high resolution on services like Google Maps and Google Earth. One Reddit post claimed that because of the alleged change in blurring settings, it was suddenly possible to see the Russian military base of Lipetsk in greater detail. But a Russian military news website shared high-quality images of the same base in 2015 and 2021, crediting Google Earth. Our ruling A Facebook post claimed that following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, Google Maps started publishing high-quality satellite images of Russian military facilities. Google told PolitiFact that it has not made any changes to its satellite images of Russia. High-quality images of some of those Russian assets have been available online for years on Google services. We rate the post Fals

Footage of the Bidens celebrating Easter at the White House is fake The day after Easter, President Joe Biden and his wife, Jill, hosted the first Egg Roll at the White House since the pandemic started. The White House shared footage of the April 18 event. The verified @POTUS Twitter account shared videos and photos. News outlets, like the New York Times, did the same. And yet, claims that the Bidens didn’t actually host an Egg Roll at the White House are spreading on social media. "Lol," one April 18 post said of a photo showing the Bidens waving from behind a planter full of flowers and a presidential seal. "Screenshot of Sleepy and Jill supposedly live at the WH for the Easter Egg Roll. Check it out that presidential seal guys !!!!!! FAKE NEWS! BUSTED!!!!" 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.) It was echoed on Twitter. "Don’t believe the Fake news telling you and showing you the Biden’s Easter photo opp," an April 18 tweet said. "Below is the fake news photo on the left and the real Presidential seal from Google on the right. Did the eagle dye his tail feathers white for Easter? Why is eagle smoking a cigarette?" 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 supposed fake seal, the one visible in a photo @POTUS tweeted that shows the Bidens flanked by people in bunny costumes, shows a bald eagle with a white tail. According to social media posts, the authentic seal features a brown tail. In both images, it could look as if the eagle is puffing on a pipe but what’s actually pictured is the bird holding the end of a banner in its beak that reads "E Pluribus Unum" — "out of many, one." RELATED VIDEO The presidential seal as it exists today dates back to 1945, when Harry S. Truman was president. A website for Truman’s Little White House — his winter retreat in Florida — does show an eagle with brown tail feathers on a page about the presidential seal and flag. But we found that brown-tailed eagle on a presidential seal in a few other credible places. That’s because the seal the Bidens stood in front of — at the White House on April 18 — is authentic. You can even see the same seal in footage of then-President Donald Trump and his family celebrating Easter at the White House in 2017. It appears in a 2013 Smithsonian Magazine story about the seal and is described as "the modern seal of the President of the United States." It’s also in a White House Historical Association’s post about the history of the presidential seal. And you’ll even find it on a Britannica page for kids about the U.S. presidential seal. The seal is real, and so was the egg hunt. We rate this ridiculous post Pants on Fire!

The Australian Technical Advisory Group on Immunisation advised that the COVID-19 vaccine may be given to patients under sedation for unrelated procedures without consent as a way to force compliance That’s one way to do it. Social media users are claiming that Australia’s immunization agency recently found a way to force COVID-19 vaccine compliance: just give it to patients who are already sedated. "‘(Vaccines) may also be administered opportunistically while patients are undergoing sedation for unrelated procedures.’ — ATAGI advice on use of sedation for COVID-19 vaccination," an Instagram post said. (ATAGI stands for the Australian Technical Advisory Group on Immunisation.) The post goes on to claim in its caption that patient consent is not required. 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.) This is inaccurate. While the health agency did advise COVID-19 vaccination for people under sedation, it isn’t being used as a measure to enforce compliance with vaccination requirements — patient consent is required. PolitiFact reached out to the agency but did not hear back. 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 On April 6, the ATAGI released a report supporting the use of sedation for COVID-19 vaccination for people who have behavior disorders, severe anxiety and needle phobias. "The process of administering a vaccine (i.e. giving an intramuscular injection) may cause severe anxiety in some individuals with anxiety disorders or needle-phobia, and/or may be difficult in certain individuals with behavioural disorders," the agency said. The group said that the effort cannot be used as a way to force people to get the vaccine and that consent is required beforehand. Here’s what it wrote, with emphasis added by PolitiFact: "In patients where non-pharmacological techniques have failed, sedation may facilitate safe administration of vaccines in some special circumstances. Informed consent must be obtained prior to each dose from the patient themselves, or, where the patient does not have capacity to give consent, from the parent, guardian or substitute decision-maker. Sedation should not be used as a measure to enforce compliance with vaccination requirements." Our ruling A post on Instagram claims that Australia’s immunization advisory group recommends that people be given the COVID-19 vaccine without their consent when they are under sedation. This is wrong. The agency advised that people with anxiety disorders and needle phobias could get the vaccine under sedation under special circumstances, and only if they give informed consent beforehand. We rate this claim False

