Datasets:

Cartinoe5930

/

Politifact_fake_news

like 0

The Biden Administration is engaging in extreme ‘woke’ politics by encouraging children to take chemical castration drugs and undergo surgeries, and they are lying to children by telling them puberty blockers are "reversible. U.S. Rep. Mary Miller claimed in a tweet that the Biden administration is encouraging children to use "chemical castration drugs" and undergo gender-reassignment surgeries. "The Biden Administration is engaging in extreme ‘woke’ politics by encouraging children to take chemical castration drugs and undergo surgeries, and they are lying to children by telling them puberty blockers are ‘reversible,’" tweeted Miller, a Republican from east central Illinois, on April 8. The Biden Administration is engaging in extreme “woke” politics by encouraging children to take chemical castration drugs and undergo surgeries, and they are lying to children by telling them puberty blockers are “reversible.”We must protect our children! https://t.co/OhOlyZbxna— Rep. Mary Miller (@RepMaryMiller) April 8, 2022 The target of Miller’s claim was Biden’s White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki, who told reporters at her April 7 daily briefing that Alabama’s new law prohibiting such surgeries and medications for anyone under 18 years old would be challenged by the administration as "discriminatory" and a possible violation of the Constitution. The Alabama measure is the most strident in a spate of similar laws passed in recent years by more than a dozen Republican-controlled state legislatures throughout the country. In Alabama, doctors and nurses could face felony charges and potential prison time for providing health care related to gender reassignment — including hormone therapy, puberty blocking drugs, or any form of gender reassignment surgery. To support her claim, Miller retweeted a 44-second clip of Psaki’s press briefing. "Alabama’s lawmakers and other legislators who are contemplating these discriminatory bills have been put on notice by the Department of Justice and the Department of Health and Human Services that laws and policies preventing care that health care professionals recommend for transgender minors may violate the Constitution and federal law," Psaki said. Asked for any other evidence to support the claim, Miller’s spokesperson provided a recent guidance issued by the Office of Population Affairs, which falls under the Department of Health and Human Services. "For transgender and nonbinary children and adolescents, early gender-affirming care is crucial to overall health and well-being as it allows the child or adolescent to focus on social transitions and can increase their confidence while navigating the healthcare system," the guidance says. The BGA could find no language in either Psaki’s statements or in the Department of Health and Human Services guidance that encourages children to take "chemical castration drugs" or undergo gender reassignment surgery. Both Psaki’s statements and the guidance, however, cite potential outcomes for transgender and nonbinary children who receive gender-affirming care, such as improved mental health and a lower risk of suicide. Miller’s team did not provide clarification on what the congresswoman meant by her usage of the term "chemical castration drugs." Experts we spoke with said it is not a medical term and not commonly used by medical professionals, but generally seems to be used to describe hormone therapy. Puberty blockers, however, are gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonists, or GnRH agonists, approved by the Food and Drug Administration. Featured Fact-check Instagram posts stated on October 23, 2022 in Instagram post California state Sen. Scott Wiener “doesn’t just want to sterilize California kids, but sterilization of kids everywhere!” By Michael Majchrowicz • October 31, 2022 "They put — exactly as it sounds — puberty on pause," said Dr. Sumanas Jordan, director of Northwestern Medicine’s Gender Pathways program. Jordan said the drugs prevent the secondary sex characteristics such as breast development, hair growth and voice deepening. The American Medical Association, Endocrine Society and the World Professional Association for Transgender Health support the use of hormonal treatments for children who — with medical consultation — decide to delay puberty. Professional medical organizations recommend against puberty blockers for children who have not reached puberty, which typically starts between ages 10 and 12. Hormone treatment for feminization or masculinization of the body is typically not considered until patients are at least 16 years old. Gender reassignment surgery is typically only available to those 18 and older in the United States. Jordan confirmed that the effects of puberty blockers are indeed reversible. Paula M. Neira, program director of LGBTQ+ Equity and Education at Johns Hopkins Medicine Office of Diversity, Inclusion and Health Equity, said access to gender affirming care reduces the risks of depression, anxiety and suicide for youth struggling with gender identity. Neira also said while puberty blockers are reversible, they cannot be used indefinitely. We asked Miller to provide evidence the Biden administration is "lying" about puberty blockers being reversible. She sent guidance published by the Mayo Clinic, a non-profit health organization not overseen by Biden’s administration. The clinic cites the potential long-term effects of puberty blockers — including bone growth and density, future fertility and growth spurts. But there was nothing in the guidance to suggest the effects of puberty blockers are irreversible, as Miller seems to contend. Nor were there any statements from any government official saying anything about puberty blockers. Either way, experts conclude the effects of puberty blockers are indeed reversible. The Mayo Clinic’s guidance acknowledges some changes caused by puberty blockers could require surgery to reverse the effects, but it also said puberty can resume once the drugs are no longer taken. Ruling Miller said the Biden administration is "encouraging children to take chemical castration drugs and undergo surgeries," and "are lying to children by telling them puberty blockers are reversible." The administration made no such assertions in the video Miller cited as evidence. If they had, most credible scientific studies show the effects of puberty blockers are reversible. We rate this claim FALSE. FALSE – The statement is not accurat

“Cities in notoriously ‘tough on crime’ states like Texas and Florida saw a more significant increase in violent crime than cities in NYS.” Assembly Majority Leader Crystal Peoples-Stokes, D-Buffalo, defended New York state’s bail law amid charges by Republicans and others that changes to it in 2020 are contributing to rising violent crime. "Cities in notoriously ‘tough on crime’ states like Texas and Florida saw a more significant increase in violent crime than cities in NYS," she said in a statement. Changes to the bail law were intended to make the system fairer. Advocates said poor people should not remain in jail awaiting trial simply because they cannot afford to post bail, while those who can afford it are released. We wondered if Peoples-Stokes was correct. Did cities in Texas and Florida, where bail laws did not change, also see bigger increases in violent crime? Because Peoples-Stokes said "cities," we looked at the four violent crime categories -- murder, rape, robbery and aggravated assault -- in the 10 largest cities in each state during 2020. This is the most recent year with the most complete data available, and we looked at data reported by city police departments and published by the public safety division of each state government. In general, murders and aggravated assaults increased, while rapes and robberies did not. But we found no clear pattern in the state data among the cities in each state. Murders Murders went up 34% in Buffalo and 17% in Yonkers. In New York City, they went up 46.7%, slightly more than the 45% increase in Rochester. There are cities in Florida and Texas where the percentage increase was roughly the same or even higher than the New York cities. In Houston murders increased by 45%. In Fort Worth, they went up 59%. Murders rose 42% in Miami and 76% in Fort Lauderdale. But in San Antonio, the increase was only 20%. And in some cities in all three states, the number of murders fell. In El Paso, for example, the number of murders went down by 30%. When we calculated the overall increase among the cities in each state -- disregarding cities that had just a few murders, where a small increase would lead to a large percentage increase -- the increase in New York state came to 46%, compared with 31% in Texas and 22% in Florida. 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 According to Pew Research Center, which used data from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, murders rose by 30% between 2019 and 2020 across the country. Pew’s analysis showed that on a statewide basis, per 100,000 people, New York’s increase in murders was higher than the increases in Florida and Texas. The number of homicides per 100,000 remains lower in New York, at 4.7 at the end of 2020, than in Florida, 7.8, and Texas, 7.6. Robberies Robberies fell in all 30 cities, except for San Antonio, Austin and Tampa. New York City reported a 1.6% decline in robberies. Nine of the 10 Florida cities posted bigger percent declines. Eight of the Texas cities had bigger percentage declines. Aggravated assaults Overall, the data showed a percentage increase in aggravated assaults in the 10 cities we looked at in each of the three states. In New York, the overall increase was 4%, less than the 21% increases in Florida and in Texas. Rapes The number of reported rapes fell in most cities in each of the three states. Nine of the 10 Florida cities had fewer reported rapes, as did nine of 10 Texas cities. Rapes fell in seven of the 10 New York state cities. The percentage decline in rapes in New York was 19%. Rapes declined in the Florida cities by 15% and in the Texas cities by 17%. Evidence cited We approached Peoples-Stokes’ office for evidence of her claim, and her staff sent several sources, including a report from November 2020 regarding violent crime rates through Sept. 30, 2020, from the Police Executive Research Forum, a nonprofit organization whose members are high-ranking police officials. The report found a 66% increase in homicides and a 39% increase in aggravated assaults in Fort Worth while El Paso saw a decrease in homicides of 66%. Tampa had an increase in aggravated assaults of 35%. There was no mention of New York cities in the report. To Peoples-Stokes’ point about the effect of bail law changes in New York, other investigations have found that among people who were released under the 2020 bail changes, few committed violent offenses after release. Our ruling Peoples-Stokes said that "cities in notoriously ‘tough on crime’ states like Texas and Florida saw a more significant increase in violent crime than cities in NYS." It is true some cities in Texas and Florida that saw greater increases in some categories of violent crime than cities in New York state between 2019 and 2020. The percentage increase in aggravated assaults, considered a violent crime, grew more in large cities in Texas and Florida than it did in New York. But there are also cities in New York state that had greater increases than cities in Texas and Florida. Statewide, the increases in murders per 100,000 people was greater in New York than it was in Texas and in Florida. Her claim is partially accurate, but leaves out important context. We rate this Half True.

"Ron Johnson is trying to let insurance companies deny coverage to people with pre-existing conditions like cancer, depression, pregnancy, diabetes—or even COVID. It’s no secret that U.S. Sen. Ron Johnson isn’t a fan of the Affordable Care Act, the Obama administration’s signature health care law, passed in 2010. A hallmark of the law was its rule that health insurance companies can’t refuse to cover people or charge them more if they have a pre-existing condition — a health problem they had before the insurance coverage started. Wisconsin State Treasurer Sarah Godlewski, a Democrat who’s vying to unseat Johnson this fall, targeted Johnson this way in a April 1 tweet: "Ron Johnson is trying to let insurance companies deny coverage to people with pre-existing conditions like cancer, depression, pregnancy, diabetes — or even COVID." That coverage, of course, is a key provision in the Affordable Care Act. But does that mean Godlewski is right? 2017 amendment wouldn’t have denied sick people health coverage, but could have hiked up cost When asked to provide evidence of her claim, Godlewski’s office sent a list of votes Johnson has cast in favor of repealing or scaling back the health care law. Soon after he took office, Johnson cosponsored a bill to repeal the Affordable Care Act, saying in a Jan. 26, 2011, news release that it was "the single greatest assault on our freedom in my lifetime." He voted multiple times to drop the law’s individual mandate, which required most people to have health insurance or pay a penalty, and voted for a series of attempted repeals during the summer of 2017. But just because he wanted to get rid of the law doesn’t necessarily mean he wanted people with pre-existing conditions to go without protections. After all, many Republicans have said they support that provision, and it is widely popular with voters. Godlewski’s strongest evidence stems from a vote Johnson cast for the Better Care Reconciliation Act, an amendment to the GOP plan to repeal and replace the Affordable Care Act. The final version of the amendment — which failed — would have allowed insurance companies to offer plans that could deny coverage to sick people as long as they carried at least one comprehensive plan that followed the Affordable Care Act’s rules. Insurance companies and patient groups decried the amendment, saying it would make those comprehensive plans more costly and create two systems of insurance, one for healthy and one for sick people. 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 that specific instance, then, Johnson did vote for legislation that could have allowed insurance companies to have plans that denied people with pre-existing conditions coverage. But — to get technical — all of those companies would also have had to have at least one plan that did cover people with pre-existing conditions, even if it was likely to end up being expensive. Johnson has said he wants to protect people with pre-existing conditions Johnson’s office said the senator has committed to protections for people with pre-existing conditions. They pointed to his introduction of the Protect Act in February 2021, which would prohibit health insurers from imposing exclusions on plans based on pre-existing conditions. (The bill has not moved from committee.) They also cited a response Johnson gave to a Milwaukee Journal Sentinel inquiry about his views on health care on March 17: "The first step in any health care reform would assure everyone that people with preexisting conditions would be protected by having their insurance rates subsidized so that they pay the same rates as those without preexisting conditions." In a June 26, 2017, New York Times opinion piece criticizing the Republican alternative to the Affordable Care Act, Johnson wrote that he was in part dissatisfied with the bill because it "leaves in place the pre-existing condition rules that drive up the cost of insurance for everyone." But he followed that by writing that the country "should look to improve successful models for protecting individuals with pre-existing conditions, models underway prior to Obamacare." His statements are just that — statements. Skeptics may question whether the views are sincere, or if political roadblocks would prevent it from happening. But given current facts as they’re known, Godlewski’s claim doesn’t quite hold up. Our ruling Godlewski claimed Johnson is trying to let insurance companies deny coverage to people with pre-existing conditions. The senator did cast a vote in 2017 that would have opened the door for insurance companies to offer such plans, but still would have required them to offer other plans that did provide that coverage. And he’s said consistently that he aims to protect coverage for people with pre-existing conditions. Our definition of Mostly False is a statement that contains an element of truth but ignores critical facts that would give a different impression. 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' });

Mehmet Oz "called for a New Zealand-style gun ban" and said "Americans should have less access to guns. In his run for U.S. Senate in Pennsylvania, Dr. Mehmet Oz is branding himself as a protector of rights for gun owners. So it might be surprising to GOP voters to see claims from his chief rival for the Republican nomination that say he’s made numerous statements in support of gun-control measures. Former hedge fund CEO Dave McCormick used a 15-second video ad on Facebook and Instagram to describe Oz, the physician and TV personality who is endorsed by former President Donald Trump. "Mehmet Oz is anti-gun," the ad claims in text that appears over a grainy black-and-white image of Oz while dramatic music plays and other claims flash across the screen. "Oz called for a New Zealand-style gun ban," says one. "Oz: Americans should have ‘less access to guns.’" Did Oz really say those things? A review of statements he has made on television, in social media posts and in bylined columns show Oz for years promoted these and other ideas supported by advocates of gun control measures. His position on these matters appears to have changed since he announced his plan to run for public office. The "Second Amendment" section of Oz’s campaign website says: "As a proud gun-owner, Dr. Oz is a firm believer in the Second Amendment and our constitutional right to bear arms for protection. He opposes anti-gun measures like red flag laws and liberal gun grabs … every law-abiding American citizen should be allowed to buy the gun of their desire." But in nationally circulated newspaper columns that Oz co-wrote with Dr. Michael Roizen — and that Oz has recently distanced himself from — Oz frequently endorsed gun control stances. Oz’s campaign did not reply to our requests for information. U.S. assault rifle ban and New Zealand In 2019, Oz indicated support for a gun ban like one in New Zealand. That year, New Zealand banned most semiautomatic weapons following a terror attack on two mosques that left 51 people dead. Oz was the lead author of a question-and-answer syndicated newspaper column that he wrote with Roizen. In a 2019 column that called gun deaths in America a public health crisis, the doctors suggested the United States reinstitute a ban on assault rifles. The column ended by saying the New Zealand parliament passed legislation banning most semi-automatic and military-style weapons with a hope "to get as many of these assault weapons off their streets ASAP. Can we?" ‘Less access’ part of the claim misleading Oz once said Americans should have less access to guns — but he did not state support for any specific gun control measure. In a 2013 column about America’s overall health ranking, Oz and his colleague cited a number of health problems and noted the number of gun-related homicides in the U.S. They offered dietary tips and other health suggestions. "And let's add in more access to health care; less access to guns that aren't designed for hunting; more access to good nutrition" and other steps, they wrote. They did not elaborate on how to achieve "less access" to guns. Statements backing gun-control measures McCormick’s campaign cited to us additional Oz statements on gun control that are not noted in the ad. Background checks: In a 2014 column, Oz and his colleague wrote that "until the government embraces gun-safety measures — polls show that 79% of the population favors universal background checks for gun buyers — it's every doctor's responsibility to their patients and your responsibility to yourself and your family to reduce gun violence." Featured Fact-check Instagram posts stated on October 17, 2022 in an Instagram post There were two shooters in the 2017 Las Vegas mass shooting. By Ciara O'Rourke • October 20, 2022 Waiting periods: In a 2017 column, the doctors wrote: "One regulation that seems to be very effective in reducing gun violence, and shouldn’t bother anyone, is to institute waiting periods in every state. … Just think how many lives strict background checks and tighter automatic weapon, magazine and ammunition regulations could save without impinging on anyone’s rights." Stricter regulation: Oz and his colleague expressed support in a 2018 column for "responsible gun laws" to reduce gun deaths among children. They said there are twice as many pediatric firearm deaths in states with the "most lenient" gun regulations than in states with the strictest regulations. The column also urged readers who support stricter regulations to write to their representatives. Study gun violence: Also in 2018, Oz tweeted in reference to the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention: "Right now, the @CDCgov is NOT funded to study gun violence in this country. It’s time we treat shootings as a public health problem. Contact your congressperson today to demand they fund the #CDC to comprehensively study gun violence. #EndTheBan." Red-flag laws: On his TV show in 2019, Oz said red flag laws, which provide a mechanism to take guns from people exhibiting dangerous behavior before they harm themselves or others, "may help protect you and your family." At a campaign stop in February 2022, Oz said he believes in some red flag-style laws to evaluate whether people with certain mental health issues should be allowed to be armed, but that he is against any national red-flag registry, according to a local news report of the event. What Oz has said about the columns On March 18, 2022, in a story about the columns supporting gun-control measures, Fox News reported that Oz disavowed the columns. In an interview, Roizen told PolitiFact that for most of the more than 15 years that he and Oz co-authored the column, he and Oz typically wrote the columns separately, without consulting one another. Roizen said he believes he wrote all of the columns that supported gun-control measures. "I believe he believed in people having guns, the Second Amendment," Roizen said, but that he didn’t know Oz’s opinions on any gun-control measures. He said Oz never expressed any objections to him about the columns that supported gun control. "I don’t remember any conversation about it at all," Roizen said. 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 Real Clear Politics polling average as of April 12 shows McCormick in the lead by 2.6 percentage points over Oz. An Emerson College Polling/The Hill poll of very likely Republican Pennsylvania voters conducted April 3-4 showed McCormick in the lead, by 18% to 17%, over Oz. Trump endorsed Oz on April 9, five days after McCormick’s ad started running. Trump said Oz "will always fight for and support our under-siege Second Amendment." The leading Democratic candidates are Lt. Gov. John Fetterman, state Rep. Malcolm Kenyatta and U.S. Rep. Conor Lamb. The primaries are May 17. Overall, 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 in an ad that Oz "called for a New Zealand-style gun ban" and said "Americans should have less access to guns." Oz currently is running as a pro-gun candidate, but that is in contrast with statements he made for years in support of gun-control measures such as an assault rifle ban and measures to restrict gun purchases, such as background checks and waiting periods. Oz’s statement about less access to guns was vague; it did not call for governmental restrictions on gun access. We rate the statement Mostly True. RELATED: The race for the Pennsylvania U.S. Senate seat: A guide RELATED: Pennsylvania fact-chec

McDonald’s added xylitol to its ice cream which is toxic to dogs We’re not sure who is thinking about feeding McDonald’s ice cream to their dogs. But in case you know someone who is, a social media post offers this urgent, exclamation-point-filled message: "WARNING!!! McDonald’s has added Xylitol to their ice cream!!! Xylitol is deadly to dogs!! Do not let your pups eat any type of ice cream from McDonald’s!!" reads an April 13 Facebook post. But dog owners don’t have to worry too much — it isn’t true. 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.) Xylitol, a sugar alcohol, can be deadly to dogs, but we could find no evidence that it was added to McDonald’s ice cream recipe. It isn’t listed as an ingredient in any of the company’s desserts. Featured Fact-check Instagram posts stated on October 24, 2022 in a video McDonald's uses potatoes sprayed with a highly toxic pesticide called Monitor. By Andy Nguyen • October 28, 2022 McDonald’s also dismissed the rumor. "These claims are false," the company said in an email to PolitiFact. "Our soft serve, found in our cones and other desserts, does not contain xylitol." This doesn’t mean that regularly giving your dog ice cream is a good idea, however. Pet companies and veterinarians warn that too much can make dogs sick, and some ice cream companies do include toxic ingredients, like xylitol. Even so, it’s not in McDonald’s ice cream, so we rate this Facebook post Fals

The Brooklyn subway attack was a false flag Hours after a gunman opened fire on a crowded subway train during morning rush hour in Brooklyn, New York, some people logged onto social media to falsely claim that the attack was staged, or what many call a "false flag" operation. "Biden gives a gun grabbing speech yesterday, when NO ONE was talking about guns, and voila! FALSE FLAG," someone tweeted, sharing a story about the shooting. "The guy fired 33 rounds in a crowded subway car and hit 10 people. No deaths, and the cameras just HAPPENED to not be functioning, and the guy ‘got away’. This has EVERY marking of a False Flag," another said. Other reasons social media users used to claim that the attack was fake include bogus claims of crisis actors and "fake blood." "False flags" are supposed covert operations designed to deflect blame and are frequently the subject of conspiracy theories. Posts making these claims 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.) On April 12, a man popped open a smoke canister in a subway car and started shooting, firing over 30 rounds and striking 10 people as the train pulled into the 36th Street station in Sunset Park. Five riders were critically wounded in the rush-hour attack, and many more were injured in the chaos that followed, police said. No deaths have been reported. Wearing a gas mask and construction vest, the man — identified by law enforcement as 62-year-old Frank R. James — fled the scene, leaving behind a gun, ammo, gasoline and fireworks. He was arrested a day later in Manhattan. While a motive has not yet been established, investigators said that James will face federal terrorism charges. There is no evidence that the attack was staged. Multiple local and national news organizations have been closely covering the shooting in Brooklyn, obtaining live footage, speaking to law enforcement and interviewing witnesses. Claims about "fake blood" and "crisis actors" are baseless and appear to solely come from unsourced social media posts. Cameras not working in the New York City subway system isn’t evidence of a conspiracy — it reflects long-standing issues plaguing the Metropolitan Transportation Authority that include frequent breakdowns and mechanical failures. 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 The day before the shooting, President Joe Biden did announce new measures to crack down on so-called "ghost guns," firearms that come in parts that can be bought online and assembled without much of a trace. But the new rule, which essentially expands the definition of a firearm to cover these kits, is unrelated to the shooting. The firearm used in the attack wasn’t a ghost gun. Police said James purchased it from a federal firearms licensee in Ohio in 2012. While James had multiple arrests dating back to the 1990s, he has no felony convictions, law enforcement said, allowing him to make the purchase. New York law enforcement also debunked reports that said the FBI had previously investigated James and cleared him (a narrative many use to support false flag theories) saying in an April 13 news conference following James’ arrest that there is "no record" of any FBI investigation involving James and that claims stating otherwise are inaccurate. It’s become common after a mass shooting to hear false claims that they were staged. This happens, partly, because these false beliefs often affirm people’s worldviews, researchers have told PolitiFact. When something tragic happens that seems to challenge one’s belief systems, it can be more comfortable to think that event was all staged for nefarious purposes. Distrust in the media and police also help push these hoaxes along and makes people more susceptible to believe in elaborate set-ups. "It can be a lot more emotionally comfortable to believe that not only did it not happen, but that the thing that happened is actually a conspiracy to delegitimize your beliefs," said Mike Caulfield, a research scientist at the Center for an Informed Public at the University of Washington. One way people can confront false flag claims during chaotic events is to first ask themselves if they or the people posting these conspiracy theories are experts in crises, Caulfield said, and instead of jumping to conclusions, seek out experts and credible sources first. Our ruling Social media posts claim that the mass shooting in the New York City subway was a false flag. This is baseless and relies on unsourced social media posts. The attack was real. Pants on Fire! RELATED: False flags: They’re real, but far less widespread than social media sugges

“Just passed into law today: You cannot go 5 miles over speed limit” in North Carolina A Facebook post warned North Carolinians to be aware of a new speed limit law. "Just passed into law today: You cannot go five miles over speed limit in NC," the post read. "You can be stopped for one mile over posted speed limit!" But pump the brakes — a majority of the Facebook users who responded to the post called it out for being misleading. "Way to share improper information," wrote one user. "It is not a law, because the law already says you can’t speed." 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.) First it’s important to note: the North Carolina Legislature isn’t scheduled to convene until May 4, so there wouldn’t have been a law passed at this time. There is an annual campaign underway from the Governor’s Highway Safety Program called "Speed a Little, Lose a Lot," aimed at curbing fast driving and raising awareness of the risks of speeding past the limit. "Law enforcement officers will step up enforcement of speeding motorists from April 11-17," a recent press release said. But the campaign doesn’t say anything about a new law that bars drivers from going 5 mph over the speed limit. Lauren Horsch, spokeswoman for state Senator Phil Berger, confirmed this. "Law enforcement has the authority to enforce speed limits, and enforcement decisions, like traffic stops, are within the discretion of the officer," Horsch said. 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 First Sgt. Christopher Knox of the North Carolina Department of Public Safety also debunked the claim. "There has NOT been a change to North Carolina law with regards to speeding statutes, nor has there been any changes to our agencies enforcement of these laws," he wrote to PolitiFact. "The North Carolina State Highway Patrol issues citations or makes arrests only for definite, clear-cut and substantial violations of the law." So what do the state’s speeding laws actually say? North Carolina, like most other states, has absolute speed limits. For example, if a person is in a 35 mph zone but is driving at any speed faster than that, it’s a violation of a law. With that being said, the state follows what’s known as "basic" speeding law, which stipulates that "no person shall drive a vehicle on a highway or in a public vehicular area at a speed greater than is reasonable and prudent under the conditions then existing." DrivingLaws.com explains it this way: a person can safely drive 55 mph on a clear, sunny day, but in conditions that are snowy and icy, that speed would be dangerous and could violate basic speeding law. Our ruling A Facebook post claimed that a new law was passed in North Carolina on April 11 that drivers could not go 5 mph over the speed limit, and could be stopped for going one mile over it. No new law was passed stating this. North Carolina, like other states, follows absolute law, which means that a person driving at any speed over the posted limit in an area is in violation of the law. However, it allows for basic law, which rules that a person can drive at a speed that is reasonable and safe under favorable conditions. We rate this Facebook post Fals