COVID-19 is a synthetic version of “snake venom” that evil forces are spreading through remdesivir, the COVID-19 vaccines and drinking water to “make you a hybrid of Satan. A new anti-vaccine documentary ridiculously claims that the coronavirus is not a virus, but a synthetic version of snake venom that evil forces are spreading through remdesivir, the mRNA COVID-19 vaccines and drinking water to "make you a hybrid of Satan." The 48-minute film, released April 11, is the latest in an expanding genre of mega-viral, conspiracy-laden videos made in the mold of the "Plandemic" video from May 2020. Its title, "Watch the Water," is a nod to a favorite refrain of the QAnon conspiracy theory, which is centered around the belief that a secret cabal of Satan-worshipping pedophiles is running a global sex-trafficking ring. The video is an interview between far-right radio host Stew Peters, who has a history of using inflammatory rhetoric and spreading COVID-19 conspiracy theories, and Bryan Ardis, a former chiropractor who built a brand around claiming that the drug remdesivir is killing people. It showed Ardis, who sells acne products and is now using the film to sell what he calls "anti-v" supplement kits online, invoking the Garden of Eden story and a fictional TV show plot as he outlined an elaborate mass-murder scheme that he claimed involves even the pope. "I think the plan all along was to get the serpent's, the evil one's DNA into your God-created DNA," Ardis said. "They're using mRNA, which is mRNA extracted from, I believe, the king cobra venom, the king cobra venom. And I think they want to get that venom inside of you and make you a hybrid of Satan." The video’s theory is "miles from reality, and indicates a profound lack of understanding in science and medicine, and much twisted logic," said Dr. David Relman, professor of microbiology and immunology at Stanford University. "There is no evidence whatsoever that SARS-CoV-2 or COVID-19 is caused by snakes or snake venom." Some members of the anti-vaccine and QAnon movements met Ardis’ venom claims with skepticism. But Peters promoted the film widely on the messaging app Telegram, and it racked up nearly 3 million views on Rumble, a video hosting platform, in the week after its release. Social media users shared it across other mainstream platforms, where 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.) COVID-19 is not snake venom Early in the documentary, Ardis told Peters he first started investigating a potential link between COVID-19 and snake venom after he received a cryptic text from an unnamed doctor asking, "If you got bit by a rattlesnake, would you go to a hospital and get antivenom?" The text, Ardis claimed, came in shortly after he had done an interview about the monoclonal antibodies used to treat COVID-19 infections, so that got him thinking. He falsely claimed that the monoclonal antibodies are identical to the anti-venoms used to disable the toxins from a snake bite. He then claimed without evidence that if a public health agency advises against a treatment, then that means the treatment actually works. A monoclonal antibody treatments center is seen closed on Jan. 25, 2022, in Pembroke Pines, Fla. (AP) The Food and Drug Administration in January recommended limiting the use of monoclonal antibodies as COVID-19 treatments after they were shown to be less effective against the newer variants. So Ardis reasoned that if the FDA was discouraging the use of monoclonal antibodies, and if monoclonal antibodies were anti-venoms, then the coronavirus must actually be venom. "I realized all of a sudden that monoclonal antibodies are anti-venom," Ardis said. "The federal government doesn’t want us using anti-venom. Why are they bashing anti-venom, and why are we finding anti-venom works against COVID? Is it not a virus? Is it a venom?" The answer, experts said, is no. The monoclonal antibodies used for COVID-19 infections "do not recognize or bind to snake venom," Relman said. "They have nothing whatsoever to do with snake venom." Anti-venoms are developed by injecting venom into an animal with a robust immune system, such as a horse, and harvesting the antibodies the animal produces in response. Monoclonal antibodies are different. They are lab-produced, or cloned, and designed to boost protection against a specific target like the coronavirus. No monoclonal antibodies have been created yet to target snake venoms, said Dr. Robert Garry, a virologist at Tulane University. Flimsy evidence The coronavirus has been isolated, replicated, sequenced, imaged and studied as it has worked its way across the globe, killing over 6 million people. Scientists have no doubt that it’s a virus. But Ardis suggested, for example, that a University of Pittsburgh researcher who was shot dead in May 2020 was killed because he was going to reveal that COVID-19 was snake venom. 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 university told PolitiFact that those allegations are "incorrect and not scientifically valid." Police said the incident was unrelated to the researcher’s work. Ardis also cited several studies. He pointed to one early-pandemic study that considered snakes as a COVID-19 reservoir, but Garry said its findings were "very speculative" and "pretty quickly rejected." Ardis misrepresented a second study, falsely claiming that it showed an enzyme from rattlesnake venom in the blood of COVID-19 patients. In reality, the study found that an enzyme healthy humans already have in their bodies — which is similar but not identical to an enzyme in rattlesnake venom — was circulating at elevated levels in patients who died of COVID-19. Ardis then described a third study in a way that was "not only disturbing and outrageous but is absolutely incorrect," said Gus Wright of Texas A&M University, one of the study’s co-authors. The study mapped the genetic makeup of the Indian cobra and, to help develop a more effective anti-venom, identified 19 venom toxins that are specific to that snake. Ardis implied that the 19 toxins were related to COVID-19, but Wright said the study "in no way has any association with COVID-19." The 19 in COVID-19 reflects the year it was discovered, 2019. "He seems to grab at phrases and fragments of findings and then weave them into a distorted picture," Relman said. Toward the end of the film, Ardis went so far as to claim that the phrase "coronavirus pandemic" can translate in Latin to "the pope’s venom pandemic" or "king cobra venom pandemic." Those interpretations are "completely false," said Massimo Cè, a lexicographer at the Thesaurus Linguae Latinae, the world’s largest dictionary of Latin. Coronaviruses have been known to scientists by that name for decades, Cè said, and the term itself traces back centuries to the Latin word used to describe the halo of light seen around the sun and the moon. Pope Francis speaks with youth in St. Peter's square at the Vatican on April 18, 2022. (AP) Evil forces aren’t envenomating people through remdesivir, vaccines and water Ardis claimed that evil forces are targeting people with the snake venom through remdesivir, vaccines and drinking water, since venom is a secretion that can’t spread as a respiratory virus. His supposed proof included the observation that both remdesivir and snake venom have "a white-to-yellowish tint" when stored, he said. He also referenced debunked videos in which social media users claimed the vaccines made them magnetic, and that tap water tests positive for COVID-19. And he showed a clip from a fictional TV show in which a character was poisoned through his drink. Ardis said after he watched the episode, "I realized how they’ve been spreading this." But Gilead, the manufacturer of remdesivir, said Ardis’ claims about the drug containing snake venom and causing mass deaths were "entirely false." Remdesivir is "definitely not venom from a snake," said Dr. Katherine Seley-Radtke, a professor of chemistry and biochemistry at the University of Maryland, Baltimore County. The drug’s structure has been repeatedly confirmed as what scientists classify as a "nucleoside analogue," Seley-Radtke said, while snake venom is "a complex mixture of all sorts of things." Pfizer also told PolitiFact that its mRNA vaccine is "entirely synthetic and does not contain any animal products." Ingredient lists for COVID-19 vaccines are public. The U.S Centers for Disease Control and Prevention says the coronavirus has not been detected in drinking water, either. The creator of the fictional TV show that Ardis cited told FactCheck.org that the poisoning scene, which aired in 2017, was not meant to foreshadow the pandemic or the nefarious plot Ardis described. Water pours out of the faucet on Feb. 20, 2021, in Dallas. (AP) "This would require a massive conspiracy of scientists, public health officials, etc., in countries all over the world," Garry said. "The claims are wildly inaccurate." Our ruling Ardis said COVID-19 is a synthetic version of "snake venom" that evil forces are spreading through remdesivir, drinking water and the COVID-19 vaccines to "make you a hybrid of Satan." That’s a far cry from reality, experts said. COVID-19 is not snake venom. The former chiropractor relied on a mix of misrepresented scientific studies, twisted logic, fictional TV show plotlines, botched Latin, debunked home videos, circumstantial evidence and what he claimed were signs from God to stake his case. We rate his statement Pants on Fir

President Joe Biden was confused, “turned around and shook hands with thin air” after a speech When President Joe Biden visited North Carolina Agricultural and Technical State University, the country’s largest historically Black university, he toured the campus’ new engineering and research complex with students, faculty and U.S. Rep. Kathy Manning, D-N.C. He then delivered a speech about supply chain disruptions, economic renewal and his administration’s Build Back Better agenda. But there’s one thing he didn’t do that social media posts are claiming he did: "After Biden finished his speech today, he turned around and tried to shake hands with thin air and then wandered around looking confused," radio station WDBO posted April 14 on Facebook. "Do you fear our president is incapacitated?" Facebook flagged the post and others like it on its platform in an effort to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about our partnership with Facebook.) The claim also appeared on YouTube and Twitter, shared by Republicans like Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, and Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, R-Ga. It even appeared on Instagram, where Snoop Dogg shared the video and claim with his followers. We took a look at those clips and the full videos of Biden’s speech. They don’t add up to the claim that he was trying to shake hands with thin air — different angles show that he was gesturing toward onlookers behind him. 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 A C-SPAN video of Biden’s entire speech shows an angle from Biden’s right side — after he finished speaking at the 53 minute mark, he turned to those gathered to his right behind him and pointed his hand at them as they stood up to applaud. He then turned to his left and did the same to those seated on that side, who also stood and clapped. Biden smiled at both sides before walking down the ramp towards the audience in front of the lectern. C-SPAN video of Biden's speech at North Carolina Agricultural and Technical State University, April 14, 2022 A YouTube video from WFMY-TV, Channel 2 from Greensboro, North Carolina, shows Biden briefly speaking to audience members before walking out of the room flanked by Secret Service agents. The International Business Times also found this claim to have holes. We reached out to the White House, as well as North Carolina A&T State University for their input. Neither responded in time to a request for comment. The clips of Biden gesturing to those seated in the audience are being misconstrued to appear as if he was trying to shake hands with air. We rate this claim False. RELATED VIDE

If Wisconsin Gov. Tony Evers "had passed his (gas) tax increases ... fuel prices would be at least a dime higher Gas prices may be falling a bit, but the rhetoric around them keeps rising. The latest example came April 7, 2022 in an attack on Gov. Tony Evers on Twitter from state Rep. Tony Kurtz, R-Wonewoc, which is in Juneau County: "Everyone is feeling pain at the pump. It started well over a year ago. Diesel fuel in Sept 2020 was $2.09, six months later in March 2021 $2.99. If @GovEvers had passed his tax increases, these fuel prices would be at least a dime higher." In an April 1, 2022 fact-check, we rated a claim in a TV ad that Evers "tried to make us pay even more at the pump" Half True, in large part because the claim focused on his intent and a related move at the time would have cushioned the blow. But this one is framed differently, and looked at in context, it focuses more narrowly on the proposed gas tax increase and its would-be impact on prices today. Is Kurtz right that if Evers "had passed his (gas) tax increases ... fuel prices would be at least a dime higher?" Estimated impact When asked to provide backup for the claim, Kurtz’s staff referred PolitiFact Wisconsin to a March 31, 2022, memo from the Legislative Fiscal Bureau titled "Estimate of Proposed Motor Fuel Tax Revenues." The memo looked at a proposal from Evers in his 2019-21 budget that would have increased the motor vehicle fuel tax by eight cents per gallon – and then tied future increases to inflation, which is known as indexing. The measure failed in the Republican-controlled Legislature, but the analysis estimated the change would have brought in $725 million for transportation funding, if it had been in effect. For our purposes here, we are most interested in where the gas tax would be today. Featured Fact-check Viral image stated on October 18, 2022 in an Instagram post Kamala Harris said, “We have to acknowledge gas is high which is the opposite of low.” By Ciara O'Rourke • October 18, 2022 According to the fiscal bureau, once indexing was factored in, as of April 1, 2022 the state gas tax would have been 42 cents per gallon, or 11.1 cents higher than where it is today, without the increase (30.9 cents per gallon). That said, in the tweet, Kurtz only provided part of the picture. The plan from Evers also included a proposal to eliminate the state’s longstanding minimum markup law for gasoline. The minimum markup law was created during the Great Depression to protect small business from larger rivals. The law mandates a price floor where goods like gas, groceries, and beer are "marked up" so they are not used as "loss leaders" at a price level where the other businesses can’t compete. The idea from Evers was to offset the pain at the pump for drivers. But a fiscal bureau report at the time noted there are many factors at play in pricing, and there is no guarantee that any savings from removing minimum markup would stay in place. That means, once you set aside the intent of the Evers plan, and focus more narrowly on the numbers, it yields a different result. Our ruling Kurtz said if Evers "had passed his (gas) tax increases ... fuel prices would be at least a dime higher." By the numbers, a new analysis from the fiscal bureau shows prices would be 11.1 cents higher. That said, Kurtz skips over the fact the pocketbook may have been smaller, given the accompanying plan to eliminate the minimum markup law for gasoline. For a statement that is accurate but needs clarification or additional information, our rating is Mostly True. 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' });