Brian Kemp "dismissed concerns about voter fraud in the 2020 election" and "widespread illegal ballot harvesting continued, electing two Democrat senators. Republican voters in Georgia are being told that GOP Gov. Brian Kemp, who is seeking re-election, is not up to defeating the expected Democratic nominee, Stacey Abrams. The warning comes in a TV ad from Get Georgia Right, a conservative super PAC that says its aim is to elect Republicans in Georgia and for president. Kemp "dismissed concerns about voter fraud in the 2020 election" and "widespread illegal ballot harvesting continued, electing two Democrat senators," the narrator claims in the 30-second spot, which shows people appearing to place ballots inside drop boxes. "If Kemp can’t beat voter fraud, he won’t beat Stacey Adams," the ad said. The ad does not mention Kemp’s competitor for the Republican nomination in the May 24 primary, former U.S. Sen. David Perdue. But Politico reported April 13 that Get Georgia Right is dedicated to defeating Kemp and that it received $500,000 from former President Donald Trump’s Save America PAC. That accounts for nearly all the funds that Get Georgia Right had on hand as of March 31, according to its latest report to the Federal Election Commission. There is no evidence to back the ad’s illegal voting claims. ‘Voter fraud in the 2020 election’ The roughly 5 million ballots cast in Georgia in the 2020 presidential election were counted three times, including once by hand. Georgia state and local officials found no evidence of systematic voter fraud. The secretary of state’s office investigated claims about dead or otherwise ineligible voters and debunked allegations of fraud, such as the false claim that election workers in Atlanta were caught on tape secretly counting "suitcases" of fake ballots. We rated a Perdue claim that the 2020 presidential election and subsequent Georgia Senate runoff elections "were stolen" Pants on Fire. The winners of the runoffs, which were held because no candidate won more than 50% of the vote in the November 2020 elections, are the two Democratic senators the ad alludes to: Jon Ossoff and Raphael Warnock. In the runoffs, Ossoff defeated Perdue and Warnock defeated Sen. Kelly Loeffler. Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger, a Republican, certified those results, affirming that the returns "are a true and correct tabulation of the certified returns received by this office from each county." Kemp signed off on the certification. Kemp in November 2020 rejected calls from state Republican leaders for a special legislative session to tighten voter residency requirements for the runoffs, saying: "Any changes to Georgia’s election laws made in a special session will not have any impact on an ongoing election and would only result in endless litigation." In March 2021, Kemp signed legislation that adds new identification requirements to absentee voting and limits ballot drop boxes. Kemp’s office said in November 2021 it identified dozens of "inconsistencies" in the 2020 election. But those instances did not warrant an investigation by the state election board, Kemp said. ‘Widespread illegal ballot harvesting’ "Ballot harvesting"generally refers to someone collecting absentee ballots on behalf of others and then submitting them to official election drop boxes. In Georgia, it is generally illegal to collect and submit multiple mail ballots. Exceptions are made for physically disabled voters. 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 Raffensperger in January said that his office was investigating claims of ballot harvesting, but "no one has alleged that those are fraudulent ballots. Those were lawful voters." So far, claims that widespread fraudulent votes were cast via illegal ballot harvesting remain unproven. Get Georgia Right told PolitiFact it obtained videos from various Georgia counties that it said show "tens of thousands of ballots that were cast beyond the single ballot allowed per person using a drop box" in the November 2020 and January 2021 runoff elections, exceeding the margins of victory in the presidential race and both runoffs. The group did not share those videos with PolitiFact and it did not say whether it had submitted those videos to authorities for an investigation. Moreover, even if people violated the law by submitting ballots for multiple people, that alone would not make the ballots invalid. The law does not say that illegal ballot harvesting, in and of itself, invalidates the ballots or makes them illegal. True the Vote, a conservative Texas group that says it works to protect the integrity of elections, in January 2022 also alleged ballot harvesting in the November 2020 and January 2021 elections. Last year, the Georgia Bureau of Investigation said there wasn’t enough evidence to proceed on the allegation. True the Vote has since said it has a witness, but has yet to reveal the person’s identity. The State Election Board voted March 16 to issue subpoenas to the group to obtain the name of the witness. Handicapping the Georgia governor’s race If neither Perdue nor Kemp gets more than 50% of the primary vote, there will be a runoff on June 21. In the Nov. 8 general election, the Republican nominee is expected to face Abrams, who is unopposed in the Democratic primary. Kemp won his first term as governor in 2018 by defeating Abrams, a former George state lawmaker, by about 50% to 49%. Campaign watchers rate the general election as a toss up and "tilts Republican." Our ruling Get Georgia Right, a conservative super PAC, said Kemp "dismissed concerns about voter fraud in the 2020 election" and "widespread illegal ballot harvesting continued, electing two Democrat senators." Kemp dismissed claims of voter fraud after investigations showed there was no evidence that such fraud happened in the 2020 election or in the January 2021 runoffs. Two Georgia Democrats were elected to the U.S. Senate in the runoffs and their election results were certified by state officials in Georgia who were Republicans. The claim that illegal ballot harvesting happened in Georgia is not proven. We rate the claim False. RELATED: David Perdue’s PolitiFact file RELATED: Brian Kemp’s PolitiFact file RELATED: Stacey Abrams’ PolitiFact file RELATED: Fact-checks about Georg

Sen. Marsha Blackburn made a white power symbol at Ketanji Brown Jackson U.S. Sen. Marsha Blackburn, R-Tenn., sits on the Senate Judiciary Committee, and she questioned Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson during Jackson’s recent confirmation hearing for the Supreme Court. In the days since, an image of Blackburn in which her hand is resting on her arm with her thumb and index finger touching has been shared on social media with the claim that she was flashing a hate symbol at Jackson. "Marsha Blackburn decided to throw some painfully obvious white power signs during Ketanji Brown Jackson’s confirmation. I hope it goes viral so the press is forced to question her," one April 7 tweet says. The tweet was liked more than 30,000 times. 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 (Screenshot from Twitter) But video of the hearing shows that Blackburn was wearing a different outfit than the one she was wearing in the image that shows her hand poised like that — a gesture that traditionally means "OK" but that has in recent years been associated with white supremacy. In fact, Blackburn tweeted out the video in which she makes the gesture on April 7. You can see it around the 1:28 mark, as Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin finishes speaking and Blackburn directs a question at Gen. Mark Milley, chairman of the joint chiefs of staff. "Top Biden defense officials just admitted that it was wrong of the administration to share intelligence about Russia with the Chinese," she said in the tweet. "You’d think they would have figured that out ahead of time." Later in the video she can be seen tapping her hand lightly against her arms, and moving her index fingers as she speaks. At other times, her hands are folded. It doesn’t look like she’s deliberately making a hate symbol, and we found no evidence to support the claim that she was. We’ve previously debunked claims that President Joe Biden, who made a similar gesture, "flashed the white power sign while a Black man was asking him a question." The man was white, and Biden was making a "zero" with his hand. RELATED VIDEO It’s also worth noting that this gesture is not now a universal white power gesture. According to the Anti-Defamation League, in 2017, members of the website 4chan falsely claimed that it represented the letters "WP" for "white power." "The hoaxers hoped that the media and liberals would overreact by condemning a common image as white supremacist," the Anti-Defamation League said in this article explaining the gesture. While overwhelmingly people use the gesture to signify assent or approval, "as well as other usages unrelated to white supremacy," the league says, it has also been used as a sincere expression of white supremacy. What’s not true: that Blackburn made a white power gesture at Jackson. We rate that claim False.

Gilbert Gottfried died from the COVID-19 vaccine After news broke that comedian Gilbert Gottfried had died, it didn’t take long for unfounded claims to spread on social media that his cause of death was the COVID-19 vaccine. "The jab killed Gilbert Gottfried, according to his wife," said one tweet that followed the April 12 announcement. But that’s not true. Gottfried is survived by his wife, Dara, his daughter Lily, his son Max, his sister Karen and his nephew Graham, according to a statement from Gottfried’s longtime friend and publicist, Glenn Schwartz. In the statement, Schwartz said that Gottfried had died from "recurrent ventricular tachycardia," a heart rhythm problem. 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 Schwartz said this was "due to myotonic dystrophy type II," an inherited muscular dystrophy that affects the muscles and other body systems, such as the heart. Gottfried’s family posted a statement about his death on Gottfried’s verified Twitter account. It doesn’t mention the COVID-19 vaccine. "We are heartbroken to announce the passing of our beloved Gilbert Gottfried after a long illness," the statement says. "In addition to being the most iconic voice in comedy, Gilbert was a wonderful husband, brother, friend and father to his two young children. Although today is a sad day for all of us, please keep laughing as loud as possible in Gilbert’s honor." RELATED VIDEO The statement was also posted on an Instagram account that appears to belong to his wife. Last year, the St. Clair County Emergency Management Agency in Illinois shared a Cameo video from Gottfried urging people to get vaccinated at the fairgrounds there. But claims he died from the COVID-19 vaccine are False.

Disney+ has had over 350,000 cancellations in the last five days On March 28, the Walt Disney Corporation released a statement condemning the signing of HB 1557, criticized as Florida’s "don’t say gay" bill. In response, some conservatives called for boycotts and told people to stop visiting Disney theme parks and cancel their Disney+ streaming subscriptions. Within days many on social media claimed victory, stating that Disney+ had already lost over 350,000 subscribers. "Disney+ has had over 350,000 cancellations in the last FIVE days," one April 8 Facebook post 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.) We could find no news reports or documentation that shows 350,000 Disney+ subscriptions have been canceled. The company does not routinely report on the fluctuations of their subscribers. Disney declined to comment. 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 last released subscriber statistics in February 2022 in a first quarter earnings report. At the time, Disney said it had added 11.8 million Disney+ subscribers, bringing the total to 129.8 million. The next update on subscription figures will be during Disney’s next quarterly earnings call on May 11 and would be the only place where it would share more information. HB 1557 prohibits classroom instruction on sexual orientation and gender identity in kindergarten through third grade. Supporters of the law hail the need for parents, and not teachers, to have control over such discussions, part of a broader push to control the content of classroom lessons. But critics warn it isn’t necessary and makes some students feel unsafe by singling out LGBTQ material as dangerous and inappropriate. Our ruling Facebook posts claim Disney lost over 350,000 Disney+ subscription days after conservatives called for boycotts. There is no evidence to support this. Disney has not released any data on its subscription numbers since February and more figures will be reported after the company’s next quarterly earnings call in May. We rate these unsupported posts False. RELATED: ‘Don’t say gay’ vs. ‘parental rights': Fact-checking claims about Florida’s HB 155

The chairman of Virginia’s Republican Party made a “shockingly racist post” about Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin A Virginia politician resigned days after news surfaced that he wrote a racist Facebook post about two Black military leaders, including U.S. Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin. But a tweet from liberal Facebook page Occupied Democrats criticized the wrong person as being the post’s author. "BREAKING: Virginia Republican Party Chairman makes a shockingly racist Facebook post calling President Biden’s Black Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin a ‘dirty, stinking n-----,’ calls for a ‘civil war.’ He’s refusing to step down over his post," Occupy Democrats tweeted. BREAKING: Virginia Republican Party Chairman makes a shockingly racist Facebook post calling President Biden’s Black Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin a “dirty, stinking n*gg*r,” calls for a “civil war.” He’s refusing to step down over his post. RT IF YOU THINK HE MUST BE EXPELLED!— Occupy Democrats (@OccupyDemocrats) April 8, 2022 A Twitter user saw the tweet and asked us if it was true. The person who made the statements was a local official, not someone in a statewide leadership position. Occupy Democrats later sent a corrected tweet. The real author of the post was David Dietrich, who is not the chairman of Virginia’s GOP. Rather, he’s the chairman of the Hampton Electoral Board in Virginia. Dietrich led the three-member board, which oversees elections in Hampton’s city of over 137,000 residents. Hampton is located in the southeastern part of Virginia, near the city of Norfolk. Dietrich made the post in February 2021. Under the headline "Military Purge," Deitrich lashed out at Austin’s appointment as defense secretary, saying that Austin was "standing down the military to ferret out ‘white nationalists’" in order to "remove conservative, freedom-loving Americans from the roles." He also bashed retired Army Lt. Gen. Russel L. Honoré, whom House Speaker Nancy Pelosi tasked with leading a review of security at the Capitol following the Jan. 6 insurrection. "To listen to this guy, you would think he was a Black Nationalist," Dietrich wrote. 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 Dietrich went on to call the two military leaders "nothing more than dirty, stinking n------" and said, "Perhaps the best way to pull us back from the brink is a good public lynching." A local Virginia TV station, WAVY-TV, was the first to break the story on April 8, 2022. It reported that Dietrich’s comments came to light after the Republican Party of Hampton released them in a statement. The party said it was made aware of Dietrich’s post the week before. It condemned Dietrich’s comments as "abhorrent and unacceptable" and called for him to resign, as did Virginia Gov. Glenn Youngkin, a Republican. "The abhorrent words of a Hampton Roads official are beyond unacceptable and have no place in Virginia," Youngkin wrote. "It’s time to resign." As governor, I serve all Virginians. I won’t accept racism in our Commonwealth or our party. The abhorrent words of a Hampton Roads official are beyond unacceptable and have no place in Virginia. It’s time to resign. https://t.co/w2pnl95jrl— Governor Glenn Youngkin (@GovernorVA) April 9, 2022 After initially refusing to do so, Dietrich resigned on April 9. The official who was wrongly identified as the speaker of the racist claims is Virginia GOP chairman Richard Anderson. The Virginia GOP Twitter account replied to Occupy Democrats on April 8, writing that the group was "spreading misinformation." "We have demanded his resignation and asked the circuit court to remove him," the Virginia GOP tweet said. Occupy Democrats issued a correction of its tweet on April 11. However, by then several Facebook users had copied and shared the uncorrected text of the original claim. Our ruling A tweet from Occupy Democrats pointed to the chairman of Virginia’s Republican Party as the one who authored a racist post about Austin and Honoré. The racist post was real, but it was made by the chairman of the Electoral Board in Hampton, Virginia, not the state’s GOP. We rate this claim False. UPDATE, April 12 at 5p.m.: We updated this fact-check shortly after publication with a tweet addressing the Occupy Democrats claim from the Virginia GO

“You couldn’t buy a cannon when, in fact, the Second Amendment passed. President Joe Biden announced new regulations to curb the proliferation of so-called "ghost guns," unserialized firearms made from kits. Biden spoke of codifying a prohibition on manufacturing these firearms without serial numbers, requiring sellers to conduct a background check on prospective buyers, among other rules. He also detailed his desire to see assault weapons and high-capacity magazines banned. Then the president invoked history to support his stance. 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 "From the very beginning, the Second Amendment didn’t say you can own any gun you want, big as you want," Biden said at the press conference. "You couldn’t buy a cannon when, in fact, the Second Amendment passed." This isn’t the first time Biden made such an assertion about the Second Amendment. Or even the second. During his presidential campaign, he made a similar claim about cannon ownership in the Revolutionary War. We rated that False. Then, in 2021, Biden said the Second Amendment "limited the type of people who could own a gun and what type of weapon you could own." False again. The Second Amendment did not place limits on individual ownership of cannons. The text of the amendment is brief: "A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed." Though the rights endowed in the amendment are a point of contention for most Americans, the U.S. Supreme Court has maintained that it does confer an individual’s right to bear arms. "Biden's statement is completely false," said David Kopel, the research director and Second Amendment project director at the Independence Institute. "Neither in 1791 nor in the preceding centuries was there any American law against owning particular types of arms." Historians have previously told PolitiFact that Biden mischaracterized the history of gun regulation and its ties to the Second Amendment. The White House did not return PolitiFact’s request for comment. While there are robust regulations dealing with gun ownership today, federal gun regulation came in 1934, decades after the Second Amendment was introduced into the U.S. Bill of Rights. That regulation did not rely upon the Second Amendment. For Biden, the third time isn’t the charm. We rate this claim Fals

Poland palace that Biden visited is fake The appearance of the exterior of the Polish Presidential Palace in Warsaw left one social media user claiming that President Joe Biden’s visit there was staged. "Y’all waking up yet? You’re watching a movie," read the caption for a video posted on Facebook on April 6. You trust everything that’s going on over there? Why would they have to fake a building? Where are they really?" The video plays a clip of Biden’s arrival and we hear a different person describe a "wrinkly wall and a wrinkly window" before the narrator isolates an image he claims shows a "fake building." 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.) After stopping to visit U.S. troops a day earlier, Biden was greeted at the presidential palace in Warsaw on March 26 by Polish President Andrzej Duda. Embed from Getty Imageswindow.gie=window.gie||function(c){(gie.q=gie.q||[]).push(c)};gie(function(){gie.widgets.load({id:'fc9b93DvQOh6MpzOKUAB3w',sig:'o8ZnvliACBp5dc1zzcLDhNa_t9yQ3t3SJPJWuqZ4FzA=',w:'594px',h:'395px',items:'1387818207',caption: true ,tld:'com',is360: false })}); This photo from Getty Images shows what appears to be some of the scaffolding on the front of Poland's Presidential Palace. (Embed from Getty Images) In multiple photos of the scene, there appears to be something covering the building’s exterior on the side where the entrance is, almost like a replica of the building on canvas. On either side of the main entrance, a temporary white wall the length of the building was erected, where dignitaries waited to greet Biden. In one image from the president of Poland’s official website (see the seventh image in the gallery at the bottom), you can see what looks like scaffolding on the left side of the building and the wall almost looks like a painting. We reached out to Jakub Szymczuk, Duda’s official photographer who took the photo, for an explanation, but have not received a response. We also reached out to the White House, the Secret Service, Duda’s office and other photographers at the scene to explain the building’s appearance, but didn’t hear back. The exterior of the building looked different in this Oct. 26, 2021, photo when Jordan’s King Abdullah II visited the palace, and on March 19, 2017, when Germany's President Frank-Walter Steinmeier visited. Articles translated from Polish from August discuss planned renovations on all presidential properties, including the presidential palace. And the chancellery of the President of the Republic of Poland sent a statement to PolitiFact, confirming that renovation work on the facade of the presidential palace has begun. 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 It’s clear the building itself is real, as was Biden’s visit. Wider photographs and videos from the scene show the full courtyard of the palace and Biden’s arrival. Biden was photographed visiting with U.S. troops on March 25 and giving a speech outside the Royal Castle in Warsaw on March 26 after his visit with Duda. The trip was widely covered by major news outlets, such as Fox News, the Wall Street Journal, the New York Times and many others, with no suggestion the event was staged. Szymczuk, Duda’s photographer, posted a selfie with Biden inside the palace on Facebook the same day. The palace was built in the 1640s and has served many purposes over the centuries, according to the official website of the Polish president. The main body of the palace was mostly destroyed by a fire in 1852 and the building has been renovated multiple times over the years. After one such renovation in 1994, it became the "official seat of the President of the Republic of Poland," the site said. PolitiFact has debunked multiple false allegations since Biden took office that he and the White House have staged various events, including that Biden created a fake set to receive a COVID-19 vaccine booster, that he faked an interview in front of a green screen, and that an anti-lynching bill signing ceremony didn’t really happen. We can add this claim to the list. Our ruling A Facebook post alleged that Biden’s trip to Poland was staged because the Presidential Palace in Warsaw looks fake. It does appear that there may be something covering the exterior of the building, but wider shots and video show the whole courtyard of the palace. Polish websites show articles from August detailing planned renovations at presidential properties. In addition, there was widespread news coverage, some of it live, of Biden’s stop in Poland, which included a visit with U.S. troops and a speech outside the Royal Castle. To believe Biden’s trip to Europe was staged would mean believing a widespread conspiracy involving another country and the media. We rate this claim False. UPDATE, April 14, 2021: This article has been updated to reflect that Polish officials confirmed renovation work has begun on the palace. The rating is unchanged.

Ukraine is the “money laundering and child sex trafficking capital of the world! Beware of claims that declare a city or country the capital of something — anything — in the world. In 2010, we debunked a claim that Phoenix was the "No. 2 kidnapping capital in the world," and in 2012, a claim that Tampa is the "strip club capital of the world." Now amid Russia’s invasion of Ukraine is a post claiming Ukraine is the "money laundering and child sex trafficking capital of the world!" This post was flagged as part of Facebook’s efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about our partnership with Facebook.) Let’s start with money laundering. Ukraine is "not even close" to being the money laundering capital of the world, said Moyara Ruehsen, who oversees the financial crime management program at Middlebury Institute of International Studies at Monterey. Ruehsen pointed us to two lists used to gauge money laundering risk around the world. First is the Basel AML Index, with AML standing for anti-money laundering. According to the global ranking in 2021, Haiti was No. 1, followed by the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Myanmar, Mozambique and the Cayman Islands. Ukraine was 55th, landing between Russia (44th) and the United States (83rd). Next, Ruehsen directed us to the jurisdictions under increased monitoring by the Financial Action Task Force, a global watchdog that sets international standards aimed at preventing money laundering. 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 task force keeps a "grey list" — countries under increased monitoring as they address deficiencies in their anti-money laundering — and a "black list," countries Ruehsen said people shouldn’t do business with at all. Ukraine is on neither list. (Iran and North Korea are on the black list.) The European Commission also identifies high-risk countries that have "strategic deficiencies in their regime on anti-money laundering and countering the financing of terrorism." Afghanistan, Cambodia, and Pakistan are on the list, but Ukraine is not among them. Ukraine was on FATF’s "grey list" about 20 years ago, Ruehsen said, and up until 2014, when the country’s former president, Viktor Yanukovych, was overthrown, Ukrainian leadership was widely considered to be corrupt. "I don’t doubt it that a lot of that corrupt behavior trickled down to lower levels of government," Ruehsen said. Meanwhile, Volodymyr Zelenskyy, the country’s current president, campaigned on addressing corruption. The claim that Ukraine is the money laundering capital of the world, she said, "sounds like Russian propaganda." RELATED VIDEO As for sex trafficking, we’ve previously debunked a claim that Russian President Vladimir Putin vowed to "‘crush’ child sex traffickers in Ukraine." According to the State Department’s latest Trafficking in Persons report, Russia has a more serious problem with child sex trafficking than Ukraine. Both countries struggle with the issue, the report said, but Ukraine took action to address it between 2020 and 2021, while Russia failed to make "significant efforts" to eliminate the problem. While Ukraine convicted traffickers, increased financial assistance to victims, and launched awareness campaigns, Russia "convicted only one trafficker," failed to "initiate any new prosecutions of suspected traffickers," and "offered no funding or programs to provide services for trafficking victims." Russia, not Ukraine, is among 11 governments the report says have "a documented ‘policy or pattern’ of human trafficking, trafficking in government-funded programs, forced labor in government-affiliated medical services or other sectors, sexual slavery in government camps, or employment or recruitment of child soldiers. The report also ranks countries based on the extent of government efforts to meet minimum standards for the elimination of human trafficking. Tier 1, the United States’ ranking, is the highest, but it doesn’t mean the country has no human trafficking problems. Rather, it means the country fully meets minimum standards to eliminate trafficking. Tier 2 — Ukraine’s tier — means a country’s government doesn’t fully meet the minimum standards but is making significant efforts to bring itself into compliance. Tier 3 includes countries such as Afghanistan and Russia that don’t meet the minimum standards and aren’t trying to. We rate this post False.

People protesting the Dakota Access pipeline “were intentionally poisoned” by government officials in North Dakota when a pilot “knowingly sprayed poisonous chemicals” over protesters’ camps More than five years after the fact, some social media users are circulating claims that hundreds of people who spent months protesting the construction of the Dakota Access pipeline were attacked with harmful chemicals. One such Facebook post, which was first shared in March 2020, was still generating buzz online as recently as April 8. "If you were in Standing Rock the months of Oct to Nov 2016, you were intentionally poisoned by the Governor of North Dakota Jack Dalrymple, Kyle Kirchmeier of Morton County Sheriffs Department and the pilot who knowingly sprayed poisonous chemicals over the Standing Rock Oceti Sakowin and Sacred Stone Camps," it read. The post went on to claim that the Morton County Sheriff’s Department "directed a secret operation" that used agricultural aircraft to spray "an aerosol called Chlorophacinone, also known as ROZOL" on protesters each night for nearly seven weeks. 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 Standing Rock protests against the Dakota Access pipeline were not without violent conflict, but there is no evidence to suggest that protesters were sprayed with poisonous chemicals. From around April 2016 through February 2017, thousands of people gathered near the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe’s reservation in North Dakota to protest the construction of a 1,172-mile crude oil pipeline, known as the Dakota Access pipeline. At the same time, the tribe waged a legal battle in an effort to block the pipeline — arguing that the project was a threat to native lands and could contaminate their water supply. Protesters were pepper sprayed, tear gassed, struck with rubber bullets, hosed with water in below-freezing temperatures and attacked by security dogs. Some complained of what they characterized as a mysterious plane flying overhead during the protests. But government officials and people involved in the demonstrations have both refuted claims that planes sprayed protesters with harmful chemicals. Rozol, an anticoagulant poison that causes animals to bleed to death, is often used to kill prairie dogs by putting pellets into their burrows. It is a restricted-use pesticide, so only certified pesticide applicators in some states can use it. Rumors that Rozol was used on protesters arose after an Environmental Protection Agency investigation found that in 2016, a private rancher had illegally used 40,000 pounds of Rozol poison to attempt to kill black-tailed prairie dogs near the Standing Rock Sioux Reservation, where the protests occurred. The Bismarck Tribune reported that instead of being put into burrows, Rozol pellets were "broadcast on the ground," and dead prairie dogs were left unmoved, endangering other wildlife. Researchers from United Tribes Technical College studied the incident. Referring to the protesters as "campers," they wrote that, as colder winter temperatures set in, "widespread respiratory illnesses among some campers became prevalent." Though rumors emerged that Rozol was responsible for the illness that protesters started calling "DAPL cough," there was no conclusive evidence of a connection. 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 "Although there are statements posted online that some campers have had medical tests that showed Rozol exposure or analyses of their tents that showed Rozol residue, those test results have not been confirmed or are not reliably available, and so the true nature of the illness is still not clear," researchers wrote. The researchers also noted that it was possible some of the protesters’ camp sites were set up on land where the Rozol had been illegally distributed. At least one of the protesters’ camps was set up on Cannonball Ranch land, according to a Seattle Times report. The Rozol was illegally distributed across more than 5,400 acres of land, some of which was part of the Cannonball Ranch. However, North Dakota officials refuted claims that Rozol was responsible for "DAPL Cough" symptoms. The government’s ND Response website attributed the symptoms to the protesters’ living conditions, which included tents and other non-insulated structures in temperatures that often go below zero. A light inside a tent glows as a person walks by at the Oceti Sakowin camp where people have gathered to protest the Dakota Access oil pipeline in Cannon Ball, N.D. on Nov. 29, 2016. (AP)​ ND Response wrote that common temporary forms of heat "have been known to cause lung, nose, and eye irritation." The statement concluded: "An ongoing cough is not consistent with Rozol exposure." Dallas Goldtooth is a spokesperson for the Indigenous Environmental Network, one of the organizations involved in the protests, and was often quoted during national coverage of the demonstrations. He called the claims "wild rumors" in a December 2016 Facebook post. "No we are not being sprayed with chemicals," he wrote. ND Response also addressed claims that crop duster planes had sprayed protesters with chemicals, saying the state had "routinely conducted aerial surveillance of the camps" in an effort to assess the number of people present, which would be important to ensure protesters' safety if a mass evacuation were required. "At the time the rumor started, there were videos posted on social media alleging chemicals being sprayed which depicted law enforcement officers without respiratory gear," the state agency behind the website said. "Authorities would never spray a crowd with mustard gas or other lethal chemicals, particularly with unprotected law enforcement officers present." Our ruling A post claimed Dakota Access pipeline protesters were "intentionally poisoned" by government officials in North Dakota when a pilot "knowingly sprayed poisonous chemicals" over their camps. We found no evidence to suggest planes dropped a poisonous chemical on people protesting the Dakota Access pipeline. People involved in the protests and state officials have refuted this claim. We rate this claim Fals