“They’re going to be giving these people who come across the border, giving them smartphones. U.S. Rep. Rob Wittman recently mischaracterized a government tool being used to track people entering the country illegally as a smartphone giveaway. "They’re going to be giving these people who come across the border, giving them smartphones," Wittman, R-Va., said during an April 8 radio interview on WRVA. "Listen, I know a lot of people across our district who would like a smartphone." Wittman represents Virginia's 1st Congressional District which, in this fall’s election, will extend from Williamsburg and Puquoson north through Westmoreland County. The district will include western Chesterfield County and eastern Hanover County. Although many of Wittman’s constituents may want a smartphone, they’d probably be disappointed with the ones being distributed to undocumented immigrants. Wittman, along with a number of other conservatives, don’t provide context about their purpose and limited capabilities. Immigration officials issue the phones so they can monitor immigrants released from custody; the phones cannot be used for other purposes, like going on Facebook or calling friends. A spokesperson for the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement told PolitiFact National that the agency gives smartphones to some immigrants who have been detained after entering the country illegally. The devices do not have the capability to make personal phone calls, check social media or browse the internet, the spokesperson said. Instead, the phones are pre-loaded with an application called SmartLINK as a way to track immigrants who have been released from detention and are awaiting a deportation hearing. SmartLINK is part of ICE's Alternative to Detention program to closely track "non-detained noncitizens at varying levels of supervision, using several different monitoring technologies," ICE’s spokesperson said. The app requires someone to check in with immigration officials either by uploading a selfie or answering a call from their case manager, according to the Associated Press. The application was first used in 2018 - during President Donald Trump’s administration - to keep track of about 5,000 people, the AP reported. Now, ICE uses it to keep tabs on more than 125,000 immigrants. 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 Not all immigrants detained by ICE get a government-issued device, the agency’s spokesperson said. "If a noncitizen acquires their own personally owned smartphone, the SmartLINK application can be loaded onto that device," the spokesperson said. SmartLINK was developed by BI Inc., a subsidiary of The GEO Group, a private prison company. White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki acknowledged the smartphones during a briefing on April 8, saying it's one of several ways the government can track someone after being released from detention. We reached out twice to Wittman’s office for comment and did not get a reply. Similar comments mischaracterizing the tracking program have been made by conservative pundit Nick Adams and by former Trump attorney Jay Sekulow and his son, Jordan. PolitiFact National rated Adams’ comment Half True. Our ruling "They’re going to be giving these people who come across the border, giving them smartphones," Wittman said on radio. "Listen, I know a lot of people across our district who would like a smartphone." The smartphones given to some immigrants detained by ICE are used to track them with a pre-installed application after they are released from custody. The phones cannot be used for anything else. ICE has been using the phones and the tracking application since 2018. Wittman’s statement is partially accurate, but leaves out important details and context. We rate it Half True.

“If your roommate catches HIV, you will be exposed to it and will probably contract it too, given long enough. Human immunodeficiency virus, or HIV, is a virus that attacks the immune system and can lead to AIDS. A recent Facebook post warns that if you live with someone who has HIV, you’re likely to contract it. "If your roommate catches HIV, you will be exposed to it and will probably contract it too, given long enough," the post says. "There is no cure." 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.) Most people get HIV through anal or vaginal sex or by sharing needles or other equipment used to inject drugs, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. As for oral sex, interacting in a workplace, getting medical care, eating food handled by someone with HIV, biting or spitting, kissing, and touching, "there is little to no risk of getting HIV," the CDC says. "For transmission to occur, something very unusual would have to happen." HIV doesn’t survive long outside the human body, so it’s not transmitted by mosquitoes, ticks or other insects; through saliva, tears or sweat; by hugging, shaking hands, sharing toilets, or sharing dishes; or through the air. Plus, for HIV-positive folks who are engaged in sexual activity, there is medication available that can keep their viral load down, giving them "effectively no risk of sexually transmitting HIV to their HIV-negative partners." That’s because you can only get HIV by coming into direct contact with certain bodily fluids from someone with HIV who has a detectable viral load, HIV.gov explains on its website. 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 Johns Hopkins Medicine has a few suggestions for protecting yourself against HIV: don’t have sex or share needles. And if you do have sex, use a condom, get tested for HIV and make sure your partners do, too. Notably, it doesn’t discourage people from living with someone who has HIV as a means of protection. That’s because it’s not accurate that you will probably contract HIV if your roommate has it. In 2009, a New York Times columnist dealt with a question from the roommate of someone who was HIV positive. "I believe he need not tell housemates about his status," the person seeking advice wrote, but added that "many disagree, saying that household items — a razor, a toothbrush — could be used accidentally." The Times quoted epidemiologist Dr. Paul Marantz, who said that "the risk of transmission from household contacts is very low." We rate this post False.

CNN tweeted about “brave children” in Ukraine signing up to fight Russia An Instagram post appears to show a screenshot of a tweet from CNN about child soldiers in Ukraine, but the tweet was fabricated. The April 15 post says CNN tweeted about "brave children" in Ukraine signing up to fight Russia. The post’s profile photo shows CNN’s logo alongside Twitter’s signature blue check mark that means the account is verified. The text on the fake tweet says, "As fighting intensifies in Eastern Ukraine, brave children sign up to fight the Russian invaders. We spoke to one girl, named Olga from Zaporizhzhia, aged 12, who tells her story of taking up arms to fight invading Russian troops." It includes a photo of children wearing fatigues and standing in formation, with a text overlay that says, "CNN supporting use of child soldiers." 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.) CNN told Associated Press and Reuters fact checkers that the tweet is not real. The tweet, which is dated April 11, does not appear on the network’s Twitter page or in online archives. The AP also noted that "there are no tweets showing other users reacting to such a post, which would still be visible even if the original had been deleted." 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 CNN did not respond to PolitiFact’s request for information. The photo in the post was taken in 2017. It was published in a March 30, 2022, story by CNN about the Azov Battalion of the Ukraine military. In that story, the photo caption says it was taken outside Kyiv on July 14, 2017, and shows "a student at a paramilitary camp for children call(ing) the rank to attention." The AP confirmed with the photographer, Alex Masi, that it was taken at a "summer camp from 2016-17, where kids learn about the realities of war." CNN did not tweet about "brave children" in Ukraine signing up to fight Russia, and we rate the claim Pants on Fir

Joe Biden’s comments prove that food shortages are being “done deliberately by the governments of the world. A video being shared on Facebook posits that governments around the world are orchestrating a food shortage and offers as evidence remarks President Joe Biden made in March. "Both talked about how we increase and disseminate food, food shortages," Biden is captured saying in a clip included in the video. "Oh, right," the video’s narrator can be heard saying. "You want to increase the spread of food shortages." 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 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 That quote is authentic, but if you look at Biden’s remarks in context, it’s clear that he apparently misspoke, and was actually talking about increasing and disseminating food around the world. RELATED VIDEO "We had a long discussion in the G7 with the, with both the United States, which has a significant — the third-largest producer of wheat in the world — as well as Canada, which is also a major, major producer, and we both talked about how we could increase and disseminate more rapidly food, food shortages," Biden said at NATO Headquarters in Brussels on March 24. "And in addition to that, we talked about urging all the European countries and everyone else to end trade restrictions on — on sending — limitations on sending food abroad. And so we are in the process of working out, with our European friends, what it would be, what it would take to help alleviate the concerns relative to food shortages." Politico, reporting on Biden’s meeting with other G-7 leaders, noted that they "pledged action … to address food shortages caused by Russia’s war on Ukraine." We rate this post Fals

March 2022 moon crash was orchestrated by the government and visible from Earth A Facebook post made false claims about a real rocket crash that happened last month. The April 11 post suggested that when a rocket part crashed into the moon in March, it was planned by the government and visible from Earth. It shows two videos side by side, each depicting an object puncturing the moon. "Everyone been so focused on Wiil & Jada, Ukraine & Russia. That we missed the event of what happened to the moon on March 4th, 2022," the caption says, with misspellings. "Don't believe Google it. The question is what the hell is the government up to?? I'm pretty sure this wasn't NO ACCIDENT. They distracting and hiding something. I'm pretty sure that wasn't no ‘ROCKET’ I mean it is but a rocket missiel (sic). The ‘ROCKET’ went through." 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.) Part of a rocket did strike the moon on March 4, but evidence does not support the claim that the crash was planned by the government. Scientists have said the rocket part was "space junk" from a Chinese rocket mission in 2014. On another occasion, in 2009, NASA intentionally crashed a rocket into the moon for experimental purposes, and information about that mission was made public. The impact of the March crash was not visible to humans. And the videos in the post that suggest it was were made in 2020 and 2021 using visual-effects software, said Greg Pietrantonio, the person who created them. The March rocket strike occurred when "a discarded rocket stage that’s been drifting through deep space since at least 2015 collided with the moon," according to National Geographic, which reported that the rocket was "completely obliterated." The impact occurred on the far side of the moon, out of range of ground telescopes. 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 The crash was thought to be "the first time a man-made space missile has unintentionally hit the moon," NPR reported. It did not pose any risk to Earth. The videos included in the Facebook post are labeled "Texas" and "California" — though they were filmed in Pennsylvania and Florida, Pietrantonio said — and each shows something striking the moon. But the videos, which were first posted to TikTok in 2020 and 2021, were made using Adobe After Effects software, Pietrantonio said. He said making sci-fi/apocalyptic videos is his hobby and he eventually gained a sizable following; he has 617,000 followers on TikTok, and his two videos that are included in the Facebook post have been viewed millions of times each. Our ruling A Facebook post suggests that when a rocket part crashed into the moon last month, it was planned by the government and visible from Earth. Evidence does not support the claim that it was planned by the government. Scientists said the rocket part was "space junk" from a Chinese rocket mission in 2014 and the crash was unintentional. The crash was not visible from Earth. And the videos in the post were created using visual-effects software in 2020 and 2021. We rate it False.