The COVID-19 vaccines contain “HIV lipid wrappers. Since the first COVID-19 vaccines became available to the public in late 2020, people have falsely claimed that all sorts of nefarious things are in them, including aluminum, graphene oxide and microchips. Some even said that the shots contain strains of the HIV virus. We rated that Pants on Fire. Here’s a new one. "There are HIV lipid wrappers in the jabs you shoved in your arms and the arms of your children. Does that at all upset (you)?" said an April 10 post shared on Facebook. This isn’t accurate. The Pfizer and Moderna COVID-19 vaccines that use lipids do not contain any live viruses. The ingredients for all the approved vaccines are published and none include any HIV material. 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.) Lipids are molecules such as fats or oils that aren’t soluble in water. In Pfizer and Moderna’s COVID-19 vaccines, lipid nanoparticles encase and transport the mRNA — essentially acting as "tiny ‘delivery vehicles,’" according to one biotechnology company that helped develop them. Featured Fact-check Instagram posts stated on October 12, 2022 in an Instagram post Pfizer executive “admits” vaccine was never tested for preventing transmission. By Jeff Cercone • October 13, 2022 These molecules are used in both vaccines as a way to protect the mRNA that they surround, allowing it to enter cells. "Covid mRNA vaccines are encased in lipid nanoparticles to ensure their delivery to cells … There is no relationship with HIV," said Amesh Adalja, a senior scholar at the Johns Hopkins Center for Health and Security. The full lists of ingredients for all three vaccines approved for use in the U.S. — Pfizer, Moderna and Johnson & Johnson — have been shared by manufacturers and do not include HIV in any form. Pfizer also refuted the claim, telling PolitiFact in an email that its vaccine is "entirely synthetic" and does not contain "any live virus, either from SARS-CoV-2 or others." Our ruling A Facebook post claims that the COVID-19 vaccines contain "HIV lipid wrappers." None of the approved COVID-19 vaccines contain any HIV material. Lipids are fat molecules that encase and protect the mRNA in Pfizer’s and Moderna’s vaccines and have no relationship to HIV, experts said. We rate this claim Pants on Fire

“Mike Lee advised Trump's legal challenges to overturn our election” and “was one of only two senators who was in on the scheme. As investigators continue to analyze what led to the mob attack on the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, Sen. Mike Lee was hit with an ad over his connection to the insurrection. The Utah Republican, endorsed for re-election by former President Donald Trump, was targeted by his main challenger, independent candidate and former Republican Evan McMullin. "Senator Mike Lee advised Trump's legal challenges to overturn our election," the narrator says at the start of McMullin’s 30-second TV ad. "He was one of only two senators who was in on the scheme, receiving the plan four days before the January 6th insurrection." Lee and another Republican senator, Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, advised Trump’s legal team in its efforts to overturn the result of the 2020 presidential election. But Lee ultimately broke with Trump, concluding there was no evidence for taking the victory away from Joe Biden. How Lee advised Trump On Jan. 6, 2021, then-President Trump held his "Save America" rally where he repeated his Pants on Fire claim that he won the 2020 election. Trump invited the crowd to "walk down to the Capitol" where the House and Senate were holding a joint session to certify the electoral college vote for Biden. A mob breached the Capitol and shut down Congress for hours. Early Jan. 7, after the attack was quelled, Congress certified Biden’s win. Lee and Graham voted to certify the presidential election results and against objections to certifying the results in Arizona and Pennsylvania. In supporting the election result, Lee said on the Senate floor: "I’ve met with lawyers on both sides of the issue. I’ve met with lawyers representing the Trump campaign, reading everything I could find about the constitutional provisions in question, and I’ve spent a lot of time on the phone with legislators and other leaders from the contested states…. "I spent an enormous amount of time reaching out to state government officials in those states, but in none of the contested states — no, not even one — did I discover any indication that there was any chance that any state legislature, or secretary of state, or governor, or lieutenant governor, had any intention to alter the slate of electors." Details of Lee’s actions have been publicly reported. "Peril," a September 2021 book by Washington Post associate editor Bob Woodward and reporter Robert Costa described how Graham and Lee took the claims of election fraud seriously enough to get briefed on the details, involve their senior staff and call state officials throughout the country. As summarized by the Post, a key document was a memo written about counting electoral votes by conservative legal scholar John Eastman, who is referenced in the ad. Lee received an Eastman memo from the White House that said Vice President Mike Pence could ignore seven states that had submitted dueling slates of electors to Congress, split between Trump and Biden, and count only electors from the remaining states, handing the election to Trump. Woodward and Costa reported that Lee knew the alternate electors were merely Trump loyalists putting themselves forward in certain states, in a move the authors describe as "a social media campaign — an amateur push with no legal standing." 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 Lee said that he made "phone call after phone call" to officials in some of the relevant states, such as Georgia, Pennsylvania and Arizona, saying that no one seemed poised to certify a new slate of electors. "At that point, I believed that we had reached the end of the process, as indeed we had," Lee said during a Jan. 27, 2012 online town hall. A Utah newspaper, the Deseret News, reported more on what Lee said at the town hall. He said that Trump’s inner circle repeatedly told him that state legislatures were acting to decertify or even recertify their slates of electoral votes before Congress convened on Jan. 6. As that date approached, Lee said, "I became concerned because I wasn’t seeing any of these developments occur but I was continuing to hear this narrative." Lee said that after calling governors, attorneys general, secretaries of state and legislative leaders in several states, not one state was willing or inclined to decertify or recertify their electoral votes. UTpolunderground.com, a political news website, also carried an article about Lee’s outreach to state officials and his conclusion that there was no evidence to overturn the election. When we asked Lee’s campaign for comment, a spokesperson referred us to the UTpolunderground.com article. Utah race could help decide Senate control On April 1, the same day McMullin tweeted out his ad, Trump endorsed Lee, calling McMullin "McMuffin." McMullin, a former CIA operative, was a Republican before running as an independent for president in 2016. He made news in February with reports showing he raised more campaign money than Lee in the final quarter of 2021. Democrat Kael Weston, a former State Department official, is campaigning for the Senate seat, but the Utah Democratic Party is being pressured to not field a candidate in hopes of giving McMullin a better shot to defeat Lee, the Deseret News reported. The Utah race could play a role in determining which party controls the Senate, which is now split 50-50. Campaign watchers rate the race as solid or safe Republican. Lee, who was elected in 2010, is also being challenged in Utah’s June 28 primary. The leading Republican challengers are former Utah state lawaker Becky Edwards and communications strategist Ally Isom. Our ruling McMullin claimed in an ad that Lee "advised Trump's legal challenges to overturn our election" and "was one of only two senators who was in on the scheme." Lee and another GOP senator, Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, advised the Trump team’s efforts to overturn the result of the 2020 presidential election. But Lee ultimately broke with Trump, concluding there was no evidence for overturning the result. McMullin’s claim is partially accurate but leaves out important details. We rate it Half True. RELATED: Evan McMullin ad portraying GOP Utah Sen. Mike Lee as pro-Russia, anti-Ukraine is Mostly False RELATED: Fact-checking ads in 2022 federal and state elections RELATED: Fact-checks on Jan. 6 RELATED: The 2021 Lie of the Year: Lies about the Jan. 6 Capitol attack and its significan

New York City is “wasting taxpayer money on” billboards in Florida New York City Mayor Eric Adams approached a lectern flanked by signage that bore the word "Gay," and addressed the state of Florida. It was Monday, April 4, and standing alongside the 61-year-old mayor were 10 adults, one of whom wore a rainbow-colored face mask. "This is the city of Stonewall," Adams said, invoking the historic 1969 gay rights demonstrations that followed a police raid at the Stonewall Inn, a gay bar in New York City. "This is the city where we are proud to talk about how you can live in a comfortable setting and not be harassed, not be abused — not only as adults but also as young people." At the City Hall event, Adams chastised Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis for signing into law HB 1557, dubbed the "don’t say gay" bill by critics. The legislation prohibits classroom instruction about sexual orientation and gender identity in kindergarten through third grade. Then the mayor announced an ad campaign to address the issue. For eight weeks — starting April 4 — five pieces of creative art condemning the law will be displayed on billboards across major cities in Florida. The ad campaign was spotted on a billboard in Jacksonville, Florida, following the announcement. We have a message for Florida’s LGBTQ+ community: come to a city where you can be you. Join us now at City Hall. https://t.co/0OOg7zigSB— Mayor Eric Adams (@NYCMayor) April 4, 2022 The move drew national media coverage and seemed to touch a nerve with DeSantis. "Now, New York is doing billboards telling people come, come to New York from Florida," DeSantis said at a press conference on April 5. "You know, they're wasting taxpayer money on doing that. I don't know why they would do it." Featured Fact-check Instagram posts stated on October 23, 2022 in Instagram post California state Sen. Scott Wiener “doesn’t just want to sterilize California kids, but sterilization of kids everywhere!” By Michael Majchrowicz • October 31, 2022 DeSantis’ claim sounded at odds with what Adams said when he announced the ad campaign, so we looked into it. Adams said at the event that the campaign is "costing New York City taxpayers nothing." The artwork that will be displayed on the billboards is being created by a multinational marketing company, WPP, and its subsidiaries, VMLY&R and Kinetic, among others, that won’t charge New York City for that effort. Kinetic is paying for the costs associated with putting up the billboards. Graham Smith, the managing director of VMLY&R and the company’s lead on the effort, confirmed to PolitiFact that the creative content was donated. The head of public affairs at WPP North America, Brian Ellner, also confirmed his firm is donating creative work and is securing donated media. Adams, Ellner said, "pledged that no tax dollars would be used to support" the ad campaign. DeSantis did not return PolitiFact’s request for comment. We found no news reports or credible evidence to suggest that the city paid for the ad campaign. Our ruling DeSantis said that New York City is "wasting taxpayer money on" placing billboards in Florida. Adams and the private marketing firms involved in the ad campaign have denied this characterization. WPP developed the creative content used in the campaign on a pro bono basis, and the billboard space was secured through one of its agencies. We found no evidence to support that the city contributed financially to the campaign. DeSantis did not provide any material to support his assertion. We rate this claim Fals

Disney CEO Bob Chapek was arrested for human trafficking Disney CEO Bob Chapek is clashing with Gov. Ron DeSantis over a new law that restricts lessons on sexual orientation and gender identity in Florida schools. Chapek wants state leaders to repeal the law derided as "don’t say gay," leading DeSantis and Republican leaders to criticize the company as "woke" and explore removing its special status that allows it to operate as its own government. Among all of the headlines about Chapek, there is at least one story out there that is wildly inaccurate. An Instagram post shared a screenshot of a news article with the headline, "CEO of Disney arrested for human trafficking." Below the headline is a photo of Chapek, and the first paragraph of the story falsely claims he was arrested at his home in Southern California for charges of trafficking a child across state lines and being in possession of child pornography. 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.) We searched for a link to the article and found it posted on the website of the Vancouver Times. But there’s just one problem: the Vancouver Times describes itself as a satirical website. That means the article is not, in fact, true. The article appears under the website’s Satire section. 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 It’s easy to see how this type of article could trick people — in the Instagram post, there are no markings indicating that the article is fake. The name of the website — Vancouver Times — may also sound to some people like a legitimate publication. But satire is something we’ve seen before used as a tool to mislead people. Plenty of fact-checks have debunked the claim about Chapek. Chapek has apologized for not taking a more forceful stand against the Florida bill. The company has also paused all political donations in the state. "I am committed to this work and to you all, and will continue to engage with the LGBTQ+ community so that I can become a better ally," Chapek said in a letter to employees. There’s no evidence whatsoever that Chapek was arrested for human trafficking. We rate that claim Pants On Fire! RELATED ARTICLE: ‘Don’t say gay’ vs. ‘parental rights': Fact-checking claims about Florida’s HB 1557

“With the money Elon Musk spent to buy Twitter shares, he could have given every American family $100,000 and still had enough left over to cancel all student debt. A viral social media post is claiming the $3 billion Elon Musk spent buying a 9% stake in Twitter should’ve been directly given to the American people instead. The April 5 tweet was made following the announcement that the Tesla CEO would join Twitter’s board of directors after purchasing 73.5 million shares of the company’s stock. "With the money Elon Musk spent to buy Twitter shares, he could have given every American family $100,000 and still had enough left over to cancel all student debt," tweeted Hunter Walk, the co-founder of a venture capital firm. If Walk’s tweet sparked a sense of familiarity, it’s because it echoed a similar claim involving Michael Bloomberg. During the 2020 presidential election, a claim was made that Bloomberg’s campaign spent $500 million on advertising. A social media user at the time said the money could’ve been used to give all 327 million people in the United States $1 million each. PolitiFact found the Bloomberg critic’s math was flawed. If $500 million was actually divided among 327 million people, it would amount to about $1.53 per person. Walk’s tweet also includes faulty math. Although he doesn’t say what is considered a family, there are at least 122 million households in America with about 2.6 people per household, according to the U.S. Census Bureau. Dividing $3 billion by 122 million households would result in each unit getting $24.59, with nothing leftover to tackle student debt. 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 if Musk’s $3 billion was dedicated toward paying off college loans, it wouldn’t cover a quarter-percent of what’s owed. It's estimated that Americans owe around $1.74 trillion in student loans. Walk later admitted he wasn’t being serious with his claim and said in one reply that it was a "troll twete." In a follow-up tweet on April 6, he joked about his post triggering a fact-check by Twitter’s Birdwatch feature. "What did I learn? People on left don't do math and people on right are really willing to defend their rich icons," Walk said. "And crypto folks are generally vocal but sometimes funny." Our ruling A user on Twitter said the $3 billion Elon Musk used to buy shares of Twitter could’ve been redistributed to give $100,000 to each American family and eliminate student debt. But $3 billion divided among all the families in America would be nowhere close to $100,000. It also wouldn’t even come close to covering the $1.74 trillion that Americans owe in student loans. We rate this Twitter post as Pants on Fir

“German perverts open bestiality brothels. A video clip posted on Facebook uses outdated information to baselessly claim that there are bestiality brothels "spreading" in Germany. "German perverts open bestiality brothels," says the caption on the video posted April 6 by Michael Knowles, who hosts a show at The Daily Wire, a conservative news website. In the video, Knowles reads aloud from what he says is a story published "today" by the British newspaper Daily Mail. Knowles read the headline of the story, "Bestiality brothels are 'spreading through Germany' warns campaigner as abusers turn to sex with animals as 'lifestyle choice.'" He also read the first paragraphs of the story. 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.) But the Daily Mail story that Knowles cited was published in July 2013. And even before it was published, Germany’s parliament had voted in early 2013 to criminalize "using an animal for personal sexual activities." In the video, Knowles said, "One thing we predicted was that if you lift the traditional social and political restrictions on sexual activity and you redefine marriage and you redefine the whole family …you’re going to have people not just having sex with each other … you’re going to have people having sex with animals." We reached out to Knowles for comment but did not receive a reply. 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 claim about bestiality brothels appears to have come from a single person who the Daily Mail identified as a "livestock protection officer." The officer didn’t provide any examples of the brothels but cited a German farmer who was concerned about his sheep which he said had been sexually abused by men sneaking into his barn. In the Daily Mail story, the livestock protection officer calls for the government to ban bestiality, something the German government had already done months before the story published. A bid to overturn the law was shot down by Germany's constitutional court in 2016. We did not find any credible reports of "bestiality brothels" spreading in Germany. Our ruling The caption on an April 6 Facebook video said, "German perverts open bestiality brothels." It cited a Daily Mail story that allegedly was published "today." But the Daily Mail story was published in July 2013 and contained outdated information. The German government outlawed bestiality in February 2013. We found no credible reports to back the claim. We rate this post False.

"The price of insulin has been jacked up by Big Drug Corporations. When it comes to diabetes, the numbers are stark. One in 10 Americans have the disease, and more than one in three have pre-diabetes, according to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. What’s more, people are developing diabetes at younger ages and a faster rate. A recent tweet from U.S. Sen. Tammy Baldwin, who has cosponsored legislation to cap the out-of-pocket cost of insulin for Americans at $35 per month, made a stark claim of its own: "The price of insulin has been jacked up by Big Drug Corporations," Baldwin, D-Wisconsin, said in the March 16, 2022, tweet. "35 million Americans who have diabetes need lower costs. We can cap the price of insulin at $35 with our Affordable Insulin Now Act. Let's have a Senate vote and pass it!" The House of Representatives voted a few weeks later, on March 31, 2022, to approve the Affordable Insulin Now Act, which would cap insulin prices at either $35 a month or 25% of an insurance plan's negotiated price — whichever is lower. But the fate of the measure in the Senate remains unclear. So what can one make of Baldwin’s tweet? Are costs of insulin in the United States excessive? And what can be said about whether high prices are due to being "jacked up by Big Drug Corporations"? A common condition Diabetes is a chronic health condition that affects how your body turns food into energy. Most people’s bodies naturally produce insulin, a hormone that helps convert sugars from food into energy the body can use or store for later. "When you have diabetes, your body either doesn’t make insulin or doesn’t use its insulin well, causing your blood sugar to rise," according to the CDC. "High blood sugar levels can cause serious health problems over time." When a person has Type 1 diabetes, the body can’t make insulin, and he or she will need to take insulin every day. With Type 2 diabetes, your body doesn’t use insulin well. "Losing weight, eating well and exercising can help you manage the disease," according to the Mayo Clinic. "If diet and exercise aren't enough to manage your blood sugar, you may also need diabetes medications or insulin therapy." About 30 million Americans have diabetes, and about 31% take insulin to manage the condition, according to the Commonwealth Fund, a private U.S. foundation whose stated purpose is to "promote a high-performing health care system that achieves better access, improved quality, and greater efficiency…" According to the American Diabetes Association, those with diabetes account for $1 of every $4 spent on healthcare in the United States. Uncommonly high costs Let’s start with some statistics that underline how high costs are in the U.S. According to an April 2020 report from the American Action Forum, a conservative think tank based in Washington, D.C., the average list price of insulin increased 11% annually from 2001 to 2018, with average annual per capita insulin costs now nearing $6,000. According to an October 2021 report from the Health Care Cost Institute, an independent nonprofit that studies health care prices, in its data sample the average monthly out-of-pocket spending on insulin in 2019 was $82. And "among the 8.7% of individuals in the highest spending category, the median monthly out-of-pocket spending on insulin was $315." The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services says Americans pay 10 times what people in other developed countries pay. 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 Meanwhile, a January 2021 Forbes article reported that net costs of insulin to pharmacy benefit managers and payers have decreased in recent years because of steep rebates, but the savings very often have not been passed through to patients. The bottom line: Americans pay a high cost for insulin – far higher than in other countries. But in her claim, Baldwin pinned the blame on the drug companies, when there are many factors involved in pricing and many points where prices – and profits – can be increased. When we asked Baldwin’s office for backup for the claim, it pointed us to several reports and articles on insulin costs and affordability and a 2021 Senate committee report on what is behind it. The bipartisan staff report from the Senate Finance Committee noted that "(insulin) manufacturers are retaining more revenue from insulin than in the 2000s," and that "the amount of revenue pharmaceutical manufacturers are retaining from insulin has risen." "Insulin manufacturers compete fiercely, using rebates as bargaining chips to receive preferred formulary placement for their products and to block competition," the Senate report reads. "The companies undertake these bidding wars to maximize revenue and capture — or maintain — market share. Furthermore, in some cases the investigation found that while insulin manufacturers closely monitor their competitors’ pricing actions when determining their own list prices over time, there were multiple instances of companies increasing prices in lockstep with competitors." So, that supports Baldwin’s claim. But others note that’s not the full picture. Dr. Jing Luo, assistant professor of Medicine at the Center for Pharmaceutical Policy and Prescribing at the University of Pittsburgh, said in an email to PolitiFact Wisconsin, "There was a time when list prices for insulin rose at a rapid clip…on the order of 30% per year. Those price increases came from the manufacturers themselves." Luo, whose research focuses on prescription drug use, pricing and policy, especially for medicines treating chronic diseases such as diabetes, also noted: "In recent years we have noticed that the list price changes are not as dramatic as they had been previously. This is probably due to much higher public scrutiny." Luo, in a Dec. 10, 2021 WBUR radio article said the limited number of TextEditor manufacturers in the U.S. are part of the equation. "When you have a setting where there (are) only a few suppliers, but the demand for the medication is quite great," he told WBUR, "it results in a situation where manufacturers can raise their prices without much blowback." As to Baldwin’s claim, he said it is "a simplification of the complex system we have that allows drug manufacturers to set whatever price they desire." Karen Van Nuys, executive director of Value of Life Sciences Innovation at the University of Southern California, said in an email to PolitiFact Wisconsin that big drug corporations often get the blame for rising insulin prices, but their research shows "they are actually not the culprits in this case." "The amount manufacturers have been receiving per 100mL of insulin has actually been declining steadily over the last several years," Van Nuys said. "What has been increasing is the amount of money drug distribution intermediaries — pharmacies, pharmacy benefit managers, health plans and wholesalers — have been pocketing." Insulin is measured in International Units (units); most insulin is U-100, which means that 100 units of insulin are equal to 1 mL. Our ruling Baldwin said "the price of insulin has been jacked up by Big Drug Corporations." There is no question that U.S. consumers pay more than those in other countries. And there is strong evidence that drug company profits are a key factor in the higher costs. But experts note that there are other factors involved – and other steps along the way where profits are taken. And those entities also play a role in the higher costs. For a statement that is partially accurate but leaves out important details or takes things out of context, our rating is Half 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' });

Photo shows someone in a swastika shirt giving a Nazi salute at a recent Donald Trump rally Thousands of former President Donald Trump’s supporters gathered in Michigan on April 2 to hear him speak at a rally. But an image of a woman giving a Nazi salute wasn’t taken there, as some social media posts are claiming. In the image, the woman is wearing a shirt bearing a swastika and she stands in front of what looks like an illustration of Trump appearing as Jesus. "Trump rally - let’s see you’ve got your Nazi swastikas, Sieg Heil Hitler salute, individuals wrapped in both Confederate and Nazi flags. But I believe the pièce de résistance here has to be the massive painting of Trump as Jesus Christ their savior. These folks are just swell," one April 3 tweet said. "This picture was taken last night at Trump’s rally," another tweet said. "It shows exactly how far they have devolved." A reverse image search of the photo shows that it wasn’t taken at the Trump rally, or this year. 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 fact, it has been altered. Earlier versions of the image show it flipped, and with the woman standing in front of a plaque, not an illustration of Trump. By searching for some of the words visible in the plaque, we identified it as an inscription acknowledging the Treaty of the Holston on the courthouse square in Knoxville, Tennessee. We found another image of what appears to be the same woman holding a "white pride" flag in a Facebook post that says "Neo-Nazi Rally and March against immigration, Knoxville, August 2010." RELATED VIDEO Searching for the words "Knoxville" and "Nazi" in August 2010, we found an Aug. 14, 2010, Knoxville New Sentinel video posted to YouTube showing a rally at the courthouse after members of the National Socialist Movement marched there that day. The Southern Poverty Law Center says the National Socialist Movement "was once one of the largest and most active neo-Nazi groups in the United States." This particular march predates Trump’s candidacy and presidency by several years. We rate claims that this photo was taken at Trump’s rally Pants on Fire.

John D. Rockefeller coined the term “fossil fuel” to trick people into thinking that his product was scarce and drive up the price when fossil fuels are actually “the second most abundant liquid on the planet. As Americans continue to pay high prices at the gas pump, some have taken to social media to claim that people have been lied to about fossil fuels and the availability of oil. According to one TikTok video shared on Facebook, fossil fuels do not, in fact, come from the remains of long-dead organisms, and oil is one of the most abundant liquids on the planet, next to water. The woman in the clip claims that the term "fossil fuel" was coined by American businessman and Standard Oil owner John D. Rockefeller to trick the public into thinking that oil was a rarity so he could drive up the price. "Did you know that fossil fuels do not come from long-dead living organisms?" the woman says in the clip. "In 1892, the owner of standard oil, who happened to be John D. Rockefeller himself, he named fossil fuels to trick people into thinking that his product was scarce, in turn allowing for an increase in prices. How much did you pay in gas today? And how do you feel knowing that you're paying that much for the second most abundant liquid on the planet?" 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.) Rockefeller is not responsible for coining the term "fossil fuel" in 1892 — it was being used well before he was born — and fossil fuels do, in fact, come from decomposing organisms. Oil also isn’t created quickly, and while it may be abundant, experts said that doesn’t mean it’s all readily available. Tyler Priest, a history and geography professor at the University of Iowa and leading expert on the history of offshore oil and gas, told PolitiFact that the claim stems from a longstanding conspiracy theory about big oil corporations going back to Rockefeller. The belief involves the so-called "abiogenic oil" theory which, he said, "proposes that petroleum is formed by inorganic means deep in the earth’s mantle, and thus is almost infinitely abundant. Somehow, the oil industry has managed to keep most people from learning about this." Who coined ‘fossil fuel’? John D. Rockefeller was born in 1839 and founded the Standard Oil Company in 1870, becoming one of the world's first billionaires. While he made a lot of money off oil, he didn’t coin the term "fossil fuel" to drive up the price. It was, instead, conceived by a German chemist named Caspar Neumann and can be found in the index of the 1759 English translation of "The Chemical Works of Caspar Neumann." The term was used in other works that pre-date Rockefeller, including in the title of an 1835 book on the history of Great Britain's coal trade. But it was used more widely in the early 1900s to give people the idea that petroleum, coal and natural gas come from ancient living things, making them a natural substance. 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 In Google Books Ngram Viewer, a tool that charts the usage of specific words or phrases in books over time, results for "fossil fuels" show that the term was used periodically between 1750 and 1900 and spiked after the 1940s, which was after Rockefeller’s death in 1937. "‘Fossil fuels’ was not really a term anyone used to refer to oil in the late 19th century, at least in the U.S. context," said Priest. "People used the terms ‘oil,’ ‘mineral oil,’ ‘rock oil,’ ‘Seneca oil,’ ‘gas oil,’ or ‘petroleum.’ I’m pretty sure (John D. Rockefeller) never invented or even used the term ‘fossil fuels.’" How fossil fuels work Fossil fuels are made from decomposing plants and animals — mainly microorganisms like phytoplankton and algae from millions of years ago. These fuels are found in the Earth's crust and contain carbon and hydrogen, which can be burned for energy. Coal, crude oil, and natural gas are examples of fossil fuels. While water is considered the most abundant liquid on earth, we could not find an official measurement that ranks the prevalence of different types of liquids on earth. But even if oil were somehow determined to be the second-most abundant liquid on the planet, that designation doesn’t mean much, energy experts said. The U.S. Energy Information Administration, the federal agency responsible for collecting, analyzing, and disseminating energy information, told PolitiFact that, while it doesn’t have comparisons of volumes of oil versus other liquids, just because oil exists somewhere doesn’t mean it’s economically or technically possible to extract it. Experts estimate the volume of recoverable crude oil using a figure called "proved reserves" — estimates of the volumes of oil and natural gas that geological and engineering data demonstrate to be recoverable in future years under existing economic and operating conditions. The amount of proved reserves fluctuates in certain circumstances. "In 2020 for instance, proved reserves of oil declined from 2019 levels," EIA spokesperson Chris Higginbotham told us in an email. "Lower crude oil prices in 2020 caused many operators to revise their estimates of proved reserves downward and scale back development plans for new wells … So, just because oil exists, that doesn’t mean it’s necessarily available." Oil is also not created quickly and is not considered a self-replenishing resource. "Petroleum, like coal and natural gas, is a non-renewable source of energy," National Geographic says on its website. "It took millions of years for it to form, and when it is extracted and consumed, there is no way for us to replace it." Our ruling A Facebook post features a TikTok video that claims Rockefeller created the term "fossil fuels" in 1892 to trick people into thinking oil was scarce and boost prices when fossil fuels are actually "the second most abundant liquid on the planet." Rockefeller is not responsible for coming up with the term "fossil fuels" at the end of the 19th century. It was being used over 100 years earlier, first showing up in 1759 in texts by the German chemist Caspar Neumann. Oil might be abundant but it took millions of years to yield the barrels of oil that are being drilled today, and not all oil is necessarily able to be extracted. And experts say there’s no clear measurement that puts oil as the planet’s "second most abundant liquid." We rate this Fals