Fuel containing 15% ethanol will ruin a car engine In an effort to address high gas prices, President Joe Biden directed the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to issue an emergency waiver and allow gasoline that uses a 15% ethanol blend to be sold this summer. This type of fuel, commonly called E15, is usually prohibited between June 1 and Sept. 15 because of concerns that it adds to smog in high temperatures, the Associated Press reported. On the same day of Biden’s announcement, a Facebook post claimed that E15 will ruin a car engine. "Anyone that uses gasoline - sure you heard the gov't will be selling E15 gasoline to lower prices. Do ya'll have any idea what that could do to the internal components of your engine?" the April 12 post said. "Ethanol is a corn by-product, folks, it's proven to gum up and ruin carburetors on all of your 2 and 4 cycle engines...Boy...they really want us to go electric...don't they?" The post also included a question — "Will E15 gas hurt my engine?" — and this answer: "One of the major complaints by E15 opponents is that ethanol can corrode many of the plastics, metals, and rubber components used in internal-combustion engines and their fuel systems. Hence, using fuel with a higher concentration of ethanol than the manufacturer recommends may damage your vehicle." It concludes: "Save that 10 cents a gallon, but ruin your engine…" 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 EPA and an academic study have said that fuel containing 15% ethanol is safe for cars, trucks and sport-utility vehicles made in 2001 or later — which make up more than 90% of the vehicles on U.S. roads. Since 2011, E15 has been approved by the EPA for use in cars, trucks and SUVs from model year 2001 and later, a decision that followed "many years of extensive tests, making E15 one of the most tested fuels in history prior to its permitted use," according to the EPA. In 2013, researchers from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory reviewed 43 studies about E15 use in vehicles from 2001 and later. Featured Fact-check Viral image stated on October 18, 2022 in an Instagram post Kamala Harris said, “We have to acknowledge gas is high which is the opposite of low.” By Ciara O'Rourke • October 18, 2022 "The data presented in these studies did not show any evidence of deterioration in engine durability or maintenance issues for E15… in comparison to E0 and E10," the study said. And many car manufacturers have okayed the use of E15 fuel in their vehicles made in the past 10 years. According to the Iowa Renewable Fuels Association: General Motors says the fuel can be used in vehicles from model year 2012 and later; Ford says model year 2013 and later; and the fuel is also approved for use by Volkswagen, Audi, Toyota, Land Rover, Porsche, Jaguar, Honda and Subaru (though the association did not specify for which model years). E15 is a blend of 15% ethanol and 85% gasoline, and it is also sold under the name Unleaded 88. While it can be used in many vehicles, it cannot be used in on-highway and non-road motorcycles; vehicles with heavy-duty engines, such as school buses; non-road vehicles like boats; engines in non-road vehicles such as lawnmowers; light-duty trucks; and medium-duty passenger vehicles, according to the EPA. "Most U.S. drivers pump what is known as E10, a fuel blend that contains 90% gasoline and 10% ethanol," according to the Des Moines Register. "Ethanol is a clear alcohol that derives from a manufacturing process that starts with biomass — overwhelmingly, corn starch. E15 is a blend of the fuel that relies on a larger amount of ethanol." E15 is slightly cheaper than conventional gasoline, but it is not widely available in the U.S. Out of approximately 150,000 gas stations across the U.S., E15 is sold at about 2,300 stations, the New York Times reported, adding that E15 to be sold in the summer is expected to cost about 10 cents less per gallon than conventional gasoline. Our ruling A Facebook post says fuel containing 15% ethanol will ruin a car engine. The EPA and an academic study have said that fuel containing 15% ethanol is safe for cars, trucks and sport-utility vehicles made in 2001 or later — which make up more than 90% of the vehicles on U.S. roads. Many car manufacturers have okayed the use of E15 fuel in their vehicles made in the past 10 years. But the fuel may not be safe for the engines of some vehicles on the road. We rate this claim Mostly Fals

Ukraine was responsible for the Kramatorsk train station bombing On April 8, at least 59 people, including seven children, were killed after a missile strike hit a railway station in the eastern Ukrainian city of Kramatorsk. The attack came as thousands were attempting to flee heavy Russian shelling across the region. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy initially said at least 300 people were wounded in the strike. "People (were) crowded, waiting for the trains to be evacuated to the safe territory" at the station, Zelenskyy said in an address to Finland's parliament. "They hit these people. There are witnesses, there are videos, there are remnants of the missiles and dead people … Why do they need to hit civilians with missiles? Why this cruelty that the world has witnessed in Bucha and other cities liberated by the Ukrainian army?" As Zelenskyy condemned the attack, some started to spread rumors that it was Ukraine, not Russia, that carried it out. This unsubstantiated rumor has been pushed by Russian state media and Kremlin-linked social media accounts, and was bolstered by a supposed BBC News story that placed the blame on Ukraine. "Very interesting how the train station was a war crime until we realized Ukraine did it," reads a screenshot of a tweet that was shared on Facebook on April 13. These false claims are amplified by a conspiratorial video that appears to show the BBC’s logo and watermark. But the video isn't legitimate. It doesn’t appear on the BBC’s official social media accounts, website or YouTube channel. The news organization confirmed it’s fake and said it was working to have it removed. Claims blaming Ukraine by Russian-state accounts fall short on evidence and contradict earlier posts taking credit for the strike. There is evidence of Russian military forces using the same kind of missile that hit the train station. Posts promoting this rumor 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 fake video claiming to be from the BBC The one-minute-27-second clip shows several graphic scenes, including the site of the bombing with dead people on the ground and a shot of the Tochka-U missile found nearby. "The serial number of the Tochka-U missile is identical to the series of missiles from the arsenal of the 13th AFU missile brigade," text overlaid on the video says. "The same type of missiles and the same serial number were previously fired by the Ukrainian army at the cities of Khartsyzsk, Logvinovo, Berdyansk, and Melitopol." The video also claims that Ukrainian media stopped reporting on the bombing after the missile factory numbers were revealed. The video was circulated by pro-Kremlin accounts on Telegram and appeared in multiple Twitter posts before most were taken down by the platform. Featured Fact-check Tucker Carlson stated on October 27, 2022 in a TV segment The United States is "about to run out of diesel fuel ... by the Monday of Thanksgiving week." By Andy Nguyen • November 7, 2022 The BBC did not report that Ukraine was behind the Kramatorsk attack. Inconsistencies with the placement of logos, location tags and style — like the lack of background commentary — are signs that the video wasn’t created by the news group. "We are aware of a fake video with BBC News branding suggesting Ukraine was responsible for last week’s missile attack on Kramatorsk train station," the news organization said in an April 13 statement on its Twitter account. "The BBC is taking action to have the video removed. We urge people not to share it and to check stories on the BBC News website." How claims of Ukrainian involvement fall short At a background briefing on April 8, the U.S. Defense Department said that the Kramatorsk bombing was carried out by Russian troops likely using a short-range ballistic missile known as an SS-21. "Obviously, we are not buying the denial by the Russians that they weren't responsible," said someone only identified by the Defense Department as "a senior defense official." "I would note that they originally claimed a successful strike, and then only retracted it when there were reports of civilian casualties. So it's our full expectation that this was a Russian strike." German journalist Julian Röpcke tweeted that Kremlin-affiliated media initially reported that Russia attacked the train station, but then blamed Ukraine after learning of the casualties. His tweet included screenshots of what he said were Telegram posts boasting about the attack. Kremlin affiliated media first proudly reported the #Kramatorsk massacre, claiming their missile hit an ammunition train that arrived yesterday evening.After the appearance of civilian casualties, they started blaming Ukraine.Same story as with #MH17 in 2014.#PutinAtWar pic.twitter.com/D3yMZSshbJ— Julian Röpcke🇺🇦 (@JulianRoepcke) April 8, 2022 The Russian Defence Ministry has since denied using the Tochka-U missile, yet military analysts say that images and videos on social media refute those claims. News reports and an Amnesty International report have also pointed out recent instances of Russia using the missile system. Russian media also claimed that the serial number on the missile proves it came from the Armed Forces of Ukraine. The markings on the rocket discovered at the scene of the bombing indicate it was a Soviet-era OTR-21 Tochka missile, and the serial number, the same that appears in the fake BBC video — Ш91579 — shows it was produced in the Votkinsk Machine Building Plant, a machine and ballistic missile factory in Russia’s Udmurtia region. The plant mass-produced missiles in the Soviet era, which were then transported at different times to different countries including Kazakhstan, Russia, Belarus and Ukraine, according to reporting by Ukrainian fact-checkers at StopFake.com. The missile’s serial numbers are unrelated to the country they were shipped to, so Russia’s logic that the number indicates that the missile could only come from Ukraine is flawed. Our ruling Facebook posts claim that Ukraine was responsible for the Kramatorsk train station bombing. A video used to bolster this rumor is fake. Although the video has a BBC logo, it was not produced by the news organization. There’s no credible evidence that Ukraine was behind the attack. The Tochka missile used in the attack, and the serial number on it, isn’t proof that it came from the Ukrainian army. Several news reports, legitimate photos and videos show that Russia has used these missile systems recently. The rumors that Ukraine attacked the train station have largely been spread by pro-Kremlin social media accounts. We rate this claim False

MSNBC’s Mika Brzezinski said, “Elon Musk is trying to control how people think. That’s our job. Elon Musk’s attempted takeover of Twitter has been met with unease by some employees and others who fear what changes the free-speech advocate might make to the company. But some social media users are misrepresenting an old video to suggest that an MSNBC host is upset about Musk possibly taking over the tech giant because he will get in the way of the media’s control of the news. One of the claims on Twitter amused Musk himself. The headline of a video posted on April 16 on Facebook reads, "MSNBC: "Elon Musk is trying to control how people think. That’s our job." The video plays a clip of "Morning Joe" co-host Mika Brzezinski allegedly talking about Musk and how he can "make up his own facts" and "control exactly what people think, and that is, that is our job." 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.) But Brzezinski wasn’t talking about Musk at all. The video is from Feb. 22, 2017, and Brzezinski was speaking with her co-host Joe Scarborough and guest panel about then-President Donald Trump and media coverage of him. "Well I think the dangerous edges here are that he's trying to undermine the media, he's trying to make up his own facts. And it could be that while unemployment and the economy worsens, he could have undermined the messaging so much that he can actually control exactly what people think. And that, that is our job," she said. 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 comment drew some criticism at the time in conservative media, but Brzezinski said then her words were misinterpreted. "Today I said it's the media's job to keep President Trump from making up his own facts, NOT that it's our job to control what people think," she tweeted on Feb. 22, 2017. She followed up in another tweet: "Of course, that is obvious from the transcript but some people want to make up their own facts. SAD!" Our ruling A Facebook post claims that MSNBC "Morning Joe" co-host Brzezinski said that Musk wants to "control what people think," but that’s the media’s "job." The post misrepresents a 2017 video in which Brzezinski and the show’s panel were discussing the media’s role in covering Trump. We rate this claim False. Staff researcher Caryn Baird contributed

Says Adolf Hitler said, “The day mankind finds out what I was trying to defend this nation, Germany, from, then that’s the day World War III starts. Here are some things Adolf Hitler didn’t say: that the best way to control people is "to take a little of their freedom at a time," or that under a national gun registration "our streets will be safer." We know because we fact-checked both statements attributed to the Nazi leader. Another apocryphal quote that we haven’t checked — but it certainly isn’t new — has recently been spreading on social media. It tells the story of what it describes as Hitler telling his soldiers that "even in his death" he would start World War III. "One of his soldiers asked ‘how?’" the grammatically problematic April 12 Facebook post says. "Hitler replied, ‘The day mankind finds out what I was trying to defend this nation, Germany from then thats the day World War 3 will start.’" What follows is an exchange between Hitler and the soldier. Hitler says that "mankind will learn that I was trying to save my Nation from The Free Masons, the Illuminati, the Jews" and that "if the Americans win the war, then they will conquer the world and forever be a slave to the Jews and they will try to conquer God." He later tells the soldier that "America has stolen the Jews. The Jews of God. His jewelry. The Negroes. They are the True Hebrews." 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 No source is given for the quote, but citations have surfaced in other places. Both Snopes, which looked into this in 2017, and Reuters, which did in 2020, found they weren’t accurate. We found no evidence that Hitler said this. According to the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum, Nazis persecuted Black people in Africa "depite their relatively small presence in Germany." They "forcibly sterilized a group of Afro-German children whom they derogatorily called ‘the Rhineland Bastards,’" the museum says. And after the the Nazi regime came to power, Black Germans were marginalized, socially and economically isolated, and discriminated against. RELATED VIDEO In "Mein Kampf," Hitler’s 1925 manifesto, he mentions "negroes" three times, but not in the context that appears in the Facebook quote. "The Jews were responsible for bringing negroes into the Rhineland, with the ultimate idea of bastardizing the white race which they hate and thus lowering its cultural and political level so that the Jew might dominate," he wrote at one point. We rate this post False.