“Over the course of two months, Tony Evers refused to remove (Curtis Schmitt Jr.) from the (state’s veterans) Board despite having the authority to do (so). In late March 2022, the chairman of Wisconsin’s veterans board agreed to resign after being charged with possession of child pornography in January. Curtis Schmitt Jr.’s resignation came after Republican candidate for governor Kevin Nicholson urged his removal in a letter to Democratic Gov. Tony Evers. In the letter, Nicholson blasted Evers for not removing Schmitt earlier. Nicholson, a Marine veteran who formerly served on the same board, wasted little time claiming victory after news of the resignation broke. In a March 28, 2022 fundraising email, he wrote that he’d accomplished in a day what Evers hadn’t in two months. "Over the course of two months, Tony Evers refused to remove (Schmitt) from the Board despite having the authority to do (so)," the email said. But the process of removal isn’t as simple as Nicholson’s email made it sound. Let’s take a look. Evers administration tried to get Schmitt to leave voluntarily In response to a request for evidence to back his claim, Nicholson’s office called Evers an ineffective governor who "shouldn’t have let this situation perpetuate for as long as it did." But the Nicholson response also cited the very state statute that made the process more complicated: Wisconsin law dictates that the governor can only remove an appointed state officer for cause after a taxpayer files a complaint against that person and a hearing is held. Nicholson said his letter should be considered a formal complaint. But even so, that would have meant Evers couldn’t have started Schmitt’s removal process until after Nicholson’s letter was received — two months after Schmitt was charged. 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 Evers’ communications director Britt Cudaback said in an email that the governor had not received such a complaint from a taxpayer previously and thus did not have the authority to remove him until the Nicholson complaint arrived. What’s more, Nicholson’s initial statement didn’t just say Evers had left the situation too long in limbo. He said the governor actually refused to remove Schmitt from the board. That’s inaccurate. The Associated Press reported March 24, 2022 that the Evers administration sent Schmitt a letter the day after he was charged asking him to resign immediately. Schmitt and his representatives did not respond to that letter or subsequent attempts to reach him for the following two months, according to the article. Cudaback said after that initial letter asking for Schmitt’s resignation, the governor’s office followed up three times with no response, on March 1, March 16 and March 25. So Evers did not have the authority to remove Schmitt, as Nicholson claimed. And he also wasn’t refusing to remove him — he was actively pursuing his voluntary resignation. Our ruling Nicholson claimed "Over the course of two months, Tony Evers refused to remove (Schmitt) from the Board despite having the authority to do (so)." But the Evers administration says they made several unsuccessful attempts to get Schmitt to leave voluntarily — their only option without a taxpayer complaint and a hearing. Nicholsons letter itself, two months after news broke, was what would have been enough to trigger a formal removal process. We rate this claim False. window.gciAnalyticsUAID = 'PMJS-TEALIUM-COBRAND'; window.gciAnalyticsLoadEvents = false; window.gciAnalytics.view({ 'event-type': 'pageview', 'content-type': 'interactives', 'content-ssts-section': 'news', 'content-ssts-subsection': 'news:politics', 'content-ssts-topic': 'news:politics:politifactwisconsin', 'content-ssts-subtopic': ' news:politics:politifactwisconsin' });

“Joe Biden’s open border” means that there are “more Democrat voters pouring into this country. Ohio Republican Senate candidate J.D. Vance is hitting President Joe Biden over border policies in an ad that suggests immigrants who illegally cross the border are boosting the Democratic Party. "Are you a racist? Do you hate Mexicans?" Vance asks in a TV ad. "The media calls us racist for wanting to build Trump’s wall. They censor us, but it doesn’t change the truth. Joe Biden’s open border is killing Ohioans with more illegal drugs and more Democrat voters pouring into this country." Vance then cites his mother’s drug addiction from the "poison coming across our border." Vance’s ad suggests that immigrants are illegally crossing the southern border and then voting. That’s not happening, said two election strategists of opposing parties who have teamed up on the Latino Vote podcast. "That’s blatantly inaccurate for a whole lot of reasons, the main one being it's just not true," said Mike Madrid, an anti-Trump Republican strategist. "It makes no sense what he is saying," said Chuck Rocha, a Democrat strategist. "He wants people to think Mexicans are walking across the border and filling out paperwork and they are handed a Democrat voter ID card. That’s the worst stereotype." We asked Vance’s campaign for evidence and did not receive a response. Vance is competing in a crowded May 3 Republican primary as a result of the planned retirement of Sen. Rob Portman. On the Democratic side, U.S. Rep. Tim Ryan is running against consumer protection attorney Morgan Harper. Early voting is underway. The border is not open There is not an "open border" between the U.S. and Mexico. In fiscal year 2021, which began in October 2020 and ended in September, there were 1.7 million encounters at the southwest border, numbers not seen in more than 20 years. More than 1 million of those immigrants were expelled quickly under a public health order called Title 42, which President Donald Trump began using in March 2020 due to COVID-19. The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention announced that it will halt the Title 42 order on May 23. Officials are bracing for as many as 18,000 migrants per day, nearly triple the current pace, according to the Migration Policy Institute. But once Title 42 is lifted, that doesn’t create an "open border" that would allow anyone to walk across the border and remain in the country legally. Instead, it means that the country returns to how it handled immigrants entering the country illegally before the pandemic, a longer process that includes expedited removals, placing people into long-term removal proceedings, or some migrants leaving voluntarily or going through the asylum process. These laws and procedures "are not particular to Joe Biden or the Democrats," said Ron Hayduk, a San Francisco State professor who teaches courses on elections and immigration. Voting by immigrants in U.S. illegally is rare Federal law requires citizenship to vote in national elections, and would-be voters sign a form attesting under penalty of perjury that they are citizens when they register to vote. States can check various databases to verify voters’ citizenship status. Cases of fraudulent voting by noncitizens do happen occasionally, but they are often the result of misunderstandings or errors. Rutgers University professor Lorraine Minnite previously told us that the most common problem she has seen on the issue is noncitizens getting accidentally registered to vote when they go to the Department of Motor Vehicles. But the number of people who fall into this category is "miniscule," she said. Minnite told us that Vance’s comments are a "delusion." 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 PolitiFact has fact-checked several similar claims from Trump and others — all inaccurate — about immigrants voting illegally in the 2008, 2016 and 2018 elections. We found little evidence of noncitizen voting in 2020 as well. In Ohio, Secretary of State Frank LaRose in February referred about 62 cases of potential voter fraud to prosecutors, including about three dozen related to potential noncitizens either registering to vote or casting ballots. Those cases remain under investigation, the attorney general said. In the 2020 general election in Ohio, about 5.9 million ballots were cast. LaRose, a Republican, said in 2021 that voter fraud is "exceedingly rare." In North Carolina in 2020, federal prosecutors charged 19 individuals with voter fraud after casting ballots in 2016 or 2018 elections. Sixteen pleaded guilty, mostly to misdemeanors related to voting as a noncitizen. Three cases were dismissed. Voting by noncitizens carries high risks – they may face deportation or incarceration, or it may thwart their efforts when applying for naturalization. It’s a long path for immigrants to gain the right to vote The process of becoming a citizen — and therefore earning the right to register to vote — can take a decade or longer. "Even if many of these people found a path to legal status via asylum or other means, it would be many, many years before they would become eligible to vote given both the huge backlogs in adjudicating cases in immigration court and the fact that people spend years on a green card before being eligible for citizenship," said Michelle Mittelstadt, spokesperson for the Migration Policy Institute. Vance specifically mentioned Mexican immigrants. Nationally, Mexican-Americans comprise about 69% of the Latino electorate and overwhelmingly voted for Biden, Rocha said. The Latino electorate is not monolithic — Cuban Americans lean Republican, unlike non-Cuban American Hispanics. But it’s "ridiculous" to make assumptions about how immigrants crossing the border now will vote in 20 years if they gain citizenship, Madrid said. The majority of Latinos voted for Biden in 2020; however, Trump increased his share compared with 2016 and made gains in Miami-Dade County and the Rio Grande Valley. Trump took 38% of the Hispanic vote in 2020, compared to 28% in 2016, according to the Pew Research Center. Our ruling Vance said that "Joe Biden’s open border" means that there are "more Democrat voters pouring into this country." The border is not open. The majority of immigrants encountered by border agents have been expelled recently by the use of a public health order put in place by Trump. Even when that order, Title 42, is lifted in May, that won’t create an "open" border — the federal government will respond to immigrants arriving in the U.S. illegally using its laws and decades-old processes that include removal, court hearings and, for those who are eligible, the asylum process. Vance’s ad creates an impression that immigrants are crossing the Mexican border illegally and then turning into Democrat voters. That’s wrong. Only U.S. citizens can vote in federal elections, and proven incidents of noncitizens casting ballots are rare. Even migrants who cross the border now and go through the process of gaining citizenship won’t be able to vote for over a decade or longer. We rate this statement False. RELATED: No evidence for viral claim that ‘22 million illegal aliens’ are ‘voting illegally’ RELATED: All of our fact-checks in the Ohio Senate race RELATED: The race for the Ohio U.S. Senate seat: A gui

"Volodymyr Zelenskyy is a cousin of George Soros, Pentagon official says. A viral Facebook post falsely says Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and billionaire philanthropist George Soros are related by birth — one in a series of baseless claims about links between the two. "Volodymyr Zelenskyy is a cousin of George Soros, Pentagon official says," reads the April 6 post, which is a screenshot of a tweet. The caption says, "Get out! Any other sources anyone knows of confirming this? Ohhhhh this is getting goooooooooooooood!" The post was flagged as part of Facebook’s efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about our partnership with Facebook.) The claim is "entirely false," said a spokesperson for Soros’ Open Society Foundations. In a 2020 interview, Zelenskyy was asked about Soros, and he answered, "I am not familiar with a person named Soros. I have never met him." Zelenskyy was responding to the interviewer’s inquiry about how "some people from your own faction call your government the 'Soros installed government.'" 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 Soros has been at the center of many debunked claims about his connections to Ukraine, including that he wanted to run the country and that he was using the Ukraine "as a playing field to undermine (former President Donald) Trump’s campaign," NBC News reported in 2019. More recently, false claims have said that Soros admitted on television that he helped overthrow the former Ukrainian president in order to help Zelenskyy take office. The NBC News story noted that Soros "has long been the target of conspiracy theorists about Jews controlling the world." Soros and Zelenskyy are both Jewish. We rate the claim that Zelenskyy is a cousin of Soros Pants on Fire!

“Colorado Governor Jared Polis has just signed into law a bill legalizing abortions through all nine months, up until the moment of birth. While state lawmakers in Oklahoma and Texas are pushing to restrict abortion access, this week Colorado became the latest state to guarantee the right to have an abortion. However, social media posts have misconstrued what the state’s new law will do. On April 4, when Colorado’s measure was signed into law, anti-abortion activist Lila Rose tweeted, "BREAKING: Colorado Governor Jared Polis has just signed into law a bill legalizing abortions through all nine months, up until the moment of birth." A screenshot of her tweet was shared on Facebook a day later by Republican Ben Carson, who served as the secretary of Housing and Urban Development during the Trump administration. 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 Reproductive Health Equity Act that Polis signed into law this week affirms an individual’s right to contraceptives and an abortion. It says that a government entity may not "deny, restrict, interfere with or discriminate against an individual’s fundamental right to use or refuse contraception or to continue a pregnancy and give birth or to have an abortion." These reproductive health protections already existed in Colorado, but now they are codified in the state’s statute. This means that in the event the U.S. Supreme Court overturns the Roe v. Wade precedent, access to contraceptives and an abortion will remain protected in Colorado. The new law also protects against attempts by local governments to restrict abortion access. Colorado’s law protects the right to have an abortion and does not make distinctions or regulations around a time or stage during pregnancy. Roe v. Wade banned states from prohibiting women from terminating pregnancy before viability, a standard that was defined in a later Supreme Court decision to mean when "in the judgment of the attending physician on the particular facts of the case before him, there is a reasonable likelihood of the fetus’ sustained survival outside the womb, with or without artificial support." Featured Fact-check Instagram posts stated on October 22, 2022 in an Instagram post Ballots are “mailed unconstitutionally” to every voter in Colorado. By Madison Czopek • October 26, 2022 While viability is determined on a case-by-case basis and dependent on a variety of factors including gestational age and fetal weight, a baby that is in the process of being born — or "moments before birth" — is unlikely to meet the standard under which abortion is legal. Most abortions take place early on in a person’s pregnancy. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, nearly 93% of abortions in 2019 took place at or before 13 weeks gestation. About 6% occur between 14 and 20 weeks gestation. Abortions being performed later in a pregnancy are rare; less than 1% occur at 21 weeks gestation or later, according to the CDC. Abortions around 21 weeks are often difficult to obtain because the procedure is costly, time-sensitive and only performed by a small subset of abortion providers. Our ruling A screenshot of a tweet shared on Facebook claimed: "Colorado Governor Jared Polis has just signed into law a bill legalizing abortions through all nine months, up until the moment of birth." Colorado’s new law codifies existing protections around an individual’s right to use or refuse contraceptives, continue with a pregnancy and give birth, or to have an abortion. Abortions that occur later in a pregnancy — at 21 weeks gestation or later — are rare. We rate this claim Fals

“Want a healthy, happy baby? Skip the Well Baby visits. They… make your baby sick. It’s common practice for parents to bring their healthy children to the doctor for check ups. Often called well-baby or well-child visits, these appointments give pediatricians the opportunity to monitor child growth and development. But a Facebook post offered parental advice that goes against the grain. "Want a healthy, happy baby? Skip the Well Baby visits. They make your doctor money and make your baby sick," read a March 30 post. The post comes from Jennifer Margulis, author of books that explore alternative health approaches for parents and their children while challenging financial interests of those involved in shaping infant health and care. 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.) It’s doctors’ jobs to see patients, and so we aren’t questioning whether they make money doing their jobs, though one expert we spoke to said the field would not be supported if physicians didn’t also regularly care for the sick. We wondered, however, if the advice to skip these well-child visits aligns with data. Experts in the field of pediatrics and medicine widely tout well-child visits as key for child health and parent information. Mayo Clinic describes well-baby visits as "an important way to monitor your baby's growth and development and check for serious problems." The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention says seeing a doctor regularly for well-child visits and recommended vaccines is "one of the best things you can do to protect your child and community from serious diseases that are easily spread." While there is a possibility that a child could get sick from a visit to the doctor, experts say the benefits of taking a healthy child to a doctor for these preventative visits outweigh the risk. Studies on illness spread in pediatric settings Asked about her post, Margulis pointed us to a Science Daily article about a 2014 study out of the University of Iowa. The study examined data from the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality’s Medical Expenditure Panel Survey spanning 1996-2008 and involving 84,595 families. It found that there was a 3.17% increase in the probability of a child under 6 getting sick with a flu-like illness two weeks after their well-child visit. Contrary to the point of Margulis’ Facebook post, the authors of that study emphasized the importance of well-child visits and instead said the data undergirded the need for strong infection control precautions. "We believe that attendance at well-child visits is critically important for preventing infections through vaccination and that the benefits far outweigh the risks," the researchers wrote. "Nonetheless, our results stress the importance of improving compliance with current infection control guidelines for ambulatory settings—not just for well-child visits, but for all office visits." Dr. Philip Polgreen, one of the study’s co-authors, reiterated that point in the Science Daily article and in an interview with NBC’s TODAY Show, calling the risk of a child getting sick from a well-child visit "actually quite modest." The study’s authors also noted several limitations in their findings, including that their analysis didn’t consider flu vaccination habits among the families of the children. They also wrote that by relying on medical coding data rather than microbiological evidence, the study might have misclassified some of the cases. The study also noted that two other, smaller studies examining the question of illness transmission in children found no increased risk of infection. 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 Benefits of well-child visits Dr. Michael Crocetti, associate professor of clinical pediatrics at Johns Hopkins University, said the data in the University of Iowa study is also problematic in that it didn’t break down the findings by patient age or school and day care attendance. "You cannot make a cause and effect conclusion that having a well check two weeks prior to a viral illness is the sole cause," Crocetti said. "In a two-week span, children can have multiple other exposures to viruses." Crocetti rejected the notion that children are more likely to get sick from well-child visits. Such visits, he said, enable physicians to provide physical exams for children, monitor their behavior and mental health developments, and administer immunizations in alignment with the CDC’s recommended timeline. They also give parents the chance to ask questions related to a child’s safety, diet, growth and development. The American Academy of Pediatrics also recommends physicians use well-child visits to survey for signs of developmental delay. Crocetti said that a child is more likely to get sick from being around their family, in a daycare or a school setting than they would going into the doctor’s office. In healthcare settings, he said, medical staff wash their hands often, wear masks when needed and are vaccinated against viruses like COVID-19 and the flu. "Many offices actually separate out a sick and a well waiting room," he said. Indeed, the American Academy of Pediatrics recommends physicians take specific precautions that include diligent hand hygiene, regular surface cleaning and targeted masking. It recommends separate waiting rooms and precautions for patients who may be contagious and are more vulnerable to infection. Dr. Joseph F. Hagan, Jr., fellow of the American Academy of Pediatrics and co-editor of the Bright Futures Guidelines for Health Supervision of Infants, Children and Adolescents, said the benefits of well-child visits are in prevention. "You don’t find many very serious diseases in a well visit, thank God. But sometimes you do," Hagan said. "More importantly though, you spend a lot of time with disease prevention — healthy nutrition being a good example of that, encouraging breastfeeding being an example of that." Additional claims Margulis made three other points in response to our inquiry to back up her claim that well-child visits make children sick. First, she said that pediatricians at well visits "routinely recommend Tylenol," which she said damages the brain, the immune system and can lead to autism. She pointed to a 2017 paper published in the Journal of International Research that called for more research into links between the drug and autism. But Tylenol at the appropriate dose has been found to be safe, and links between acetaminophen, the active ingredient in Tylenol, and autism are in dispute. There is no indication that healthy children attending well-child visits would be urged to take acetaminophen, which is used to treat fevers and minor aches and pains, unless it were recommended to treat short-term side-effects of a vaccination delivered during the visit. Second, Margulis argued that doctors often "find problems at these well baby checks that don’t exist." She pointed to a study that found that in cases where well-checks involved routine temperature checks of asymptomatic patients, fever was detected 0.2% of the time. In about half those cases, doctors deferred planned vaccinations and in some instances prescribed an antibiotic. But that study didn’t question the need for well-child visits. Rather, it recommended a closer examination of the use of routine temperature checks during well-child visits. Finally, Margulis said doctors discourage mothers from nursing and instead promote baby formula. But this sweeping claim contradicts data collected by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention that show an overall upward trend in breastfeeding, from about 70% in 2000 to nearly 84% in 2018. The American Academy of Pediatrics has published articles and statements that support, not discourage, breastfeeding and, in 2012, it adopted a position that discouraged physicians from handing out formula promotions in clinic settings. Our ruling Margulis’ Facebook post advised parents to "skip the well baby visits" if they "want a healthy, happy baby" because they "make your baby sick." While there is a risk a child could become sick following a visit to a pediatrician’s office, evidence linking these two is not conclusive. A study Margulis cited as evidence did indicate a small increase in the probability of a child under 6 getting sick with a flu-like illness two weeks after their well-child visit. But even the authors of that study emphasized the importance of well-child visits and said the data undergirded the need for strong infection control precautions — not an end to well-child visits. Regular check-ups for healthy babies and children are recommended by the American Academy of Pediatrics, the CDC, the Mayo Clinic and more as a means to monitor growth and development and assist with parent education and communication. We rate this claim Fals

Photo of injured Ukrainian woman was from 2018 Russia gas explosion An iconic photo of a Ukrainian woman injured after her apartment building was attacked on the first day of Russia's invasion was portrayed on social media as being from a 2018 tragedy in Russia. The woman has been accused of being a crisis actor, including by official Russian government accounts. One Instagram post on Feb. 27 shared a compilation of photos. The two at the top show newspaper covers with an image of the woman’s heavily bandaged face. Below are images of a damaged apartment building, which the post alleges are actually from a gas explosion at an apartment building in Russia in 2018. There was no caption on the post other than multiple hashtags, including #crisisactor, #hoax and #falseflag. 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 woman was identified in news reports as Olena Kurilo, a teacher, whose apartment building in Chuhuiv, Ukraine, was hit by a Russian missile on Feb. 24. The two photos seen at the top of the Instagram post were taken by Wolfgang Schwan, a photographer for Anadolu Images, and distributed to news outlets by Getty Images. Schwan also shared a photo of Kurilo on Instagram the same day. Schwan discussed his famous photo and the false claims about it in an interview with The Independent on March 2. 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 "Not only is she the face of the atrocities that happen in war to civilians, but now she has been thrown into the middle of a propaganda wave and is being hated for being a victim," he told the publication. Kurilo was interviewed by journalists at the AFP news agency on Feb. 24. Her image was captured by at least two other photojournalists, as seen in a New York Post article. The two photos at the bottom of the Instagram post are also from Feb. 24 and show the apartment complex that was attacked, Reuters fact-checkers found. The building can be seen in a report by Anadolu Agency and in a video by Justin Yau, a photojournalist in Ukraine. There was a gas explosion in 2018 that killed dozens of people in Magnitogorsk, Russia, but images show the building is not the same as the one seen in the Ukraine bombing. AFP fact-checkers showed a side-by-side comparison of the buildings; the building in Russia is taller. Fact-checkers at BBC, Full Fact and Maldita have also debunked this claim. Our ruling A social media user claims a photo of a Ukrainian woman that went viral after her apartment building was attacked on the first day of Russia’s invasion is actually from a 2018 gas explosion in Russia. At least three photojournalists took photos of the woman on Feb. 24 and she was interviewed on camera. Multiple news reports confirmed the attack on the apartment building that day, and images show the building is not the same one damaged in the Russia gas explosion. We rate this claim Fals

Only 2% of K-12 students would benefit from Iowa’s school voucher bill Back in January, the opening of the Iowa legislative session was full of discussion about letting parents choose their children’s education. Since then, lawmakers took another step toward that goal when the Iowa Senate passed a school voucher bill known as SF 2369, the Putting Students First Act. Prior to passing the bill, House Minority Leader Jennifer Konfrst, D-Windsor Heights, sent a press release condemning the legislation. She said the voucher bill would hurt more students than it helps. "If the bill is approved, only 2% of Iowa students would benefit while the rest of Iowa kids in public schools would end up losing opportunities," Konfrst said in the press release. SF 2369 would create 10,000 vouchers to use for parents in the area to transfer their kids from their local public school to a private school of their choice. Ron Robinson, Iowa’s Legislative Service Agency specialist on the bill, said that in order to apply for one of the vouchers, a student’s family must be 400 percent below poverty level, or have an Individualized Education Plan. To pay for this, $55.2 million would be moved from Iowa’s general fund — the state’s main operating fund. Each student who uses a voucher would receive roughly $5,500, which is 70 percent of that state’s per pupil allocation, Robinson said. The bill passed the Iowa Senate 31-18 on March 30 and has moved to the House. Featured Fact-check Deidre DeJear stated on October 19, 2022 in a tweet "Kim Reynolds doesn’t think nurses are educated." By Liam Halawith • October 31, 2022 We cannot gauge whether "the rest of Iowa kids in public schools would end up losing opportunities," because that is a prediction. But Robinson confirmed Konfrst’s statement that 2 percent of Iowa’s K-12 children will have a chance at vouchers. Only 10,000 vouchers would be available for about 485,000 school children in Iowa, he said. However, other student funding generated from taxes and federal funds will remain in the district that the student leaves. According to the governor’s fact sheet, public schools will retain roughly $1,400 per pupil in property tax dollars for each student from that particular school district who uses a voucher to attend a private school. After the Senate vote, Gov. Kim Reynolds sent a news release that said the state should create opportunities for more families to provide their children with the education choice best for them. "The Senate made clear tonight that parents matter. Iowans want and deserve school choice and educational freedom for their children and I urge the House to get this across the finish line and send a bill to my desk," Reynolds said. In fiscal 2021, the state’s general fund ended with a $1.24 billion surplus. The $55.2 million amounts to roughly 4.4 percent of the general fund. Our ruling Jennifer Konfrst stated that only 2 percent of K-12 students in Iowa would benefit from the Putting Students First Act that is moving through the Iowa Legislature. With about 485,000 school children in the state and only 10,000 vouchers available, she is correct. We rate the statement True

Says Tucker Carlson said, “What if these bodies of tortured, dead civilians were staged? What if they’re fake? What if the Ukrainian military killed them & then blamed Russia? I’m not saying any of this is true, I’m just asking the questions. Why can’t we ask these questions? On April 4, Joe Walsh, a former Republican congressman from Illinois, tweeted what some people interpreted as a direct quote from Fox News host Tucker Carlson. "[email protected] tonight: ‘What if these bodies of tortured, dead civilians were staged? What if they’re fake? What if the Ukrainian military killed them & then blamed Russia? I’m not saying any of this is true, I’m just asking the questions. Why can’t we ask these questions?’" the tweet said. That evening, Walsh tweeted a clarification: "I tweeted this out this morning. I was predicting what @TuckerCarlson would say ‘tonight.’ Here’s what’s funny: So many people read this tweet & believed Tucker had already said it. Which is understandable becuz it’s EXACTLY the kind of thing Putin-lover Tucker would & has said." Carlson addressed the original tweet on his show the following night. "He claimed that this was a verbatim quote from our show," Carlson said. "Quote: ‘What if the bodies of tortured dead civilians are staged? What if they're fake? What if Ukrainian military killed them and blamed Russia? Not saying any of this is true, just asking questions. Why can't we ask questions?’ End quote." 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 Carlson went on to say that the quote "isn’t real." "It’s completely made up," he said. "We didn’t say that, we didn’t say anything like that, we didn’t even address the topic on the air in any way." RELATED VIDEO Russia has said without evidence that "fake dead bodies" were "staged" in Bucha after its troops left the town. Carlson, meanwhile, has been criticized for echoing Russian talking points. On March 9, for example, Carlson said a Russian claim that Ukraine has bioweapon labs was "totally and completely true," but there’s no evidence that’s the case, PolitiFact reported. But this talking point, about staged bodies, wasn’t one Carlson made. We rate claims that he said the words that appeared in Wash’s tweet False.