George Soros injected “$33 million” into Black Lives Matter Conservative commentators have tied liberal billionaire philanthropist George Soros to Black Lives Matter for years, long before the murder of George Floyd catapulted the group to the forefront of the struggle for racial justice. Some claims lack any evidence — like when Candace Owens falsely said Soros was orchestrating protests after Floyd’s killing in summer 2020. Others require a closer look. That’s the case of another claim Owens made back in 2018 that portrays Soros as a major donor of Black Lives Matter. The video was reshared on April 9, 2022, by Turning Point USA, a conservative advocacy group, with this caption: "Charlie Kirk and Candace Owens NAILED IT! Black Americans are sick of the hypocrisy and toxicity of BLM Inc!" The video 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 Presented without a date, the four-minute clip shows Owens and Kirk, the group’s founder, taking questions from audience members at Stanford University. "I’ve been trying to look into Black Lives Matter," says a person who identified themselves as a Stanford freshman. "I’m learning that their movement is funded by George Soros." "$33 million injected," Owens added. Other websites and pundits like Owens have tossed out the $33 million donation figure over the years. The figure comes from a Washington Times article published in 2015, amid protests in Ferguson, Mo., over the fatal police shooting of Michael Brown Jr., an 18-year-old Black man. The Washington Times used tax filings for the Soros’ grant-making network, Open Society Foundations, to assert that Soros fueled a slew of protests in Ferguson that erupted after Brown’s death in 2014. When we asked Owens about her claim on April 13, she pointed to another story published by the Washington Times in 2016, which referenced the $33 million figure and the previous article. There’s a big caveat: the latter article referred to contributions to the "Black Lives Matter movement." That’s distinct from the organization itself. (It also folded in other grants from liberal sources.) An Open Society Foundations spokesperson told PolitiFact that the coverage "conflated a range of investments over a span of time as an immediate response to the deaths of Michael Brown Jr. and Freddie Gray." Black Lives Matter is a decentralized global network founded by three women — Alicia Garza, Patrisse Cullors and Opal Tometi. Though "black lives matter" is also used as an umbrella term for the broader push for racial equality across the globe, other social justice groups that received money from Soros do not necessarily have a formal link to the network. The organization’s global network foundation amassed over $90 million in donations in 2020, according to the Black Lives Matter impact report. (The group has recently garnered criticism over the purchase of a multi-million dollar mansion.) As Snopes previously reported, the Soros-funded groups that the Washington Times pointed to were already established organizations. One is the Drug Policy Alliance, a nonprofit founded in 2000 that aims to end the "war on drugs." Open Society Foundations has not given money directly to the Black Lives Matter organization, the spokesperson said. However, it has funded organizations that are associated with the broader movement. The latest connection PolitiFact found was the foundation’s 2018 grant of $279,860 to Release Leads, a UK-based group that focuses on drug use education and policy reform. It also organizes events that feature the Black Lives Matter movement in the UK, among other advocacy groups. Following Floyd’s murder in 2020, Open Society Foundations announced a $220 million investment for various groups, including the Equal Justice Initiative and Repairers of the Breach. Still, it did not fund the Black Lives Matter organization. In her email to PolitiFact on April 14, Owens pointed to a partnership that the Tides Foundation, a left-leaning charity, announced with the Black Lives Matter organization to establish a support fund in 2020. While the Tides Foundation did receive more than $600,000 from the Open Society Foundations in 2020, none of the grants were designated for the Black Lives Matter support fund. Our ruling In a resurfaced Facebook clip, Owens said Soros injected "$33 million" into the Black Lives Matter organization. We found no evidence proving Soros or his foundation gave money directly to the Black Lives Matter organization. Previous reporting in 2015 and 2016 used the $33 million figure to refer to donations from the foundation to multiple groups involved with the cause of racial justice. The figure for Soros’ Black Lives Matter support is not credible, so we rate this claim False

“Disney lost 172,000 reservations recently, valued at around $636 (million) in revenue lost. Since the Walt Disney Corporation denounced Florida’s HB 1557, dubbed the "don’t say gay" bill by critics, conservatives have signaled their intent to boycott Disney theme parks and streaming services. Though we have yet to see the impact of such actions, some social media users are claiming victory. "Disney lost 172,000 reservations recently, valued at around $636 (million) in revenue lost," an April 12 Facebook post read. 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 doesn’t make clear what kind of "reservations" it’s referencing, but there’s no evidence so far that Disney has experienced overwhelming numbers of cancellations at its resorts or theme parks. 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 company’s latest figures pertaining to its theme parks were released in February 2022, when Disney reported that it experienced an increase in revenue of $7.2 billion. The next update on figures related to its theme parks will be released on May 11, when Disney holds its quarterly earnings call. Disney did not respond to PolitiFact’s request for comment. When we looked into similar claims that the company’s subscription-based streaming service, Disney+, "had over 350,000 cancellations" recently, we also found no evidence. Walt Disney Co. is a major multinational media and entertainment company whose profits and losses, policies and business decisions are closely scrutinized, when they are announced. When Disney lost $700 million in the summer of 2020, news outlets like the Washington Post wrote articles on the subject. And should its next quarterly earnings call reveal major losses, that news will certainly make headlines. So far, available information shows no such thing. We rate this claim Fals