Josh Mandel doctored an image in a campaign ad but "forgot to Photoshop the hands that clearly show he put his face on the body of a Black soldier. A new campaign ad from Josh Mandel, a Republican candidate for U.S. Senate in Ohio, invoked Martin Luther King Jr. in an effort to blast critical race theory. The ad drew strong criticism, and some on social media accused Mandel of editing himself into a photo with Black Marines for the spot — claims the Mandel campaign called false. The campaign released the ad April 5 on Twitter and YouTube. The 30-second spot cuts between images from Mandel’s service in the Marine Corps to Mandel on and near the Edmund Pettus Bridge in Selma, Alabama, where King marched for civil rights in 1965. "Martin Luther King marched right here so skin color wouldn’t matter," Mandel says in the ad. "I didn’t do two tours in Anbar Province, fighting alongside Marines of every color, to come home and be called a racist. There’s nothing racist about stopping critical race theory." An unsubstantiated Twitter rumor asserted that Mandel had edited his face into one of the ad’s photos, which showed him alongside five other uniformed troops, all of whom appear to be Black. Some social media users noted with suspicion that in the image, Mandel’s hands appear darker than his face. Some also pointed out that Mandel appears to be the only person with his name on his uniform. Some Twitter users shared posts alleging that Josh Mandel edited himself into a photo in his recent ad. Occupy Democrats, a liberal media outlet built around a Facebook page, amplified the rumor. "Breaking news: Ohio pro-Trump U.S. Senate candidate Josh Mandel puts a photo of himself standing with Black soldiers in his latest campaign ad," Occupy Democrats wrote in a post shared on both Facebook and Instagram. "The only problem is that he forgot to photoshop the hands that clearly show he put his face on the body of a Black soldier." Occupy Democrats claimed in this April 5 Facebook post that Josh Mandel edited himself into a photo in his recent ad. The posts were flagged as part of Facebook’s efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about our partnership with Facebook.) Mandel campaign disputes tampering with photo Scott Guthrie, a spokesperson for Mandel, said the charges of photoshopping are "totally false." Guthrie provided PolitiFact and reporters at Politico, NBC News and the Associated Press with another version of the image in question, which he said was the original photo. In that version of the image, Mandel’s hands do not appear to be as dark as in the ad. 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 Josh Mandel's Senate campaign shared what they said was an original version of the photo from his recent ad. (Josh Mandel for U.S. Senate) Fred Davis, a Republican consultant who creates ads for Mandel, told PolitiFact that the version of the image that showed up in the ad reflected efforts by the video editor to make sure the text directing viewers to the campaign’s "JoshMandel.com" web address showed up on the video. He said it "was vignetted slightly by the editor to make sure the URL white type was legible." The bottom halves of the other soldiers in the ad version of the photo also appear darker than their faces, as do the weapons they are holding. "Look at the original photo," Davis said. "It’s totally legit. No photoshopping." PolitiFact ran reverse image searches and found no prior versions of the photo, with or without Mandel. Occupy Democrats did not respond to requests for comment but has since removed its post from Facebook. PolitiFact also asked four digital forensics experts who know how to detect image manipulation about the social media allegations claiming that Mandel photoshopped his head onto the body of a Black soldier. All four said that the image as seen in Mandel’s ad, and the photo provided by his campaign, are both too low-quality to conduct a reliable, definitive analysis. The ad version of the photo includes other possible inconsistencies related to its lighting and pixelation, but the quality is so low that it's impossible to determine whether they are the result of Photoshop, video compression or other factors, said Hany Farid, a professor at the University of California, Berkeley. "Analyzing the frame in the video isn't really possible because the image has been post-processed, converted to video, further post-processed, then compressed," said Matthew Stamm, an assistant professor of electrical and computer engineering at Drexel University. Stamm analyzed the other file that Mandel’s campaign shared with PolitiFact. He found "no evidence of manipulation" and said it seems "very plausible that the image is real," but he also cautioned that his analysis "isn’t really conclusive" because that version of the image could have theoretically been altered and then printed, photographed and shared. A conclusive analysis would require the original photo in digital form, and the Mandel campaign said it does not have that. "It’s an 18-year-old photo taken in Iraq that was printed," Guthrie said. The campaign did not provide information about the other people in the photo, and the Marine Corps said it was not able to do so. But if the photo shared by the campaign really is 18 years old, then "that makes it less likely to have been digitally manipulated," Farid said. "Visually comparing both versions, it is unlikely to me that the (version in the ad) was a result of Photoshop editing," added Siwei Lyu, a professor of computer science and engineering and the director of the UB Media Forensic Lab at the University of Buffalo. Our ruling Occupy Democrats said Mandel doctored an image in a campaign ad but "forgot to Photoshop the hands that clearly show he put his face on the body of a Black soldier." The liberal group’s claim is based on social media users’ observations that Mandel’s hands appear darker than his face in a photo showing him beside Black soldiers in a recent ad. No other evidence has conclusively substantiated the alleged photoshopping. The ad’s creator, meanwhile, said Mandel’s hands appeared darker in the ad because the photo had been vignetted in order to highlight the white text at the bottom directing viewers to Mandel’s website. A Mandel campaign spokesperson provided PolitiFact with a version of the photo in which Mandel’s hands and the lower half of the rest of the photo appear lighter and more consistent with the rest of the image. PolitiFact places the burden of proof on the speaker of the claim. Because the claim is unproven, we rate it Fals

"Biden changes his mind and now wants to resume building Trump’s wall. While in office, President Donald Trump didn’t fulfill his promise to build a wall along the southern U.S. border and make Mexico pay for it. So, is his successor now picking up the slack? That’s what one Facebook post would leave readers to believe. "Biden changes his mind and now wants to resume building Trump’s wall," read the headline on an April 3 post that included a link to an April 2 story on the American Web Media website. 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 headline is misleading and gives the false impression that construction will commence on hundreds of miles of border wall that Trump promised. That’s not what’s happening. The U.S. Department of Homeland Security is planning repair work on the existing border wall, including closing gaps, cleaning up work sites and stabilizing eroding areas. The work will address "life, safety, environmental and remediation requirements," the department said in a December 2021 press release. Regarding the gaps, "in the scramble to build as quickly as possible before Biden took office, construction crews in several areas of southern Arizona skipped over locations that required additional engineering or custom wall panels," the Washington Post reported. Some gaps are a few feet across and others are much wider, and they have become crossing points for migrants and smugglers. 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 one area where remediation work is needed, demolition crews carved roads and gouged paths through the mountains in preparation for sections of the wall that were never built. Now, "the abandoned border wall site is a liability for U.S. Customs and Border Protection, with loose rocks and boulders sliding down the mountainsides," according to the Washington Post. On the day Biden was inaugurated, he signed an executive action that called for a pause of border wall construction with the goal of ending it. His campaign promises included saying that there would "not be another foot" of the wall constructed. The Texas Tribune reported on work underway on a 13-mile section of new construction in Texas. Critics noted that it looks like a border wall. But the government says it isn’t. It says earthen levees are being replaced with concrete levees topped with guard rails. Our ruling The headline on a Facebook post says, "Biden changes his mind and now wants to resume building Trump’s wall." The headline gives the false impression that construction will commence on hundreds of miles of border wall promised by the Trump administration. The U.S. Department of Homeland Security is planning repair work on the existing border wall, including closing gaps, cleaning up work sites and stabilizing eroding areas. But this work is not indicative of Biden’s effort to "resume building Trump’s wall." We rate this claim False

Sudden death in adults and Sudden Infant Death Syndrome are caused by vaccines Even though vaccines are among the safest medical products, baseless claims about their safety continue to circulate widely on social media. One since-deleted April 3 post on Facebook said Sudden Infant Death Syndrome — the unexpected death of a seemingly healthy baby — and sudden death in adults are caused by vaccines. We noticed another post on Twitter that said, "‘Sudden death’ for adults and ‘Sudden Infant Death’ for babies. BOTH ARE DEATH BY VACCINE." The Facebook post was flagged as part of the platform’s efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about our partnership with Facebook.) Studies and scientific reviews found no association between vaccination and deaths in anyone — adults or children — except in rare cases, according to a 2015 study. More recently, following the introduction of COVID-19 vaccines in late 2020, a 2021 study by the CDC found no increased risk for death among those vaccinated for COVID-19. And research studies and safety reviews do not show any links between childhood vaccines and Sudden Infant Death Syndrome (SIDS), according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The causes of SIDS are unknown, but many health professionals believe it is associated with a buildup of carbon dioxide in the blood and low levels of oxygen. "Since immunizations are given to about 90% of children less than 1 year of age, and about 1,600 cases of SIDS occur every year, it would be expected, statistically, that every year about 50 cases of SIDS will occur within 24 hours of receipt of a vaccine," according to Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia. "However, because the incidence of SIDS is the same in children who do or do not receive vaccines, we know that SIDS is not caused by vaccines." 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 are recommended ways to reduce an infant’s risk of SIDS, such as avoiding smoking during pregnancy, putting infants to sleep on their backs and adapting their sleep environment. Vaccines are tested in clinical trials prior to public use, and multiple systems are in place to monitor their safety after they are released for public use, according to the CDC. Those include the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS), the Vaccine Safety Datalink and the Clinical Immunization Assessment project. Serious adverse reactions to vaccination are rare, and the benefits of vaccines far outweigh the risks. Our ruling A Twitter post says sudden death in adults and Sudden Infant Death Syndrome are caused by vaccines. Research studies, as well as safety and scientific reviews, have not found any links between childhood vaccines and Sudden Infant Death Syndrome, or between vaccination and deaths in people of any age — adults or children — except in rare cases. Vaccines are tested in clinical trials prior to public use, and multiple systems are in place to monitor their safety after they are released for public use. Serious adverse reactions are rare. We rate this claim False.

Says Sens. Lisa Murkowski, Susan Collins and Mitt Romney “are pro-pedophile. Before we get to Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene’s misuse of a U.S. Supreme Court nomination to tar the records of three Republican senators, let’s establish their track records against child exploitation. In 2019, Sen. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, co-sponsored and successfully passed a bill called the End Network Abuse Act. The legislation focused on rooting out child pornography within Defense Department computer systems. The National Center on Sexual Exploitation hailed the move as a victory against child exploitation. In 2018, Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, co-sponsored a law called Protecting Young Victims from Sexual Abuse. A response to the Olympic gymnastic sex abuse scandal, the measure reinforced the duty to report suspected abuse and increased the scope of penalties for child pornogrphy. When Sen. Mitt Romney, R-Utah, ran for president in 2012, he vowed he would ramp up prosecutions and impose new barriers to all pornography. It was not a stance new for him. "If I am president, I will work to make sure that every computer sold into the home has an easy to engage pornography filter so that every parent can protect their child from unwanted filth," Romney said at a 2007 Values Voter summit. Even without this context, we and many other observers knew Greene was disconnected from reality when she tweeted April 4 that Sens. "Murkowski, Collins, and Romney are pro-pedophile." The three Republican senators had joined Democrats in a procedural vote to move forward with the Supreme Court nomination of Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson. Greene’s office said Jackson has a history of "showing leniency towards pedophiles." In a career that spans a quarter of a century, Jackson has held many positions. She clerked for three federal judges, worked in private practice, and before she joined the U.S. Court of Appeals, she spent eight years as a federal district judge. 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 When Jackson appeared before the Senate Judiciary Committee, several Republicans accused her of being "soft" on child pornography offenders, because she often issued sentences that were below what federal sentencing guidelines suggested and what prosecutors were seeking. We, along with other news organizations, found those accusations misleading. The federal guidelines in child pornography cases are outdated, and judges disregard them about 70% of the time. Judges also issue sentences shorter than what prosecutors request. Some conservative judges nominated under President Donald Trump have made that call. Jackson didn’t always opt for shorter sentences. For cases that included attempted or actual sexual abuse of a minor, Jackson generally agreed with prosecutors’ recommendations. In one instance, she handed down a sentence that was eight years longer than what the guidelines recommended. Greene, a congresswoman from Georgia, took the view that supporting Jackson’s nomination amounts to being pro-pedophile. This mangles logic and language. The defendants were sent to jail. Once released, they had to live under oversight that restricted their movements and activities for 10 to 20 years. Punishing people does not equal supporting their crimes. Our ruling Greene said Murkowski, Collins and Romney are pro-pedophile. All three lawmakers have clear track records of moving against child exploitation, whether online or in person. Greene’s claim is beyond preposterous. It’s Pants on Fire!

Gov. Kathy Hochul’s “record” includes “firing” 34,000 health care workers Even with a months-long easing in the coronavirus pandemic, vaccine mandates remain controversial in some quarters. Rob Astorino, a Republican candidate for governor of New York, accused the woman he wants to oust, Democratic Gov. Kathy Hochul, of firing some 34,000 health care workers for not complying with vaccine mandates. In a tweet posted Jan. 20, Astorino said of Hochul that "none of your mandates have helped beat ‘this surge.’" Among other criticisms, Astorino’s tweet blamed Hochul for "firing 34K HC workers." None of your mandates have helped beat “this surge.”They only beat people down & 400K have beat a path to the exits.Your record? ❌ Most active COVID cases in 🇺🇸 ❌ Masking 2-yr olds❌ Firing 34K HC workers❌ Prioritizing C19 meds by raceMy plan:https://t.co/5XDP4omFAy https://t.co/Z1g4Y3owj2— Rob Astorino (@RobAstorino) January 20, 2022 A closer look shows that Astorino has exaggerated this figure. Under Hochul’s predecessor as governor, Democrat Andrew Cuomo, New York State health care workers were placed under a vaccine mandate. The mandate required health care workers to be vaccinated by Sept. 27, 2021. On Oct. 5. Hochul — who had been elevated to governor following Cuomo’s resignation — extended the mandate to apply to workers in mental health and disability services. Under the new mandate, health care workers in these facilities had until Nov. 1 to get at least one vaccination. 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 Astorino campaign said its tweet was based on New York State Health Department data showing that 33,982 health care workers were inactive because of the vaccine mandate. "We believe Rob's claims are completely accurate," Phil Oliva, a spokesperson for the Astorio campaign, told us in an email. However, the Astorino campaign’s reading of the numbers was faulty. The New York State Health Department told PolitiFact New York that "approximately 3% of health workers were furloughed, terminated, or opted to resign or retire." Data released by Hochul’s office on Oct. 13 showed that the number of health care workers who had left their jobs was 33,982, but that the number who had specifically been fired was 10,555. That’s less than one-third of the total loss in health care workers. In public comments on Oct. 13, 2021, Hochul reiterated that the number of lost jobs were greater than just those who were fired. "It includes people who were terminated, resignations, people deciding to retire, and people who are on furlough waiting to see the outcome of litigation" against the mandate. In addition, it was up to employers, rather than the governor, to determine what happened to employees who did not comply, said Erin Silk, a spokesperson for the New York State Health Department. "Those plans could include termination, but that was not required," Silk said. Our ruling Astorino said Hochul’s record included "firing" 34,000 health care workers. About 34,000 health care workers in New York state did leave their job after the vaccine mandate was enacted. However, less than a third of those could be described as being due to "firing." About two-thirds of the lost jobs stemmed from resignations, retirements, or furloughs by employees waiting to see how litigation against the mandate played out. We rate the statement Half Tru

In cutting greenhouse gas emissions, the United States is “the leader in the world by far. The latest United Nations climate change report had a grim forecast: If greenhouse gas emissions don’t peak within three years, then there’s little hope of limiting the global temperature rise to 1.5 degrees Celsius. Alaska Republican Sen. Dan Sullivan says one of the best moves the United States could make is to speed up the shift in places like China and India from coal to natural gas. Sullivan has a plan to increase American natural gas production, liquify it and ship it overseas. His key supporting argument is the hefty 14% drop in American carbon dioxide emissions over the last 15 years. "If every other country in the world had a record like this, where do you think we would be on global emissions?" Sullivan said at a March 23 Senate hearing. "We are the leader in the world by far." Whether the U.S. is the world leader in cutting emissions depends on how you measure things. In total metric tons, Sullivan is right. But in relative terms, many economic peers achieved steeper declines. Sullivan’s chart requires a closer look At the Senate hearing, Sullivan displayed a chart showing the change in carbon dioxide emissions in nine countries between 2005 and 2020. The U.S. stands out with a fall between those years of 970 million metric tons of carbon dioxide. Japan’s emissions went down 237 million metric tons. China, on the other hand, released an additional 4,689 million metric tons in 2020 than it did in 2005, while India’s emissions rose 1,315 million metric tons. Chart used by Sen. Dan Sullivan, R-Alaska, to show carbon dioxide emission trends for nine countries. (Office of Dan Sullivan) Sullivan’s staff pulled these numbers from the website Our World in Data, a reliable resource based at the University of Oxford in England. The numbers are accurate, although climate trackers warn against including 2020 numbers, because the COVID-19 economic shutdown distorted normal emission patterns. In our analysis, we looked at 2005 to 2019. The first caveat to Sullivan’s approach is that he uses absolute numbers. Rob Jackson, an earth systems professor at Stanford University, said the chart is "conveniently misleading." The United States has the largest reduction because, in 2005, Jackson said, it had the highest emissions. "Other countries, in Europe in particular, have done far more than we have to reduce greenhouse gas emissions," Jackson said. Looking at the percentage change in carbon dioxide emissions, the United Kingdom made the greatest progress, with a reduction of 35%. Italy, France and Germany came next. The United States and Japan tied for fifth place with reductions of about 14%. !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"); Sullivan spokesman Ben Dietderich agreed that the relative changes reshuffled the rankings, but he countered that the absolute number of tons mattered most. It’s the tons of carbon dioxide that affect the global climate, he said. At the end of the day, Dietderich said, the United States made the largest contribution to reducing carbon dioxide emissions. Jackson raised another issue with Sullivan’s chart — it left out emissions per person. China’s emissions are enormous, but the country also has 1.4 billion people. Viewed through that lens, despite the decline in U.S. emissions, the United States remained the larger emitter per capita. 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 "Our per capita emissions are still twice China’s and eight times higher than India’s," Jackson said. !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"); Sullivan’s focus on carbon dioxide doesn’t give the full picture of American emissions. There are other greenhouse gases, most importantly methane and nitrous oxide. The same website that provided the carbon dioxide numbers also has data for greenhouse gases across the board. Factoring in all greenhouse gases, the U.S. trends are less dramatic. The total decline goes from a reduction of 879 million metric tons to 607 million metric tons. As a percentage, the decline goes from 14.3% for carbon dioxide alone to 9.5% for all greenhouse gases combined. The numbers work that way because it doesn’t take much of those other gases to put a lot of carbon into the air. While natural gas was the single largest factor in cutting U.S. emissions, major contributions also came from the rise in wind power and efficiency gains in American industry that lowered demand. The limits of expanding natural gas production Sullivan’s point was that if other countries followed the United States’ lead, global emissions would fall. Since the blossoming of natural gas production played a large role in the U.S., it makes sense, he said, to expand production further and export to coal-burning countries like China and India. Not so fast, say energy researchers. Michael Young, a senior scientist at the University of Texas at Austin, said building the pipelines and processing plants to send natural gas overseas adds carbon to the atmosphere. It’s possible, Young said, that exports to Asia could reduce emissions there if they replaced coal or wood. "But it’s also true that liquified natural gas from the U.S. will embed carbon dioxide emissions in the production and transportation of the fuel, reducing the benefits," Young said. "Whether the two balance out depends on many factors." Ben King, a senior analyst at Rhodium Group, a private research center, said while industry is getting better at preventing the release of methane gas, it still happens in the liquefaction process. More troubling, King said, is that building new plants to export natural gas is a 30-year investment. "Locking in long-lived fossil fuel assets runs directly counter to the need, recently affirmed in the latest International Panel on Climate Change report, to quickly transition away from uncontrolled fossil fuel use," King said. Our ruling Sullivan said the United States is "the leader in the world by far" in cutting greenhouse gas emissions. In absolute terms, that is accurate – but it isn’t telling the full story. Relative to the scale of emissions in other leading economies, other countries show much deeper reductions. Sullivan also left out emissions per person in the United States. While those have gone down, they are still about twice as high as they are in China. We rate this claim Half Tru

The FBI lost Hunter Biden’s laptop For well over a year, we’ve heard a lot about Hunter Biden’s abandoned laptop. Questions have swirled about its contents, whether it was really his and even whether it existed at all. Now, after a cache of emails from the abandoned computer was verified by the New York Times and Washington Post, one claim suggests the FBI has lost the laptop. But a close look shows that conclusion is an overreach based on a confrontational exchange in a March 29 House hearing. In that Judiciary Committee hearing, which was held to discuss oversight of the FBI’s cyber division, U.S. Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., questioned Bryan Vorndran, the FBI assistant director for the division, about the laptop’s whereabouts. Vorndran repeatedly told Gaetz he doesn’t know. Donald Trump Jr. turned the exchange into a video on his Facebook page titled, "UNREAL: The FBI lost Hunter Biden’s Laptop?" "Oh my god, guys, you’ve got to watch this exchange. The head of FBI cyber has no idea where the Hunter Biden laptop is," Trump says in the video. "You know who probably has Hunter Biden laptops? Russia, Iran, China … all of our enemies have a copy of this laptop it feels like but you know who misplaced it? The FBI, because they have no interest in looking at it." 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.) The exchange Trump referenced is not proof that the FBI lost or misplaced Hunter Biden’s laptop, and recent reporting confirms that the laptop is in the bureau’s possession. While Vorndran says that he personally didn’t know where the laptop was, he didn’t say that the agency lost it. PolitiFact reached out to the FBI for comment but did not hear back. Trump’s team declined to comment. Here is the exchange: Gaetz: "So, where is it? The laptop?" Vorndran: "Sir, I’m not here to talk about the laptop. I’m here to talk about the FBI’s cyber program." 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 Gaetz: "You are the assistant director of FBI cyber. I want to know where Hunter Biden’s laptop is. Where is it?" Vorndran: "Sir, I don’t know that answer." A few moments later, Gaetz says, "I’m holding the receipt from Mac’s Computer Repair, where in December 2019 they turned over this laptop to the FBI, and now you’re telling me right here, that as the assistant director of FBI cyber you don’t know where this is after it was turned over to you three years ago?" Vorndran: "Yes, sir, that’s an accurate statement." After Gaetz grills him further, Vorndran says the questions are not "in the purview of his investigative responsibilities." We could find no credible reports about the FBI losing or misplacing the computer. A March 30 Washington Post story that details how the newspaper analyzed a copy of the laptop’s hard drive places it in the FBI’s possession. "The MacBook itself is now in the hands of the FBI, which is investigating whether Hunter Biden properly reported income from business dealings," the story says. Questions about the laptop first emerged in October 2020, after the New York Post reported that a computer that appeared to belong to Hunter Biden was dropped off at a repair shop in April 2019 in Delaware and had been shared with then-President Donald Trump’s personal attorney, Rudy Giuliani. At the time, other news outlets were unable to verify the laptop’s existence or contents. In March 2022, however, the New York Times reported on an ongoing investigation into Hunter Biden’s taxes and acknowledged the legitimacy of the laptop through emails authenticated by people involved in the investigation. The Washington Post also authenticated thousands of emails from a copy of the computer’s hard drive with the help of security experts who examined the data. In none of this reporting is there a suggestion that the FBI has misplaced the laptop that they seized. Our ruling Using video from a Congressional hearing as evidence, Donald Trump Jr. claimed that the FBI lost Hunter Biden’s laptop. That hearing was about the FBI’s cybersecurity division. Vorndran, an FBI official who was presenting, was questioned by Gaetz about the laptop. Discussion of the computer and its contents were not on the agenda for the day’s meeting. Vorndron responded that he did not know of the computer’s whereabouts and wasn’t there to talk about that matter. This does not amount to evidence of Trump’s claim. There is no other indication that the computer, which was seized by the FBI, has been misplaced. The Washington Post, which reviewed the contents of the computer’s hard drive, confirmed it remains in FBI possession. We rate this claim False

"John Fetterman's a self-described democratic socialist. Six weeks before Pennsylvania’s primary elections, a super PAC formed to support Democratic U.S. Rep. Conor Lamb attacked the other leading Democratic hopeful, Lt. Gov. John Fetterman, by saying he identifies as a democratic socialist. "Who can Democrats trust in the race for Senate? Connor Lamb's a former prosecutor and Marine," the narrator says in Penn Progress’ 30-second TV ad, released April 5. "John Fetterman’s a self-described democratic socialist … Republicans think they’d crush socialist Fetterman. With all that's at stake, Fetterman’s a risk we can't afford." Penn Progress has not produced evidence that Fetterman called himself a democratic socialist. One TV station took down the ad after Fetterman’s lawyers called on it to do so. NPR retracted its description The ad cites NPR for this claim. On Nov. 28, 2020, NPR broadcast a story about Fetterman in which the reporter called Fetterman a "self-described democratic socialist." On Dec. 6, 2021, NPR attached a correction: "This story wrongly states that Pennsylvania Lt. Gov. John Fetterman is a ‘self-described democratic socialist.’ He is not." The same day the super PAC’s ad was released, lawyers for Fetterman and his campaign called on television stations to take down the ad, calling it false and defamatory. "Fetterman has never described himself as a ‘democratic socialist,’" their letter said. The letter referred to the NPR story and the correction. Fetterman’s campaign announced the same day that a Philadelphia TV station had taken down the ad. We reached out to Penn Progress but did not hear back. Politico reporter Holly Otterbein tweeted that she asked the group for evidence to back its claim. Otterbein wrote that the PAC referred her to a 2016 article in Public Opinion, a Pennsylvania newspaper, and a 2021 article in Forbes that called Fetterman a self-described democratic socialist, but no articles in which he’s quoted calling himself one. Both articles used the phrase, "self-described democratic socialist." On April 6, the Forbes article was updated: "Correction: This story had incorrectly identified Fetterman as a ‘democratic socialist’ — he is not." Lamb also used socialist tag Politico reported in December that Lamb referred to Fetterman as a socialist, but Lamb’s campaign did not provide any evidence. On April 3, after a debate that Fetterman did not attend, Lamb said, according to the Washington Post: "The socialist label sticks on John because of the policies he actually has advocated and the people like Bernie Sanders that he has actively campaigned with." Featured Fact-check Instagram posts stated on October 12, 2022 in an Instagram post Pfizer executive “admits” vaccine was never tested for preventing transmission. By Jeff Cercone • October 13, 2022 Fetterman endorsed Sanders in Sanders’ 2016 presidential run. In 2016, an interviewer asked Fetterman: "You are very progressive, I think — I could be wrong but you label yourself as a democratic socialist?" Fetterman replied: "No, I don’t label myself a democratic socialist, but I certainly ran the most progressive campaign in my race this past spring." Race 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 Fetterman and Lamb, the other major Democratic candidate is state Rep. Malcolm Kenyatta. The major Republican candidates are commentator Kathy Barnette, real estate developer Jeff Bartos, Philadelphia attorney George Bochetto, former hedge fund CEO Dave Mccormick, physician and TV personality Dr. Mehmet Oz and Carla Sands, who served as President Donald Trump's ambassador to Denmark. The primaries are May 17. Overall, 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 A super PAC supporting Lamb said "Fetterman's a self-described democratic socialist." Media reports that made this assertion now carry corrections. We found no evidence that Fetterman described himself that way. And he has declared that he has never described himself that way. We rate the claim False. Editor's note, April 7: After publication, a spokesperson for Penn Progress emailed us with the links to NPR, Forbes and Public Opinion articles, which we had noted, as well as other media references that called Fetterman a self-described democratic socialist. None of the references showed Fetterman calling himself one. Our ruling remains the same. RELATED: The race for the Pennsylvania U.S. Senate seat: A guide RELATED: Pennsylvania fact-chec

“California introduces new bill that would allow mothers to kill their babies up to 7 days after birth. The alarming news about a new California law came in the form of a headline shared on Facebook. "California introduces new bill that would allow mothers to kill their babies up to 7 days after birth," read the screenshot headline above an image of a sleeping newborn, swaddled and cozy in a pink and blue knit hat. "Democrats at it again," read the caption that accompanied the March 31 Facebook post. 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.) While the post would be shocking, it is wrong. California lawmakers are not seeking to legalize killing newborns. The claim was taken from a screenshot of a March 24 blog post that claimed that California lawmakers are working on an "infanticide bill." "Under California AB 2223, a mother will be shielded from civil and criminal charges for any ‘actions or omissions’ related to her pregnancy," the post read. "These actions include not only abortion in any stage of pregnancy, but also ‘perinatal death.’ Perinatal death is defined as the death of a newborn up to seven days or more." Assembly Bill 2223 is a real bill — but it would not legalize killing newborns in California. The bill intends to ensure that parents are not "investigated, persecuted, or incarcerated for ending a pregnancy or experiencing pregnancy loss," said Erin Ivie, a spokesperson for Assembly Member Buffy Wicks, D-Oakland, the California legislator who introduced the bill. Broadly, the bill would end a requirement that a coroner must investigate deaths related to, or following, self-induced or criminal abortions. It would also prevent using a coroner’s statement on a certificate of fetal death to pursue a criminal or civil case. The bill would also add the following language to the Health and Safety Code: "Notwithstanding any other law, a person shall not be subject to civil or criminal liability or penalty, or otherwise deprived of their rights, based on their actions or omissions with respect to their pregnancy or actual, potential, or alleged pregnancy outcome, including miscarriage, stillbirth, or abortion, or perinatal death." Ivie pointed to the cases of two California women, Chelsea Becker and Adora Perez. Both were prosecuted and incarcerated after delivering stillborn babies, because officials ruled that methamphetamine found in the fetuses’ systems caused their deaths. A judge later dismissed Becker’s murder charge. And though Perez struck a plea agreement, a judge overthrew it and the resulting 11-year prison sentence, saying it was unlawful. In addition to avoiding such cases, Ivie said the bill is intended to protect parents who lose a baby after delivery as a result of a pregnancy-related issue. She provided a real-world example: A Long Island woman was pregnant when she was in a car wreck. She suffered severe injuries and her baby was delivered by emergency pre-term cesarean section. After living for a few days, the baby passed away. Prosecutors argued that they could charge the woman for her child’s death because it occurred after delivery, rather than in utero — and because she hadn’t been wearing a seatbelt. They also said she had used drugs and alcohol that contributed to the crash. The woman was convicted of manslaughter, but that conviction was overturned in 2015. Featured Fact-check Viral image stated on October 29, 2022 in an Instagram post The Pelosis “are refusing to turn over surveillance video of their home.” By Ciara O'Rourke • October 31, 2022 These false claims appear to arise out of the ambiguity of the term "perinatal." Depending on the source consulted, the adjective "perinatal" has different meanings: Merriam-Webster: "Occurring in, concerned with, or being in the period around the time of birth." Dictionary.com: "Occurring during or pertaining to the phase surrounding the time of birth, from the 20th week of gestation to the 28th day of newborn life." The National Institute of Mental Health: "The time before and after the birth of a child." The U.K. National Health Service: "The period of time when you become pregnant and up to a year after giving birth." For the purposes of Wicks’ bill, Ivie said, "the perinatal stage is the period following pregnancy, and it is currently undefined when it comes to duration." Ivie told PolitiFact, however, that Wicks amended the language of the bill to specify that it would only prevent people from being prosecuted if a perinatal death occurred "due to a pregnancy-related cause." Khiara M. Bridges, a law professor at University of California, Berkeley School of Law, said perinatal is not a "legal term of art," so it does not have a set meaning across several different laws. It would be helpful for lawmakers to define "perinatal" as it is used in the bill, Bridges said. She said Wicks’ proposed amendment should clarify that the bill is not meant to protect people who intentionally kill their newborn babies. "If the text is amended to say a ‘perinatal death due to a pregnancy-related cause,’ it means that the fetus died because of some complication due to the pregnancy, as opposed to an action that the pregnant person or anyone else took to cause the fetal death," Bridges said. If there were any ambiguity in the law, a judge would likely be tapped to help interpret the meaning of the statute, Bridges said. "A judge would be hard-pressed to interpret that language as protecting a person who kills their baby up to seven days after birth intentionally," she said. "One of the tools judges would use in that case is legislative intent." Wicks said claims that her bill would legalize murdering newborns were "absurd and disingenuous." "No person should face prison time for a tragic pregnancy outcome, and this bill will ensure that prosecutions and investigations have no place in reproductive health care," Wicks said. Our ruling A post claimed a proposed California bill "would allow mothers to kill their babies up to 7 days after birth." It does not. The bill is meant to ensure that people are not investigated, prosecuted or incarcerated for ending a pregnancy, experiencing pregnancy loss or for losing a baby after it is born due to pregnancy-related causes, according to the lawmaker who introduced it. A judge would use that legislative intent to help interpret any ambiguity in the law if it were passed. We rate this claim Fals

“Senate Republicans’ plan" would "end Social Security" and "end Medicare. An 11-point agenda proposed by Sen. Rick Scott, R-Fla., continues to produce fodder for attack ads from Democrats. Scott’s plan, which he pitched as a platform for the GOP should the party take back Congress in November, indicated support for raising income taxes on millions of Americans by saying that all Americans should pay some income tax, and half don’t. Democrats like Rep. Val Demings teed up the plan to falsely tag Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., as supporting Scott’s pitch. Demings is running for Rubio’s Senate seat. Now the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee — the direct rival to the Republican Senatorial Campaign Committee that Scott chairs — is going after another plank of Scott’s plan. Its 30-second TV ad uses clips from a Fox News interview of Scott. The anchor questions Scott about how the plan would raise taxes and "potentially sunset" programs such as Social Security and Medicare. Then these words appear on the ad’s screen: "SENATE REPUBLICANS’ PLAN — END SOCIAL SECURITY" "SENATE REPUBLICANS’ PLAN — END MEDICARE" Claims that Social Security and Medicare are imperiled are common during election campaigns. The DSCC attack goes too far in framing Scott’s idea as a broadly supported death sentence for Medicare and Social Security. The first thing to know is that Scott’s plan, released Feb. 22, was proposed by him — not a group of Senate Republicans. Leading Republicans such as Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky quickly panned parts of it. The next is that it didn’t directly call for ending those programs as the ad bottom-lined. It calls for all federal legislation to sunset within five years. That leaves open the possibility of those programs ending were Congress not to approve them again. In rejecting Scott’s proposal, McConnell said, "We will not have as part of our agenda a bill that raises taxes on half the American people and sunsets Social Security and Medicare within five years." The meaning of ‘sunset’ Scott’s plan mentions Social Security and Medicare once, in a section labeled Government Reform/Debt: "Force Congress to issue a report every year telling the public what they plan to do when Social Security and Medicare go bankrupt." Featured Fact-check Rick Scott stated on October 30, 2022 in an interview on CNN's "State of the Union" “All Democrats in the Senate and House voted to cut $280 billion out of Medicare just two months ago.” By Louis Jacobson • October 31, 2022 The plan also says: "All federal legislation sunsets in five years. If a law is worth keeping, Congress can pass it again." The nonpartisan Congressional Research Service says "the sunset concept provides for programs and agencies to terminate automatically on a periodic basis unless explicitly renewed by law." Under Scott’s plan, all federal laws, including those creating Social Security and Medicare, would expire after five years. Congress would have to renew the laws it wants to keep. As the New York Times reported: "Taken literally, that would leave the fate of Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security to the whims of a Congress that rarely passes anything so expansive." As PolitiFact Wisconsin reported, Scott’s statement was generic and did not directly call for the phasing out of either program. The DSCC ad cites a news story that points out that Social Security and Medicare would be ended only if the laws creating them were not renewed. Scott in the past has raised concerns about the impact of the two programs on the federal debt. Our ruling The Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee claimed that the "Senate Republicans’ plan" would "end Social Security" and "end Medicare." The ad refers not to a plan from Senate Republicans but from one Republican, Scott. The plan would sunset all federal laws after five years, requiring Congress to renew the laws it wants to keep. Federal sunsetting provides for programs to terminate automatically on a periodic basis unless they are explicitly renewed by law. While there is an element of truth in that these social welfare programs could be phased out in Scott’s model, the DSCC claim overreaches by painting that uncertain outcome as a broad party position, giving voters a misleading impression. We rate the claim Mostly False. RELATED: Sen. Rick Scott says his GOP agenda didn’t call for a tax increase. Experts think it did RELATED: No proof for Val Demings claim that Marco Rubio backs tax hikes like those indicated in Scott’s plan RELATED: Ron Johnson has not endorsed plan to phase out of Social Security, Medica

“The Russian army captured the U.S Major General Roger L. Cloutier Jr. … in the besieged Ukrainian Azov camp in Mariupol. The Russian invasion of Ukraine has sparked another baseless internet rumor, this time about the alleged capture of a top NATO leader in Mariupol, Ukraine. "Unconfirmed sources from Russia Military: The Russian army captured the U.S Major General Roger L. Cloutier Jr. … in the besieged Ukrainian Azov camp in Mariupol," said the April 4 tweet that appeared to start the rumor, according to CrowdTangle, a social media insights tool. The tweet came from an anonymous account that has spread pro-Russia and conspiratorial content warning of "globalists." Its Twitter bio says the owner's prior account was suspended. The tweet not only got Cloutier’s military rank and title wrong — he is a lieutenant general and the commander of NATO’s Allied Land Command since August 2020 — but it also set off a flurry of social media posts falsely claiming Cloutier was captured. One Thai-language Facebook post spreading the same message received more than 4,000 likes in a matter of hours. The posts were flagged as part of Facebook’s efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about our partnership with Facebook.) The false claim was promoted in posts on the pro-Trump and QAnon internet forums patriots.win and greatawakening.win, both of which have played host to far-right and extremist content in the past. Hal Turner, a far-right radio host who has a history of elevating conspiracy theories, also repeated the narrative on his website. The headline on his April 4 story: "U.S. Army General CAPTURED in Mariupol with AZOV Nazis!" Featured Fact-check Facebook posts stated on October 17, 2022 in una publicación en Facebook "Ministros de Defensa de OTAN deciden invadir a RUSIA para prevenir ataque de Putin”. By Maria Ramirez Uribe • October 17, 2022 But Maj. Brian Andries, deputy public affairs officer at NATO Allied Land Command, confirmed in an email to PolitiFact that Cloutier has not been captured. "These rumors are completely false," Andries said. "Our commander is currently commanding NATO Allied Land Command in Izmir, Turkey, and has not been to Ukraine since the Land Staff Talks we conducted in July of 2021. While NATO nations are sending financial and military aid to Ukraine, no NATO soldiers or leaders are deployed to the country." On April 5, one day after he was alleged to have been captured, Cloutier shared photos from an event in Turkey to his LinkedIn profile. One commenter responding to the post asked Cloutier about the rumors that he had been taken captive by Russian forces. Cloutier’s response was the same as Andries’ to PolitiFact. "These rumors are completely false," he wrote in reply. Cloutier is also in photos the Allied Land Command posted to its official Twitter and Facebook accounts from the same April 5 event. We rate claims of Cloutier’s capture Fals

Pfizer paid “$2.8 million bribe payment” to the FDA for COVID-19 vaccine approval Some social media users are falsely describing a document showing a $2.8 million payment from Pfizer to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration as a "bribe" for approval of the company’s COVID-19 vaccine. "$2.8 million bribe payment from Pfizer to FDA for their Bioweapon ‘approval.’ You’re not supposed to know that. Look the other way," reads an April 2 tweet. The tweet includes a photo of a document with a line at the bottom that reads: "A wire transfer of $2,875,842.00 was made to the U.S. Department of Treasury. (TREAS)," before cutting off. Several other Twitter users make the same claim. The payment was not a bribe, but rather an application fee required under a 30-year-old law for any drugmaker seeking FDA approval of their products. The Prescription Drug User Fee Act was signed into law in 1992 and has been reauthorized every five years. It allows the FDA to collect fees from pharmaceutical companies "that produce certain human drug and biological products," and helps the agency streamline the approval process, the FDA website says. (The law is due for reauthorization again this year.) "User fees provide instrumental funding for the FDA’s independent review of medical products that make a difference in the lives of all Americans, without compromising the agency’s commitment to scientific integrity, public health and regulatory standards, patient safety, and transparency," FDA spokesperson Abby Capobianco wrote in a statement to PolitiFact. The FDA’s fiscal year 2021 budget was $6.1 billion. Industry user fees paid about 46% of the budget; the federal budget authorization covered the other 54%. Featured Fact-check Instagram posts stated on October 12, 2022 in an Instagram post Pfizer executive “admits” vaccine was never tested for preventing transmission. By Jeff Cercone • October 13, 2022 A spokesperson for Pfizer also confirmed that the $2.8 million mentioned in the tweets was a required Prescription Drug User Fee Act payment. The FDA released the document as part of an ongoing Freedom of Information Act lawsuit, said Capobianco. The lawsuit seeking the documents came from a group called the Public Health and Medical Professionals for Transparency. That group, which MedPage Today reports has several members known for spreading false information during the pandemic, sued the FDA in September for the release of COVID-19 vaccine review documents. The photo shared by some on social media only shows the first page of the six-page document, and ends in mid-sentence, cutting off the portion that states the payment is for a "user fee." The payment shown in the May 6, 2021 document, matches the 2021 rates posted on an FDA webpage for applications that are required to present clinical data. In August 2021, the FDA gave Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine full approval for use in people ages 16 and older. "The public can be very confident that this vaccine meets the high standards for safety, effectiveness, and manufacturing quality the FDA requires of an approved product," then-Acting FDA Commissioner Janet Woodcock said in August. Our ruling Social media users are saying a document recently released by the FDA shows that Pfizer paid the agency a $2.8 million "bribe" for approval of its COVID-19 vaccine. But those posts mislead by sharing a truncated version of the letter that describes a user fee. Those fees are paid to the FDA under the Prescription Drug User Fee Act. All drug companies must pay the fees to have their products reviewed for approval. We rate this claim Fals

Says Barack Obama tweeted, “Has anyone checked to make sure Donald Trump doesn’t have a Russian birth certificate? A fabricated tweet makes it look as though former President Barack Obama suggested publicly that his successor, Donald Trump, was born in Russia. "I think most Americans would agree that I’m a level-headed individual, not a man who’s prone to indulging in conspiracy theories," says the tweet, which was created to look like it came from Obama’s verified Twitter account on March 16, 2022. "I’ve certainly had a fair number directed at me. But has anyone checked to make sure Donald Trump doesn’t have a Russian birth certificate?" The tweet alludes to the "birther" conspiracy theory that Trump promoted for years about Obama, which falsely claimed that Obama was born in Kenya and ineligible to be president. It also alludes to Trump’s business ties to Russia and relationship with Russian President Vladimir Putin, who he recently called a "genius." But the tweet is not real. Obama’s tweets on March 16 were posts sharing a trio of articles from the New York Times, Vox and USA Today that he said were "worth reading" about the war in Ukraine, followed by his picks for the NCAA Tournaments in men’s and women’s basketball. 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 fake tweet referencing Trump’s birth certificate does not appear on Obama’s Twitter page, nor does it appear on archived versions of it. It also doesn’t show up on Politwoops, a database of deleted tweets from politicians run by ProPublica, or in any credible news reporting. Still, images purporting to show screenshots of the tweet have been shared widely across Twitter, Facebook and Instagram amid Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, racking up tens of thousands of likes and comments, according to CrowdTangle, a social media insights tool. The earliest iterations of the fake tweet appeared on Reddit on March 16, PolitiFact found via reverse image searching. A Reddit user who creates fake tweets as a form of satire told Reuters that the fake Obama tweet was her creation. The posts were flagged as part of Facebook’s efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about our partnership with Facebook.) We rate these posts Fals

Says New Zealand Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern said her country doesn’t have to deal with the “rage of older white men” because “we’ve never allowed Rupert Murdoch to set up a media outlet here. If you’re a fan of Fox News, you may be a little upset with a quote going around about its founder, media mogul Rupert Murdoch. According to social media posts, New Zealand Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern recently said that her country doesn’t have an issue with the "rage of older white men" because it has never allowed Murdoch to start a media company there. "Asked why New Zealand does not suffer from the rage of older white men like in other western Anglo countries, PM Jacinda Adern replied, ‘Because we’ve never allowed Rupert Murdoch to set up a media outlet here.’ The guy has wreaked havoc on civil society in (the) US," a tweet re-shared on Instagram says. 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 tweet, which misspells Ardern’s name, is wrong. We could find no record of Ardern saying this in searches of news archives or in meeting transcripts from New Zealand’s House of Representatives. Ardern’s office said the quote lacks legitimacy. "The Prime Minister did not make this statement. I have no idea who made it up," Andrew Campbell, Ardern’s spokesperson, told PolitiFact in an email. 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 quote may have been re-appropriated from a statement about Murdoch made by David Cormack, a former policy and communications director for New Zealand’s Green Party. Cormack told the Guardian in October 2020 that "a huge reason that our politics is not so extremely polarised and so far out there is because we no longer have Murdoch-owned press in New Zealand, and it’s never taken a foothold." The statement wasn’t about the "rage of older white men." And Cormack didn’t claim that New Zealand never allowed Murdoch to set up shop there. The Murdoch-owned News Corp has had stakes in New Zealand media companies in the past. Cormack acknowledged that his quote was being misattributed on Twitter several times, at one point writing, "New Zealand, i am @jacindaardern now. I'm sorry. I don't make the rules." New Zealand, i am @jacindaardern now. I'm sorry. I don't make the rules. I'll see you tonight @NZClarke.Tomorrow... Big changes. https://t.co/v550wnhwPS— David Cormack (@David_Cormack) April 3, 2022 Our ruling Social media posts claim that Ardern said New Zealand doesn’t have issues with the "rage of older white men" because "the country never allowed Rupert Murdoch to start a media outlet there." There is no evidence that Ardern, or anyone else, said this. A similar statement about Murdoch was made by a former New Zealand Green Party communications director, but it’s not the same quote. We rate these posts Fals

A video taken from a car driving through Bucha, Ukraine, shows a corpse “moving his arm,” and then “in the rear view mirror the ‘corpse’ sits down. Ukrainian officials accused Russia of a massacre in a city outside of Kyiv, claiming they found hundreds of dead people after Russian forces withdrew from the area. "This is genocide," Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelenskyy told CBS News. The Russian Ministry of Defense denied responsibility as it has with previous attacks, saying in a post on Telegram that the photographs and videos coming out of Bucha, Ukraine, "are another hoax, a staged production and provocation by the Kiev regime for the Western media." Across Telegram, Twitter and other platforms, Russian officials pushing that claim shared a video showing footage taken from a car as it steered through a street strewn with bodies. A Telegram post shared by the Russian Ministry of Defense, and reshared by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, falsely claimed that a video from Ukraine’s Expreso TV showed abnormalities that proved the people were "deliberately laid out to create a more dramatic picture." (The videos contain sensitive and graphic content.) "The video of the bodies is confusing," the Russian defense ministry wrote in the post, which included a slowed-down version of the video. "Here at the 12th second the ‘corpse’ on the right is moving his arm. At 30th second in the rear view mirror the ‘corpse’ sits down." Other Russian agencies and officials shared the allegations against Ukraine across Twitter. Russian agencies and officials posted false claims about a video captured from Bucha, Ukraine, on social media. But the claims are false. The video from Expreso TV, available on the station’s YouTube channel, does not show one of the people moving an arm. Instead, journalists and social media debunkers revealed that it shows a mark — perhaps a droplet of water or a speck of dirt — moving across the car’s windshield. 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 One Twitter account inverted the coloring of the video to show more clearly that the person on the ground lies still as the speck moves across the windshield. BBC News posted a version of the video that is edited to show the mark circled in red, along with other similar marks. The Expreso TV video does not show a corpse sitting up in the car’s passenger-side mirror, either. As BBC News’ disinformation reporter Shayan Sardarizadeh tweeted, the dead body appears as though it is sitting in the mirror because the mirror's shape has a distorting effect. The buildings in the background also appear distorted. PolitiFact asked an expert in physics and optical sciences about the video. He said the same thing: that the alleged movement is due to the mirror’s effects. "I've looked at the videos in the links you sent and can see no evidence whatsoever that the corpse either moved its arm or sat up," said Charles M. Falco, professor emeritus at the University of Arizona’s James C. Wyant College of Optical Sciences, in an email. "What I do see is the effect on the reflected image of the stationary corpse caused by the distortion of the moving convex mirror," Falco continued. "That distortion is due to the fact the mirror is convex to give it a wider field of view than a flat mirror has, and is why those rear view mirrors have the warning printed on them that ‘objects in mirror are closer than they appear.’" Sardarizadeh identified the same victims from the Expreso TV clip in photographs from Getty Images and a different video. Benjamin Strick, the director of investigations at the Center for Information Resilience and a contributor at Bellingcat, found YouTube videos posted by the Guardian and Al Jazeera that show additional angles. A New York Times review of satellite imagery contradicted the Russians’ claim that many of the civilians seen dead in Bucha were killed after the Russian forces left the area. The corpse Russian officials claimed was moving his arm was visible in the satellite imagery. Our ruling The Russian Ministry of Defense said a video taken from a car driving through Bucha, Ukraine, shows a corpse "moving his arm," and then "in the rear view mirror the ‘corpse’ sits down." Both claims misrepresent what the video in question shows. The video shows a mark floating across the car’s windshield — perhaps a drop of water or a speck of dirt — which Russia officials falsely portrayed as of a corpse "moving his arm." Similarly, what Russian officials falsely claimed was a corpse sitting up was actually a dead person whose body appeared distorted due to the shape of the car’s passenger-side mirror. We rate this claim Fals

"As compared to last year, Texas has about 15% more power generation capacity. As temperatures dropped in early February and Texans braced for severe winter weather, state officials assured the public the power grid was better prepared to handle freezing temperatures compared with 2020. In a Feb. 3 news conference, Gov. Greg Abbott listed the reasons why he believed Texans should have confidence in the grid: "As compared to last year, Texas has about 15% more power generation capacity." Seasonal data from grid operator Electric Reliability Council of Texas indicates available generation capacity is at 85,000 megawatts for winter 2021-22, up from 83,000 megawatts in winter 2020-21. That comes out to be a 2% increase. So where did Abbott get 15%? Abbott referred to installed capacity Abbott's office referred PolitiFact Texas to the Texas Public Utility Commission, which oversees ERCOT. According to ERCOT and PUC officials, the 15% cited by Abbott describes an increase in total installed capacity from 102,874 megawatts in winter 2020 to 118,257 megawatts in winter 2021. Total installed capacity refers to the maximum amount of power that can be generated under ideal conditions. "That's just if everything we had on the grid was operating at its full output. That's what it could make," said Joshua Rhodes, research associate at the University of Texas at Austin Energy Institute and Webber Energy Group. However, at any given time, the grid isn't producing at 100% potential, experts told PolitiFact Texas. For example, the sun isn't always shining for solar energy, or the wind isn't always blowing for wind energy, Doug Lewin, energy consultant and president of Stoic Energy Consulting, said as example. "It's sort of more of a theoretical potential," Lewin said. Featured Fact-check Instagram posts stated on November 2, 2022 in a video Video suggests GOP voters denied access in general election. By Gabrielle Settles • November 8, 2022 "There is no resource that has a 100% operational capacity," Lewin said. "That does not exist, but generally thermal plants have a higher operational capacity. But when you start to put together enough wind and solar, and they're spread out across a broad enough geographic area, their overall capacity factors or operational capacity increases." Rhodes also said a lot of the capacity added in the last year included wind and solar, which would not operate at 100% capacity all the time. "We don't expect all the wind and all the solar to be available during a winter peak event," Rhodes said. ERCOT officials said in February that the grid has a total generating capacity at about 86,000 megawatts if needed, the American-Statesman reported then. The value Abbott cited described what the grid is capable of creating, though the amount of available power might be less than total installed capacity. "I don't think there's anything wrong with saying we added a whole lot of capacity in the last year," Lewin said. Aidan Tuohy, program manager of Grid Operations and Planning at the research and development firm Electric Power Research Institute, said resource adequacy assessments have processes to account for wind patterns and sunlight in its seasonal estimates. "One, that let's say ERCOT used, they look at historical performance and then take either an average during stressful conditions, or some other statistical measure during stressful conditions," Tuohy said. "And then another way to do that is to actually simulate operations. For example, in California, they simulate a thousand different patterns of generator outages and wind and solar patterns based on historical data and then try to come up with what the expected observed load will be." ERCOT included risk assessments for thermal resources based on historical information, Tuohy also noted. Our ruling As Texas braced for the effects of cold weather, Abbott assured Texans: "Compared to last year, Texas has about 15% more power generation capacity." Experts say Abbott was referring to the total installed capacity if power generation infrastructure were running at 100% capacity. However, that is a theoretical figure. Instead, stations generate at a fraction of the total installed capacity. The amount of available power in an emergency situation would be less than the installed capacity. We rate this as Mostly Tru

The economy was "dead in the water when we got here. Virtually no jobs created. Trying to deflect public dissatisfaction about high inflation, White House chief of staff Ron Klain touted other, stronger aspects of the economy during an interview in ABC’s "This Week." The economy, he said, was "dead in the water when we got here. Virtually no jobs created." The White House told PolitiFact that by the end of the Trump administration, job creation had stalled out, and President Joe Biden's pandemic and economic recovery bill, the American Rescue Plan, accelerated economic expansion. Still, Klain’s framing was a significant exaggeration of reality. The Biden administration has some justification for being pleased with its job-creation record. In the 15 months since Biden took office, month-over-month job gains have exceeded 424,000 in 14 of those months. (The only exception was in April 2021, when job gains totaled 263,000.) Those gains have brought the national employment level to just under 99% of what it was just before the pandemic hit. But the gains in employment didn’t turn on a dime when President Donald Trump left office and Biden took over. The recovery began under Trump. !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"); In December 2020, the final full month before Biden took office, the employment level fell by 115,000, which has been the only absolute loss of jobs since April 2020, when the nation was suddenly plunged into lockdowns. Featured Fact-check Rob Portman stated on June 30, 2010 in a news release Since the Democrats’ stimulus went into effect last year, Ohio has lost about 150,000 Jobs. By Mark Naymik • July 28, 2010 But that month is unrepresentative of the final months of Trump’s presidency. The final three months under Trump prior to that December loss produced gains of 919,000, 647,000, and 333,000 jobs, respectively. Those gains are substantial, not "virtually no jobs created." Another key metric of economic health, gains in gross domestic product, also began their upswing before Biden took office. !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"); Even setting aside the 33.8% increase in the third quarter of 2020, which was basically a reversal of the sudden -31.2% shrinkage the previous quarter, the fourth quarter of 2020, which came during Trump’s tenure, produced 4.5% growth. Our ruling Klain said the economy was "dead in the water when we got here. Virtually no jobs created." The job creation record under Biden has been impressive, exceeding 424,000 in 14 out of the 15 months he’s been in office. However, the economy didn’t turn suddenly when he took office; it was already improving during the final months of Trump’s tenure. While Trump’s last full month in office, December 2020, produced a loss in employment by 115,000, that was the exception. The final three months under Trump prior to that December loss produced job gains of 919,000, 647,000, and 333,000, respectively. Those gains are substantial, not "virtually no jobs created." We rate the statement Mostly Fals

According to the Census Bureau, “5 million more people voted than were registered to vote” in the 2020 election In the race to fill the U.S. Senate seat now held by retiring Republican Rob Portman, all but one of the candidates for the Republican nomination cast suspicion on the 2020 presidential election. At a recent debate, businessman Mike Gibbons, a top contender, repeated a favored talking point. "Five million more people voted than were registered to vote," Gibbons said March 28. "And that’s according to the U.S. Census Bureau. There’s a problem. We need to investigate it. The Jan. 6 commission should be investigating that instead of some sort of false accusation of some sort of insurrection." Gibbons is wrong. No numbers back up his claim of 5 million more votes cast than there were people registered to vote. We’ve checked iterations of this statement before and found them false. Gibbons’ invocation of the Census Bureau failed to improve his accuracy. The Census Bureau reported in April 2021 that its surveys found 168,308,000 registered voters, and 154,628,000 votes cast in the 2020 election. Neither is an exact figure; these estimates are based on people’s answers to survey questions. But since Gibbons name checked the Census Bureau, it’s worth noting that, according to the bureau, there were at least 13 million more registered voters than people who voted. That’s the opposite of what Gibbons asserted as fact. Gibbons spoke as if the Census Bureau was the gold standard for election results. But data collected from the states gives a more accurate picture of the number of registered voters and the number of ballots cast. In its latest report to Congress, the U.S. Election Assistance Commission said numbers sent to them by state election officials showed there were 209,441,338 active registered voters in 2020, more than the Census Bureau found. "Active" registered voters includes people who meet every requirement to walk into a polling station and cast a ballot. Finding that number nationwide isn’t as simple as it might seem. Not every state automatically reports the distinction between people who have voted recently and those who haven’t in a long time and need to reconfirm their address and voting status before they can vote. University of Georgia political scientist Trey Hood said there can be other complications in working with state data. 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 "Some states have same-day registration during early voting, or Election-Day registration," Hood said. "Some of these figures may not get lumped in with existing registrants, depending on how the state records these statistics." The commission’s questionnaire to state election officials aimed to cut through the clutter and capture the truest estimate of the people ready and eligible to vote. As for how many actually voted, the commission reported 161,303,109 ballots cast. There are other wrinkles to the data. Not every ballot included a vote for president. University of Florida political scientist Michael McDonald estimated that the figure for the presidential election could be closer to 158,407,000. Readers might find other numbers, based on earlier reporting and preliminary statistics, but in every case, the number of people who voted is many millions less than the number of people registered to vote. Based on the U.S. Election Assistance Commission’s work, there were about 48 million fewer votes cast than the number of registered voters, meaning than in total, Gibbons was off by about 53 million. Our ruling Gibbons said that according to the Census Bureau, "5 million more people voted than were registered to vote" in the 2020 election. Contrary to what Gibbons said, the Census Bureau estimated that 13 million fewer people voted than were registered to vote. That was based on statistical sampling in a survey. The U.S. Election Commission worked directly with state election officials and found that 43 million fewer people voted than were registered to vote. That report came out last year. We rate this claim Pants on Fir

“Democrat’s New Plan: Tax billionaires to lower the deficit by $1 TRILLION and fund clean energy independence. Republican’s New Plan: Raise taxes on households earning less than $50,000 by an ADDITIONAL $4,500 after CUTTING taxes for the rich. A liberal group’s Facebook post comparing tax plans from Democrats and Republicans exaggerated the proposed changes and lacked important context about both policies. The March 30 Facebook post claimed that a Democratic proposal would "tax billionaires to lower the deficit by $1 TRILLION and fund clean energy independence," while a Republican-backed plan would "raise taxes on households earning less than $50,000 by an ADDITIONAL $4,500 after CUTTING taxes for the rich." The post instructed viewers to "vote accordingly." 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.) (PolitiFact illustration of screenshot) The "Democrat’s plan" mentioned in the claim points to parts of President Joe Biden’s proposed budget for 2023. The "Republican’s plan" appears to be a reference to an 11-point proposal Sen. Rick Scott, R-Fla., released in February. Let’s dive into both. The Democratic plan The description of Biden’s budget proposal overstated the impact a higher tax on wealthy individuals would have on the country’s deficit. It also lacked broader context about how much debt the U.S. would still accrue, even after factoring in this tax revenue. While it’s true that billionaires would be subjected to higher taxes under Biden’s proposed budget, so would some millionaires. The name of the tax itself, the "Billionaire Minimum Income Tax," is misleading since it would impose a tax on all households worth more than $100 million. Under this rule, wealthy individuals would pay a tax rate of at least 20% of their income, including any unrealized capital gains, such as stocks. If approved, this tax would impact about 20,000 households, or less than 0.01% of the country’s population, said Howard Gleckman, a senior fellow at the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center. Most of the people impacted would be multimillionaires. There are roughly 700 billionaires in the U.S. The Biden administration estimated this tax would generate $360 billion in revenue over the next decade — not the full $1 trillion that the claim suggested. The rest would be made up by other measures in Biden’s budget proposal, but that, too, lacks detail. "That overall budget includes a lot of blanks right now. There's a big kind of magic asterisk in this budget," Gleckman said. One missing piece in Biden’s budget is any effect of Build Back Better legislation, a domestic spending package of Biden priorities that remains stalled in Congress. It’s not clear how much spending will be included in these bills, how Congress will pay for it, and what the effect on the deficit would be. "Without knowing that, this budget doesn't really lower the deficit by $1 trillion. It aspires to it, but it doesn't do it," Gleckman said. 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 The deficit is the difference between what the U.S. takes in and spends each year. Even when accounting for this $1 trillion in net deficit cuts, the country’s debt is still expected to go up by $14.4 trillion over the next 10 years. Biden’s budget shows the U.S. spending $72.7 trillion over the next decade, while bringing in $58.3 trillion in tax and other revenue. Clean energy initiatives are a big focus of Biden’s budget, as the claim said. The plan sets aside $45 billion for the federal government to address climate change, including $90 million to modernize the country’s electrical grid and $502 million to weatherize and retrofit low-income housing, among other initiatives. The Republican plan In February, Scott put forth a proposed agenda if the GOP were to win the majority in Congress after the midterms. Scott is chairman of the National Republican Senatorial Committee. One part of the agenda opines that all Americans should pay income tax. "All Americans should pay some income tax to have skin in the game, even if a small amount. Currently over half of Americans pay no income tax," Scott’s plan states. So far, Scott’s wish has found many attacks and few takers. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell dismissed the notion of new taxes in light of Scott’s comment. Some Americans don’t owe any federal income tax because they don’t earn enough money to have income tax liability and they may receive tax credits. The share of people who did not pay income tax increased during the pandemic to 61%, up from 40% in 2019. This percentage dropped to 57% last year and is expected to continue to decrease to about 42% in 2022, according to the Tax Policy Center. Scott’s plan does not provide any details as to how much Americans who don’t pay income taxes would be taxed under his outline, so the $4,500 is rather baseless. The Tax Policy Center conducted an analysis to estimate how much people who don’t currently pay income tax would owe under Scott’s proposal. Hypothetically, every household would owe at least $100 in income tax, no matter how much they earned. Creating a minimum income tax for all Americans would eliminate tax credits and lower the standard deduction for low- and middle-income earners. In this model, households earning less than $27,000 a year would pay an average of $1,000 more a year in taxes. This estimate is much lower than the $4,500 amount asserted in the claim. The part of the claim that says this tax increase would occur "after cutting taxes for the rich" presumably is a reference to the GOP’s 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act. This legislation cut taxes for most Americans, not just wealthy individuals. Our ruling A Facebook post claimed that the Democrats’ proposal would "tax billionaires to lower the deficit by $1 TRILLION and fund clean energy independence," while the Republicans’ plan would "raise taxes on households earning less than $50,000 by an ADDITIONAL $4,500 after CUTTING taxes for the rich." The claim exaggerated what both the Democratic proposal and the Republican plan would do, if implemented. It also left out broader context about the initiatives and who proposed them. We rate this claim Mostly Fals

Says Mike Gibbons said "military service doesn't count as real work. Josh Mandel and Mike Gibbons, two of the Republicans running for U.S. Senate in Ohio, nearly got physical at one point during a debate. Mandel, a former Marine, former state lawmaker and former state treasurer, capitalized on the testy exchange by producing an attack ad against Gibbons, a businessman. The TV spot features Ohio resident Sheila Nowacki, the mother of a marine killed in Iraq in 2005. She opens the ad by saying: "Mike Gibbons has the nerve to say military service doesn’t count as real work." That’s not what Gibbons said in the debate. Mandel’s campaign told PolitiFact it did not want to comment on its ad. In searches of Google and Nexis, a database for news and other information sources, we found no instances of Gibbons saying that military service doesn’t count as real work. ‘Never worked in private sector’ News video of the March 18 debate, which also included the other three major GOP candidates, shows that Mandel criticized Gibbons’ business deals. He then sat down, and Gibbons was asked if he wanted to rebut. After Gibbons rose, Mandel continued his criticism, and Gibbons objected to Mandel’s characterizations of his business deals. Seconds later, the two were standing toe to toe and this exchange occurred: Gibbons: "You may not understand this because you’ve never been in the private sector." Mandel: "I understand it." Gibbons: "No, you don’t. Mandel: "I do." Gibbons: "You’ve never been in the private sector in your entire life." Mandel: "I worked, sir." Gibbons: "You don’t know squat." 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 Mandel: "Two tours in Iraq. Don’t tell me I haven’t worked. Don’t tell me I haven’t worked." Gibbons: "You don’t know squat. You don’t know squat." Mandel: "Two tours in Iraq. Don’t tell me I haven’t worked." Gibbons: "Back off, buddy, or you’re going to end up — Mandel: "You back off." After some crosstalk, the exchange ends with: Gibbons: "You’re dealing with the wrong dude." Mandel: "No, you’re dealing with the wrong guy. You watch what happens. You watch what happens." Ad fallout USA Freedom Fund, a super PAC formed to support Mandel’s campaign, followed up with a similar attack on Gibbons in its own ad. Gibbons, whose son is a Navy pilot, then responded with an ad of his own, saying Mandel is "lying" in claiming that Gibbons doesn’t respect military service. While Mandel’s employment has largely been in the public sector, he has earned large sums as a member of corporate boards and by joining startups, the Columbus Dispatch reported in August 2021. The Dispatch reported that Mandel earned less than some of his opponents in the Senate race, but campaign disclosures showed "the business dealings of a man accustomed to public life who suddenly — and quietly — started to make his way in the private sector." Ohio race could help decide Senate control The Ohio Senate seat is opening because the incumbent, Republican Rob Portman, is not seeking reelection. Both the GOP and the Democratic Senate primaries, to be held May 3, are contested. 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 Ohio race is rated variously by campaign watchers as "lean" Republican, "likely" Republican and "solid" Republican. Our ruling Mandel claimed in an ad that Gibbons said "military service doesn't count as real work." Gibbons said in a debate that Mandel has never worked in the private sector; he didn’t say what this ad claims. We rate Mandel’s claim False. RELATED: Ohio’s Josh Mandel repeats false claim of stolen 2020 election RELATED: Fact-checking whether Biden’s Russia sanctions over Ukraine didn’t start for 30 days, had loopholes RELATED: The race for the Ohio U.S. Senate seat: A gui

Says Gov. Tony Evers "tried to make us pay even more at the pump by hiking the gas tax. Drivers are taking a hit to the wallet as world events, such as Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, are causing crude oil prices to increase, sending gasoline prices to record-breaking levels. During the week of March 7, 2022, the average national gas price hit $4.104 per gallon according to GasBuddy.com. The previous all-time high was set in 2008 at $4.103 per gallon. Since then, prices have nudged downward, with GasBuddy reporting $3.69 to $3.79 per gallon in Milwaukee, Franklin, Wauwatosa and Waukesha and $3.85 in Lannon on April 1. In the midst of that, an affiliate of Wisconsin Manufacturers & Commerce (WMC) – the WMC Issues Mobilization Council – released a TV ad that slammed Gov. Tony Evers’ economic record. Among the claims in the ad: Evers "tried to make us pay even more at the pump by hiking the gas tax." Is the group right? Plan ties gas tax to rate of inflation When asked for backup or the claim, Nick Novak, WMC’s vice president of communications and marketing, pointed to the Legislative Fiscal Bureau’s summary of Evers’ proposed 2019-21 budget. On page 406, under the heading "Motor Vehicle Fuel Tax Rate Increase," is the following: "Increase the motor vehicle fuel tax rate (gasoline, gasoline blended with ethanol, and diesel) by eight cents per gallon resulting in a rate of 38.9 cents per gallon, effective October 1, 2019. The current motor vehicle fuel tax rate has been in effect since April 1, 2006, when the final annual indexing adjustment increased the rate to the current 30.9 cents per gallon rate." In other words, the gas tax would be increased and – in the future – be tied and rise automatically with the rate of inflation. That’s what’s meant by indexing. For instance, the fiscal bureau estimated the gas tax under the plan would rise to 39.7 cents in April 2020 and 40.5 cents in April 2021. These increases would have cost Wisconsinites $41.6 million over the 2019-21 budget period. (A more recent memo from the bureau, dated March 31, 2022, estimated that the indexing would have brought the total to 42.0 cents per gallon on April 1, 2022. ) So, Evers definitely pushed a gas tax increase. But that’s only part of the picture. When the increase was proposed – with the money it generated to go toward increased transportation funding – Evers also proposed eliminating 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. 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 state Department of Administration – overseen by Evers – said repealing the minimum markup law (which it labeled a "hidden tax") would save up to 14-cents per gallon. In other words, the Evers plan would have resulted in a net reduction for drivers at the pump of 6 cents per gallon. (From that perspective, even with rises tied to indexing in the subsequent years, based on the new fiscal bureau memo there would still be a per-gallon savings – though, of course, this is taking a narrow look at the gas tax, not overall economic matters that would affect price.) At the time, the Wisconsin Institute for Law and Liberty, a conservative law firm, in an analysis of the Evers proposal noted elimination of the minimum markup law "could immediately put more money back into the pockets of hard-working Wisconsinites all over the state" but argued it "should be fully repealed – not just for gasoline – and it should not be contingent on a tax increase." The idea from Evers was not entirely new. Republican lawmakers floated a similar plan in 2017 that would have raised the gas tax while curbing the minimum markup law, but the idea flopped when then-Gov. Scott Walker said he would not back it. This time, the GOP-held Legislature ultimately rejected Evers’ proposal and instead raised the title fee paid when vehicles are purchased by 137%, from $69.50 to $164.50. They also raised annual vehicle registration fees by $10, from $75 to $85. In any case, all of that goes against the idea that the primary aim of Evers’ plan was to simply raise the gas tax Kayla Anderson, an Evers campaign spokeswoman, said the governor "was intentionally trying to ensure consumers would pay less at the pump, not more, by repealing the state's minimum markup law. Studies from both sides of the aisle have shown that the minimum markup law results in higher prices for consumers." That’s fair, to a point. But Novak, the WMC spokesman, noted "even the Legislative Fiscal Bureau explained at the time that there may not be a change in the retail price of fuel by repealing the minimum markup law." Indeed, a March 2019 summary of the governor’s 2019-21 budget from the fiscal bureau said: "Changes in retail fuel prices as a result of the provision, if any, would be subject to a variety of market and competitive factors, which are assumed to exert considerable influence on final retail prices independent of the statutory markup." Our ruling A WMC Issues Mobilization Council ad claimed Evers "tried to make us pay even more at the pump by hiking the gas tax." In his first budget, the governor did propose an increase in the gas tax. But the ad ignores what was coupled with it: A move to eliminate the state’s "minimum markup" law as it relates to gasoline, which Evers and his office argued would be a net reduction for drivers. The inclusion of the elimination of the minimum markup law for gasoline in the plan undermines the idea that Evers was trying to make consumers pay more. At the same time, it was – and remains – far from clear that the elimination would reduce prices in the long run. And we have already seen, with inflation, that much of that initial savings would already have been eaten up. For a statement that is partially accurate but leaves out important details or takes things out of context, our rating is Half 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' });

The Strategic Petroleum Reserve has “been mostly empty” for decades Facing record-high gas prices and volatile conditions in the international oil market, President Joe Biden announced the largest release from the nation’s oil stockpiles since they were created almost five decades ago. On March 31, Biden said he would order the release of about 1 million additional barrels from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve every day for six months. It was unclear whether this would be enough to lower U.S. gasoline prices, especially if other overseas producers lower their production to cancel out the additional oil, thus keeping supply the same and prices high. But Biden’s presidential predecessor, Donald Trump, issued a statement critical of the move. "So after 50 years of being virtually empty, I built up our oil reserves during my administration, and low energy prices, to 100% full," Trump said. "It’s called the Strategic National Reserves, and it hasn’t been full for many decades. In fact, it’s been mostly empty." Federal data and energy experts made clear that Trump is wrong on several counts, most notably in the assertion that the stockpile has been "mostly empty" for decades. "I'm not sure there's anything in that quote that makes any sense at all," said Clark Williams-Derry, an energy finance analyst with the Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis. Trump’s press office did not respond to an inquiry. What is the Strategic Petroleum Reserve? For starters, Trump got the stockpile’s name slightly wrong: It's the Strategic Petroleum Reserve. The reserve dates from OPEC’s oil embargo in 1973 and 1974, when an oil price shock battered the U.S. economy. It was designed to protect the country from the effects of a severe energy supply interruption, according to the Congressional Research Service. The reserve has a capacity of more than 700 million barrels, stored in underground geological formations known as salt domes. The reserve encompasses four sites, two each in Louisiana and Texas. The stockpile’s holdings can be drawn down by about 4.4 million barrels a day. The reserve stores crude oil rather than gasoline, partly because crude oil is more stable. So any oil that’s released must be refined before coming to market. It takes about two weeks for a new release from the reserve to enter the market. (Once the oil price declines, the U.S. can purchase additional oil to replenish the reserve.) 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 Biden tried a smaller version of this tactic several months ago. On Nov. 23, 2021, Biden ordered the release of some 50 million barrels of oil from the reserve, or roughly two and a half days of U.S. demand. It was only the fourth time a president had done so. In 1991, President George H.W. Bush released reserves as the Persian Gulf War threatened the international oil market. In 2005, President George W. Bush did it after Hurricane Katrina destroyed oil infrastructure on the Gulf coast. And in 2011, President Barack Obama did it during the civil war in Libya, which prompted concerns about international supply disruptions. But last November’s release didn’t move gas prices in the U.S. significantly, in part because six weeks later, Russia invaded Ukraine, and as a protest, some Western nations, including the U.S., sought to cut back on buying Russian oil. So in March, prices at the pump in the U.S. began setting new records, setting the stage for Biden’s latest move. The stockpile is, well, stocked It’s wrong for Trump to say the stockpile has been "mostly empty" for decades. Since 1987, about a decade after the Strategic Petroleum Reserve began accepting crude oil, the amount stored has not dropped below 540 million barrels by the end of the calendar year. And most of the time, it was well above that. !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"); Between 2003 and 2020, the level in the stockpile ranged from a low of 634 million barrels to a high of 726 million barrels. While the maximum capacity of the reserve varied somewhat over that period, that represented a big percentage of the stockpile’s maximum capacity. For instance, in December 2009, the reserve was 100% filled, with 727 million barrels. By the time Trump took office in January 2017, the reserve was in excess of 90% full. The current capacity is slightly lower than its 2009 high; at the end of 2021, the stockpile was roughly 82% full. Meanwhile, contrary to what Trump said, the stockpile was never completely full while he was in office. Between the end of 2016 and the end of 2020, roughly when Trump was in office, the level of oil in the reserve fell from 695 million barrels to 638 million barrels, a decrease of about 8%. And by the time Trump left office, the stockpile was about 89% full, not 100% full. The decline on Trump’s watch stemmed from lower-profile reasons, notably sales of crude in the stockpile to capitalize on high oil prices and generate revenue that reduces the federal deficit. Similar sales were made under Obama. (There was a temporary uptick of 31 million barrels in the stockpile’s level on Trump’s watch between April 2020 and July 2020. That was during the coronavirus pandemic, when demand cratered and prices fell, making additions to the stockpile economical. But this uptick was almost entirely reversed by October 2020.) Our ruling Trump said, "It’s called the Strategic National Reserves, and it hasn’t been full for many decades. In fact, it’s been mostly empty." First, it’s called the "Strategic Petroleum Reserve." Beyond that, the stockpile has been entirely full as recently as the early 2010s, and for almost a decade before Trump took office, the stockpile was generally 90% full or higher. Meanwhile, the percentage filled actually fell on Trump’s watch. We rate the statement Fals

“An extra 2 whole months and 15 days. That’s how long it takes for white women to make the same amount men made in the same job last year. And it's even worse for women of color. U.S. Sen. Tammy Duckworth claims the gender pay gap is bad for white women doing the same job as men and it's even worse for "women of color." The Illinois Democrat in a recent tweet said it takes 2.5 months longer for white women to earn the same amount of money that men make in the same jobs in a year. She also said the gender pay gap is even worse for Black, Latina, Asian American and Native women. An extra 2 whole months and 15 days.That’s how long it takes for white women to make the same amount men made in the same job last year.And it's even worse for women of color.On #EqualPayDay, let's be clear: We need equal pay for equal work for ALL women—and we need it now.— Tammy Duckworth (@SenDuckworth) March 15, 2022 The well-documented pay gap between men and women has existed ever since women began entering the professional workforce in large numbers, but Duckworth’s claim was very specific to white women in the same job. PolitiFact has checked similar claims in the past and there has always been much debate about the specificity of the science behind gender gap claims, so we decided to check. Asked for her sources, a Duckworth spokesman said she referred to the National Committee on Pay Equity (NCPE), the founder of a gender pay gap metric known as Equal Pay Day. He also referred us to the American Association of University Women (AAUW), a nonprofit organization advocating equity for women. Both organizations are members of the Equal Pay Day Coalition. Each year, the coalition uses data from the U.S. Census Bureau and Bureau of Labor Statistics to determine the date into the next year a woman must work in order to make the same as a man makes the previous year. This year, according to the coalition, that Equal Pay Day was March 15. "If you look at what all women, not just white women, made in full time jobs year round and compare it to what all men made in the same year, then the (Equal Pay) date marks how much longer women would need to work to catch up to men from the previous year," said Carolyn York, the NCPE secretary and treasurer. York said the annual study is to illustrate a general point, and lacks the level of specificity Duckworth — and many others — have attributed to it. The study does not separate out white women, and does not examine the same professions nor the qualifications of either gender. That means in 2021, it took women overall 14.5 months to earn the same median salary earned by men overall in just 12 months. Featured Fact-check Bruce Rauner stated on June 1, 2016 in a press conference "We have lower family incomes in Illinois today than we had 17 years ago in Illinois ... because of the control of (House) Speaker (Michael) Madigan and his Democrats." By Matt Dietrich • July 13, 2016 Duckworth is not the first to make the mistake of over-hyping the specifics of Equal Pay Day. Former U.S. President Barack Obama was rated Mostly False by PolitiFact when he said in 2012 that "women are paid 77 cents on the dollar for doing the same work as men." In 2014, he was found Mostly True after adjusting to say that "women make 77 cents for every dollar a man earns." Then-U.S. Sen. Kamala Harris also received a Mostly False rating when she claimed "women on average are paid 80 cents on the dollar of what men are paid for the same work" during a 2019 appearance on CBS’s "Late Show with Stephen Colbert." So prolific is this mostly false claim, PolitiFact developed its own PolitiFact fact sheet: The Gender Pay Gap. Several factors other than job titles influence the pay gap, including the degrees and jobs women pursue, the time they take off to care for children, the number of hours they work, and years of work experience. Research suggests women are overrepresented in jobs that tend to pay less. When we informed Duckworth’s office the study does not compare white women to men nor the same jobs, Ben Garmisa, her communications director, gave us the following emailed statement. "Whether two months and fifteen days or just two days, the point—and the problem—here is that women have to work longer than men to make the same amount of money, and women of color have to work even longer than other women. Senator Duckworth is focused on not just raising awareness of these disparities, but on fixing them." We could find no study that comprehensively breaks down the pay gap by all professions, but some studies have examined specific occupations like COVID-19 frontline workers. As for the second half of Duckworth’s claim which said "women of color" have it worse, here too Duckworth is suggesting an analysis of women in the same jobs as men. Again, the data does not examine professions. Generally, however, the pay gap is worse for all women of color regardless of their jobs. The Equal Pay Day report says it takes Latina women overall twice as long — an extra 12 months — to match the median annual salary for all white men. Black women have to work an extra nine months, Asian American women an extra five months and Native-American women have to work an extra 11 months. Rating Duckworth claimed it takes an extra 2.5 months for white women to earn the same as all men working in the same job. The study to which she refers does not separate white women and does not examine occupations. While it is true the gender pay gap is worse generally for Black, Latina, Native and Asian American women, Duckworth made the same mistaken comparison about occupation. We rate this claim Mostly False. MOSTLY FALSE – The statement contains an element of truth but ignores critical facts that would give a different impressio

Pfizer staged the Will Smith and Chris Rock confrontation at the Academy Awards because it "has a new alopecia medication coming out. Social media posts are falsely claiming that a confrontation between two celebrities at the 94th Academy Awards was actually plotted by Pfizer, one of the sponsors of the ceremony, to promote a new medication. At the March 27 event, comedian Chris Rock made a joke about the shaved head of actress Jada Pinkett Smith, who has an autoimmune disease called alopecia areata that causes hair loss. After Rock’s joke, actor Will Smith, Pinkett Smith’s husband, walked onstage and slapped him. In the days that followed the ceremony, several viral Facebook posts said that Pfizer staged the confrontation to put alopecia areata in the headlines, since the drug company "has a new alopecia medication coming out." A March 28 post said the incident was "a great marketing tool for Pfizer," to use "such a ‘high end’ celebrity whose husband just so happens to be winning an Oscar that very night to promote their ever so ‘promising’ (medication) for…you guessed it ALOPECIA." One March 29 post said, "So let me get this straight, the person who sponsored the Oscars has a new alopecia medication coming out, and alopecia is trending on social media now because of the Chris Rock and Will Smith smack down... I’m sorry but this is no coincidence!?!?!" The post also said the incident was "a bunch of actors acting." And yet another post on March 29 said, "You know what would be crazy? If the sponsor of the 0scars was in Phase 3 clinical trials for a new drug ritlecitinib to treat alopecia, with a projected $750 million annual revenue, just awaiting FDA approval. Wouldn’t that be crazy? Coincidence?" The posts were flagged as part of Facebook’s efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about our partnership with Facebook.) Pfizer does not have any drugs for alopecia areata that are ready for imminent release. The company has two medications — ritlecitinib and etrasimod — under development to treat the condition, but neither will be available to the public in the near future. Pfizer does not anticipate federal regulatory approval of ritlecitinib until at least 2023, according to the company’s December 2021 presentation to investors. 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 Ritlecitinib successfully completed Phase 2b/3 trials in August 2021 for patients with alopecia areata. Pfizer said at the time that the data from the trial "will form the basis for planned future regulatory filings," but the company has not released any further information about the filing. The other drug, etrasimod, successfully completed a Phase 3 trial for treating ulcerative colitis, the company announced on March 29. The medication is also being investigated for other immuno-inflammatory diseases including alopecia areata. Etrasimod is not anticipated to be approved for use for alopecia areata until 2028. Pfizer was a "proud" sponsor of the Academy Awards — the top tier of sponsorship — along with Rolex, Verizon and Crypto.com, AdWeek reported. Despite the posts’ claims that Pfizer used its clout as a sponsor to stage the incident between Smith and Rock, media reports have said there is no evidence the slap was staged. That night, Smith apologized to the Academy and other nominees when accepting his own award for Best Actor in the movie "King Richard," and the following day, he apologized to Rock via an Instagram post. The Academy’s Board of Governors said it has initiated disciplinary proceedings against the actor "for violations of the Academy’s Standards of Conduct, including inappropriate physical contact, abusive or threatening behavior, and compromising the integrity of the Academy." It will decide at an April 18 meeting whether to suspend, expel or otherwise sanction him. Our ruling Facebook posts say that Pfizer staged a confrontation between Smith and Rock at the Academy Awards to put alopecia areata in the headlines, since the drug company "has a new alopecia medication coming out." Pfizer has two medications — ritlecitinib and etrasimod — under development to treat alopecia areata. But neither drug will be available to the public in the near future. The earliest anticipated date for federal regulatory approval of either drug is 2023. Media reports have said there is no evidence to support the claim that Will Smith’s slap was staged. The Academy has initiated disciplinary proceedings against Smith, and he apologized for his actions. We rate this claim False

Germany imposes a 19% tax on feminine hygiene products but a 7% tax on books, so one company is packaging tampons as books A Facebook post about a German tax on feminine hygiene products is based on outdated information. The March 29 post says that Germany imposes a 19% tax on feminine hygiene products but a 7% tax on books, so one company is packaging tampons as books. It’s a screenshot of a March 24 tweet. 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.) Prior to 2020, the details of the post were accurate — but that’s no longer the case. As of Jan. 1, 2020, Germany reduced its tax rate from 19% to 7% on female sanitary products. And the "Tampon Book" pictured in the post was one element used in a 2019 protest against Germany’s previously higher tax, according to reporting by The Guardian. Germany's tax laws charge 19% for luxury items and 7% for food products and everyday necessities, according to the U.S. Library of Congress. Before the 2020 change, female sanitary products were categorized as luxury items. 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 "Books are taxed at 7% in Germany, and so the founders of the Female Company, which sells organic sanitary products, decided to publish one and include tampons inside it," The Guardian reported in 2019. "Released earlier this spring, the first print-run sold out in a day and the second in a week." Supporters of changing the law said sanitary goods in such a manner unfairly burdened women, particularly poor women. As the Washington Post noted, some studies have shown that lack of access to menstrual pads or tampons is one reason girls around the world miss out on school. In early 2019, Germans submitted a petition to parliament with the required number of signatures to bring the topic up for debate in a public hearing, according to the Library of Congress. Later that year, parliament voted to reduce the tax on female hygiene products. The claim that Germany imposes a 19% tax on feminine hygiene products but a 7% tax on books, so one company is packaging tampons as books, contains an element of truth but ignores critical facts that would give a different impression.. We rate it Mostly False

“You go to a store, they don’t have bread. In an interview, former President Donald Trump voiced his dismay at the state of the country under President Joe Biden. He said shopping has changed. Hardware stores and Tiffany don’t have what you need, he said. Trump gave one particularly downhome example. "You go to a store, they don’t have bread," Trump said in a March 29 interview with the conservative Just the News. "We’re like a third world country." We asked Trump’s office for examples of bread shortages in stores and did not hear back. Such examples might themselves be in short supply. For several months late in 2021 and into early 2022, some stores did have shortages of certain products, bread included. Finding bread is not an issue today. Stores, by and large, are stocked with bread, said Katie Denis, vice president of communications for the Consumer Brands Association, a food and household industry trade group. "Any spotty outages are driven primarily by labor shortages," Denis said. "Earlier in the winter, omicron absenteeism was a major cause of shortages. If a truck driver was unable to work due to COVID exposure, that could mean a delay in some products reaching store shelves." At the best of times, stores might not have your favorite cinnamon raisin or deli rye on the shelf. Before the pandemic, according to the market data company IRI, stores would be missing some baked item 10% of the time. Recently, that number has been at 13%. But that doesn’t mean there’s no bread. 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 "It might mean that the brand of wheat bread you normally buy is not available, but there might be another variety of the same brand that is," said Joan Driggs, vice president of content and thought leadership at IRI. Whatever snags stores face seem to be easing. One IRI measure shows steady, if modest, week-over-week improvement in the supply of baked goods. Ricky Volpe, an agribusiness economist at California Polytechnic State University, said he hasn’t "seen any evidence to suggest that the food retail sector is facing any structural or widespread shortage of bread products." Inflation has raised the price of bread, and the war in Ukraine will likely reduce world wheat supplies. Ukraine is the world’s eighth largest wheat producer, and Russian attacks have devastated the annual planting season. And Russia, the third largest producer, is subject to severe sanctions. Major supply interruptions generally drive prices even higher. But that is a problem for the months ahead, not a force shaping how much bread is on the shelves today. Our ruling Trump said stores "don’t have bread." His office didn’t provide any examples, and industry data shows no major issues. A particular baked good might be missing briefly from a grocery store’s shelf, but stores carry many varieties of bread. If one is unavailable, customers generally have many other options. We rate this claim False.

"Alopecia isn't a medical disease; it's an aesthetic one. A medical condition that causes hair loss sprang into the spotlight after the March 27 Academy Awards, when comedian Chris Rock made a joke about the shaved head of actress Jada Pinkett Smith. After Rock’s joke, actor Will Smith, Pinkett Smith’s husband, walked onstage and slapped him. Soon after, some social media users expressed skepticism that the hair loss is due to an illness. "Alopecia isn't a medical disease; it's an aesthetic one," read a March 28 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 term alopecia broadly refers to hair loss from any cause, including normal aging, according to the Mayo Clinic. Some types of alopecia, such as alopecia areata, are an autoimmune disease, a type of illness that occurs when the immune system mistakenly attacks part of the body, according to the American Academy of Dermatology Association. 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 Pinkett Smith has alopecia areata. It’s unclear whether Rock knew about Pinkett Smith’s condition, the Associated Press reported. Alopecia areata is "a disease that occurs when the body’s immune system attacks hair follicles, often on the scalp or face, but sometimes on other parts of the body," the AP reported. "Sometimes hair falls out in chunks and only partial baldness results. Sometimes hair grows back but repeated bouts of baldness can also occur." It is not life-threatening, but there is no cure. The statement that alopecia "isn't a medical disease" contains an element of truth — the term alopecia broadly refers to hair loss from any cause, including normal aging. But the claim ignores critical facts: Some types of alopecia are an autoimmune disease. We rate the claim that alopecia isn’t a medical disease Mostly False.

Joe Biden didn’t sign an antilynching bill in a ceremony outside the White House on March 29 On March 29, President Joe Biden announced on Twitter that he would be signing "the long overdue Emmett Till Antilynching Act" into law that afternoon, making lynching a federal hate crime. His verified Twitter account livestreamed both the signing and remarks that followed from Biden, Vice President Kamala Harris and Michelle Duster, the great-granddaughter of civil rights pioneer Ida B. Wells. The video shows that the event took place outside the White House, before a seated audience. But a Facebook post claims that photos taken during the event didn’t actually happen on March 29. "This DID NOT happen yesterday," the March 30 post says. "The south lawn of the WH was completely empty, no chairs or anything set up. ABSOLUTELY nothing. Also, it was FREEZING cold yesterday. 30° and extremely windy. I was bundled up and my cheeks were numb after about 15 min. More lies. FAKE NEWS." 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 First, the event took place in the Rose Garden, which is just outside the West Wing and Oval Office, and north of the South Lawn. According to the National Weather Service, it was cold, but not freezing. Around the time Biden spoke that afternoon, the temperature was about 45 degrees and the wind was blowing at about 10 mph. That’s "gentle breeze" territory, according to the Weather Service’s guide to estimating wind speed. RELATED VIDEO The video shared by the White House shows that Biden, Harris and Duster were all wearing coats, as were people seated for the ceremony. But White House officials weren’t the only ones to capture this event. There’s corroborating photo and video evidence and news reports from media organizations, including the Associated Press, Getty Images, and the New York Times. We rate this post False.

“A Florida court sets atheist holy day” on April 1 Florida is known for its bizarre crimes and legal battles, but social media users have taken the trope too far. "A Florida Court Sets Atheist Holy Day," read a March 29 Facebook post, detailing litigation centered on a plaintiff’s gripe that "Christians and Jews" have recognized holidays while atheists have none. In a story narrated in the Facebook post, the Florida judge dismissed the case and explained that atheists, who do not believe in a deity, do have a holiday — April 1, or April Fools’ Day. The anecdote was posted in a public group on Facebook called "Christians laugh too." 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.) Some people appeared to recognize the satirical nature of the anecdote, but others seemed to believe it was a genuine court case. "I would laugh," one comment under the post said. "But it is sad that anyone would waste money or the courts time for such a frivolous. Lawsuit. God bless the judge." Featured Fact-check Instagram posts stated on October 29, 2022 in Instagram post Photo shows Stanford scientists' "3D model of how Joseph, the husband of Mary the Mother of Jesus Christ, might have looked.” By Michael Majchrowicz • November 4, 2022 "Fantastic ruling by a very smart Judge," another read. Florida has, on occasion, made national headlines for odd measures associated with religion. In 2002, Carolyn Risher, then-mayor of a small municipality in Florida, issued a proclamation banning Satan from her town. But as fact-checkers at Snopes reported in 2004, the Florida court case detailed in the Facebook post is a work of fiction. The post provides no defining details that could be used to locate the case. No name is given for the plaintiff or the judge presiding over the supposed case, nor is a date range for the story provided. It’s also unclear what the plaintiff would be attempting to accomplish by filing the lawsuit. Federal holidays can only be recognized by the U.S. Congress, and there are several observances that are not tied to religion, like Independence Day and Labor Day. PolitiFact found no coverage by Florida newspapers of the event. But we did find that the facetious story has appeared on the internet numerous times in the past, dating back to at least 2001. We rate this recycled hoax Pants on Fir

A video shows crowds shouting profanity at Joe Biden Some social media users are sharing a video that they claim President Joe Biden doesn’t want on the internet. The video posted March 27 on Facebook is a compilation of clips from three Biden speeches and it claims to show him being heckled by the crowds. In the last two clips, chants of "f--- Joe Biden!" can be heard. But looks — and sounds — can be deceiving. 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.) We found the original videos after identifying key details and quotes from each of the three clips and searching the information on Google. The clips that purportedly show people shouting profanity at Biden do not depict real events; they were manipulated. In the first clip, the sign on Biden’s lectern shows that Biden was speaking in Texas. He was decrying comments then-President Donald Trump made about Mexican immigrants when the person filming the video cut him off: "That’s a lie, Joe! … And it was your son in the Ukraine." The audience begins to boo and chant. A 2019 news report about the incident from radio station KTSA said the audience booed at the man who cut off Biden, and chanted, "We want Joe!" 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 Facebook video of Joe Biden's 2019 campaign speech in San Antonio, Texas. In the second clip, a sign on the lectern shows Biden speaking in Iowa. It gives the impression that Biden paused his speech as the crowd chanted "f--- Joe Biden," and then said: "I tell you what, man…" We found an article with more context on that video. Biden was speaking in North Liberty, Iowa, during the 2020 Iowa caucus when a heckler stood up and walked out of the room, telling Biden that he could be the "Hillary of 2020." The crowd chanted "Let’s Go Joe," and then Biden began to speak. No f-bombs were thrown. Bloomberg reported that the heckler, along with another man who interrupted Biden at the Iowa event, were part of a comedy duo called The Good Liars. Iowa voter: “I think you could be the Hillary of 2020…”Biden: “I thought they were exaggerating when they said that the Republicans said they were sending out 80 people to participate in the Democratic caucus here… By the way, give us back your ‘Joe’ shirt!” #IowaCaucus pic.twitter.com/AgKMlnXSl7— Bloomberg Quicktake (@Quicktake) February 1, 2020 The last clip in the Facebook post shows Biden speaking at a July 2021 rally for former gubernatorial candidate Terry McAuliffe of Virginia. "F--- Joe Biden" is heard as Biden tries to quiet the crowd, saying "No, no no, let him talk…" A Google search proves that the audio in this video was also faked. Biden was in the middle of talking about conservative leaders’ response to COVID-19 when people began shouting "Stop Line 3," a protest against a pipeline project in Minnesota. The rest of the crowd began to shout "let’s go, Joe" among other chants. Biden tried to quiet them down. Legitimate video from the event does not show the crowd yelling "f--- Joe Biden." Viewers can watch the exchange for themselves in a C-SPAN video, starting at the 22-minute mark. The original videos prove that crowds weren’t cursing at Biden in these speeches. We rate this claim False. RELATED ARTICLE: ‘Cheap fakes’: Viral videos keep clipping Biden’s words out of context RELATED VIDEO:

“Gas prices have been going up since the president’s first day in office, starting with his move to shut down the Keystone XL pipeline. Americans have shared plenty of complaints about gas price increases and U.S. Sen. Joni Ernst is among them. Ernst, R-Iowa, opened a March 19 newsletter email blast claiming gas prices have continued to rise since President Joe Biden’s first day in office back in January 2021: "President Biden wants Iowans and Americans to believe that skyrocketing prices at the pump are all Vladimir Putin’s fault — but gas prices have been going up since the president’s first day in office, starting with his move to shut down the Keystone XL pipeline." U.S. gas prices have risen under Biden, data shows, but Ernst’s claim suggests that Biden’s policies and his action on Keystone were a driving factor. Yet, gas prices already were on the rise before he took office, due, energy analysts say, to a change in demand following the easing of pandemic restrictions. Meanwhile, the sharpest increases at the pump have come since the start of war in Ukraine. PolitiFact reported in December that there is no evidence that Biden’s canceling of the Keystone XL oil pipeline caused an increase in U.S. gas prices. The Pew Research Center found in spring 2020 that the COVID-19 pandemic dropped the average retail gas price by 27% from late February to late April. Gasoline demand was down considerably during many stages of the pandemic. As people returned to more normal daily activities demand — and prices —went up. In an email to PolitiFact Iowa, Ernst spokesperson Brendan Conley wrote that regular gas was priced at $2.36 per gallon during Biden’s first day in office. During the fourth week of March 2022, the prices were $4.24, Conley wrote. Conley wrote that Ernst used U.S. Energy Information Administration data to back her claim. "As the senator was pointing out in the newsletter, the increase in gas prices was happening well before Russia’s invasion of Ukraine," he wrote. That’s accurate as far as it goes, but it ignores that the data from the Energy Information Administration shows an increasing trend since April 2020, when gas prices dipped to a low of $1.77 per gallon. That was nine months before Biden took office. West Texas Intermediate grade crude oil reflects a similar trend, with prices increasing from $16.94 per barrel on April 19, 2020, to $110.94 on March 20, 2022. These costs are paid before the oil is refined into gasoline. 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 While the cost has dipped slightly at certain times — including in November 2020 and August and November 2021 — the overall trends have been up. In the past year, the low price per crude oil barrel has been $57.63. The high reached $130.50. AAA found that March 11 was the highest recorded average retail price for gas in the U.S., at $4.33 per gallon of regular unleaded fuel. Diesel reached $5.14 at its peak on March 12. Iowa’s average cost per gallon was $3.88 on March 24, according to AAA. The state had the seventh lowest average gasoline cost then, the association said. On July 14, 2008, gas reached its most recent peak prior to 2022 at $4.11, Energy Information Administration data show. PolitiFact previously reported a broad expert consensus that gas prices are not high as a result of of any U.S. shutdown of oil production under the Biden administration. Oil production is on par with production levels during former President Donald Trump’s term. PolitiFact also has reported that claiming the most recent, and most severe,spike in gas prices is largely due to Putin and the Russia-Ukraine conflict. Our ruling Ernst said that "gas prices have been going up since the president’s first day in office, starting with his move to shut down the Keystone XL pipeline." She has a point that gas prices, as well as crude oil prices, have been on an upward trajectory for essentially all of Biden’s tenure. However, she ignores that prices started to rise when Trump was president, which experts say stemmed from increased demand for fuel after COVID restrictions eased. Gas prices did not simply turn upward on a dime after Biden took office or after he canceled the Keystone XL pipeline. We rate the statement Half True

"JUST IN: The Vatican has invited Chelsea Clinton, Dr. Fauci, New Age figure Deepak Chopra and the CEOs of Moderna and Pfizer to speak at a May conference focusing on 'health' and the 'soul.' A social media post announces an upcoming conference hosted by the Vatican with what seem to be surprising details. The March 27 post on Facebook says, "JUST IN: The Vatican has invited Chelsea Clinton, Dr. Fauci, New Age figure Deepak Chopra and the CEOs of Moderna and Pfizer to speak at a May conference focusing on 'health' and the 'soul.'" It’s a screenshot of a tweet that also says, "Was Satan unavailable?" 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 Instagram posts stated on October 29, 2022 in Instagram post Photo shows Stanford scientists' "3D model of how Joseph, the husband of Mary the Mother of Jesus Christ, might have looked.” By Michael Majchrowicz • November 4, 2022 In this case, the Vatican did call a meeting that involved these people — but it’s not breaking news. The conference happened in May 2021 after being postponed a year due to the COVID-19 pandemic. The event featured a long list of dignitaries and did include as speakers Clinton, Fauci, Chopra and the chief executives of Moderna and Pfizer. Others included Dr. Francis Collins of the National Institutes of Health; primatologist Jane Goodall; Princess Dina Mired of Jordan; soprano Renee Fleming; lead guitarist for Aerosmith Joe Perry; former professional football player Brandon Marshall; and supermodel Cindy Crawford. The Associated Press called it "a unique Vatican conference on COVID-19, other global health threats and how science, solidarity and spirituality can address them." It also featured rabbis, cardinals, imams and representatives of Christian denominations, the AP reported. The statement is partially accurate but leaves out important details or takes things out of context. We rate it Half Tru

“The Space Foundation has erased the honors previously bestowed on Yuri Gagarin, the first man to ever be in space. His name was stripped ‘in light of current events.’ In 1961, Soviet Union pilot and cosmonaut Yuri Gagarin made history when he became the first person in the world to travel to space. Now, Gagarin’s name has been thrust back in the spotlight as social media posts claim that he was "stripped" of his honors due to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. "The Space Foundation has stripped honours from Russian cosmonaut Yuri Gagarin, the first man to ever be in space," read the caption of a Facebook post shared by the Post Millennial, a conservative Canadian online magazine. The post features an article that talks about how Gagarin’s name was removed from a fundraiser event hosted by the foundation. "The Space Foundation has erased the honors previously bestowed on Yuri Gagarin, the first man to ever be in space. His name was stripped ‘in light of current events.’ The Foundation’s annual ‘Yuri’s Night’ was replaced with ‘A Celebration of Space: What’s Next?’" another Facebook post said. The posts were flagged as part of Facebook’s efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about our partnership with Facebook.) The Space Foundation, a nonprofit space advocacy organization based in Colorado Springs, Colorado, did remove Gagarin’s name from the annual event amid the war in Ukraine. The organization did not, however, rescind any honors or awards from Gagarin, and he will still be mentioned in the event’s programming. The fundraiser, slated to take place on April 3 to kick off the 37th Annual Space Symposium, was originally named "Yuri’s Night" but was changed to "A Celebration of Space: Discover What's Next" in early March 2022. The organization said it decided to change the event’s name "in light of current events," according to an archived version of the symposium’s agenda. Rich Cooper, a spokesperson for the foundation, told PolitiFact that Gagarin will still be honored at the event and that the foundation hasn’t revoked any formal honors from the cosmonaut. 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 has been a disinformation campaign as (the) Space Foundation has not stripped Yuri Gagarin of any honors," Cooper wrote in an email. "Yuri Gagarin will still be recognized and celebrated at our April 3 program … alongside a number of other notable space achievements and current happenings." The organization deleted the agenda note and released a full statement about the change on March 19, saying that it started to receive negative social media comments about Russia shortly after it began posting notices about the event in late February, then still called "Yuri’s Night." "Wanting to ensure the focus of the evening remained on our goals — the kickoff of the 10th anniversary of Space Foundation Discovery Center and raising funds for our education programs — we made the decision to change the name to ‘A Celebration of Space: Discover What’s Next’," the statement said, adding that the event will highlight Yuri’s flight, the anniversary of the Space Shuttle, and other space milestones. The derogatory online comments prompted the organization to pause its advertising for the program and discuss how to address the situation. "Not wanting to have any of our social media pages be a platform for hate or anger, and to keep the focus on our event and its goals, we made the decision to change the name," Cooper said. The foundation also hasn’t altered any exhibits related to Gagarin, including a bust of the cosmonaut displayed in its gallery. Our ruling A Facebook post claims, "the Space Foundation has erased the honors previously bestowed on Yuri Gagarin, the first man to ever be in space. His name was stripped ‘in light of current events.’" This is misleading. The Space Foundation removed Gagarin’s name from an event after it received derogatory and anti-Russian comments on its social media accounts due to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. But the organization did not revoke any formal honors from the cosmonaut. Gagarin’s exhibits are still on display at the foundation and his accomplishments will still be celebrated at the event. The post contains an element of truth but ignores critical facts that would give a different impression. We rate it Mostly Fals

“Pat McCrory appointed the ‘Republican’ judge who sided with Democrats in the partisan Democrat lawsuit/power-grab over redistricting. Former North Carolina Gov. Pat McCrory may be Republican, but he indirectly helped Democrats in a recent North Carolina redistricting case, according to one of his political opponents. McCrory is one of several Republicans hoping to replace Republican Sen. Richard Burr when he retires at the end of his term this year. McCrory tweeted on March 21 that, if elected to the Senate, he would reject any "radical activist" judicial nominee to the U.S. Supreme Court. His comments came the same day U.S. senators began confirmation hearings for Supreme Court nominee Ketanji Brown Jackson.. McCrory’s tweet evoked a response from one of his Republican challengers, U.S. Rep. Ted Budd. "He’s hoping NC Republicans will forget that when he was Governor, [McCrory] appointed the ‘Republican’ judge who sided with Democrats in the partisan Democrat lawsuit/power-grab over redistricting," Budd tweeted. The tweet refers to the legal drama over North Carolina’s voting lines. State legislators drew new congressional and legislative districts last year, as required by law. Voting rights groups then sued legislative leaders, claiming they gerrymandered the maps to give the Republican Party an unconstitutional advantage. State courts ultimately approved maps with more districts that were more favorable to the Democratic Party than previous iterations of the maps. So is it true that McCrory appointed a Republican who sided with liberal plaintiffs in the case? It’s true that McCrory appointed one of the Republican judges involved in the case. However, Budd’s tweet omits a lot of context and could mislead readers who are not well versed in the court system’s structure. And while the McCrory-appointed judge played a role in the maps that were ultimately enacted, he was not part of the state Supreme Court contingent that struck down the maps that were initially challenged. Timeline Let’s review the major decisions that happened as the redistricting case worked its way through the courts. Superior Court: A three-judge panel of two Republicans and a Democrat decided in favor of Republican legislators, ruling on Jan. 11 that they hadn’t violated state law by drawing election districts that offered their party a partisan advantage. The panel included two Republicans, including A. Graham Shirley, who was appointed by McCrory in 2015. Judges in North Carolina are typically elected, but seats can be filled if a vacancy arises. McCrory appointed Shirley to fill the vacancy left by retiring Judge Howard Manning Jr., according to The News & Observer. The panel’s ruling was appealed. Featured Fact-check Senate Leadership Fund stated on October 11, 2022 in a political ad Cheri Beasley “backs tax hikes — even on families making under $75,000.” By Paul Specht • October 31, 2022 North Carolina Supreme Court: The Democratic-majority high court ruled 4-3 on Feb. 4 to overturn the lower-court’s decision, ordering Republican legislators to redraw new districts because, in the majority’s view, they violated state law during last year’s mapmaking process. No Republicans voted in the majority. The ruling placed the three Superior Court judges in charge of reviewing the new map proposals. New voting maps enacted: This is where Budd’s claim comes in. After Republican legislators redrew both the legislative and congressional maps, the Superior Court panel accepted the revised legislative districts but rejected the Republicans’ proposed congressional map. Instead, the lower court judges recommended congressional maps drawn by independent redistricting experts. The state Supreme Court signed-off on both plans. Budd’s tweet describes Shirley’s involvement in a way that could give readers the wrong impression about his level of influence in the case. The tweet says McCrory appointed "the" Republican judge who sided with Democrats. The Superior Court’s decision to use the consultants’ congressional map, instead of the Republican proposal, was unanimous — and Shirley wasn’t the only Republican on the panel. Judge Nathaniel Poovey is also a Republican. Budd’s campaign stood by Budd’s tweet. "This unanimous decision handed over two, or possibly more, congressional seats to Democrats," Budd spokesman Jonathan Felts said. "Governor McCrory is making a big production of what he says he would do if elected to the U.S. Senate as it relates to judges, so let’s see … how those McCrory appointments are working out for conservatives in North Carolina." After McCrory appointed Shirley in 2015, Shirley the next year ran unopposed to retain the seat and was elected. U.S. Supreme Court: Republican legislators have asked the U.S. Supreme Court to get involved in the state’s redistricting case. The high court, which has a conservative majority, already voted 6-3 to reject Republican legislators’ request to halt the congressional maps drawn by consultants. Republican legislators are now petitioning the court to review the state Supreme Court’s actions to see if it violated the U.S. Constitution. Our ruling Budd said McCrory appointed "the Republican judge who sided with Democrats in the partisan Democrat lawsuit/power-grab over redistricting." Budd accurately points out that McCrory appointed one of the Superior Court judges involved in a recent redistricting case, and that the judge signed off on congressional districts that are expected to elect more Democrats than previous maps would have. However, Budd’s tweet excludes so many key details that it could give readers an inaccurate impression about the case and McCrory’s appointee. When the redistricting case came before the Superior Court panel that included Shirley, he ruled with his colleagues that the process that led to the GOP-drawn maps didn’t violate the state constitution. In other words, he ruled in favor of Republican legislators. After the state’s highest court ordered legislators to redraw election maps—and for the Superior Court panel to rule on those maps—Shirley rejected one of the Republicans’ redrawn maps. But he wasn’t the only Republican judge to do so—and he didn’t cast a deciding vote. Finally, Budd’s tweet omits the fact that Shirley is currently serving at the will of North Carolina voters. He won an election in 2016, after McCrory appointed him. Budd’s tweet has an element of truth. But it leaves out a lot of context and could give people the wrong impression about how the case played out. We rate it Mostly Fals

“New York state has already lost 99% of its historic freshwater wetlands. New York state Sen. Sean M. Ryan, who represents a district that runs north and south of Buffalo, recently wrote an op-ed that urged increasing conservation protections for wetlands. "New York's wetlands are important to nearly every living being in our state," Ryan wrote in the op-ed, which originally appeared on March 3 on the website of the conservation group Ducks Unlimited. "They provide critical habitat for species like ducks, deer, and turkeys – and you may already know that they are home to nearly half of the threatened and endangered species in the state." Ryan added that other benefits of wetlands range "from absorbing flooding and storm surge, to filtering water of pollutants and acting as one of the most effective carbon sinks," which helps mitigate climate change. In the op-ed, Ryan outlined the scope of wetland losses in recent decades. "Despite all of these benefits, our wetlands are constantly under threat," Ryan wrote in the op-ed. "New York state has already lost 99% of its historic freshwater wetlands." The 99% figure seemed high, so we checked with Ryan’s office. Cody Meyers, Ryan’s chief of staff, acknowledged to PolitiFact New York that the figure was mistaken. Meyers said the 99% figure referred to the percentage of wetland habitat losses since 1600 in New York City, rather than New York state. After we contacted Ryan’s office about the percentage, they changed the figure in the op-ed to 60%, where it remains. But what about the 60% figure? Is it accurate? The figure stems from a 1991 report titled, "Wetlands: Status and Trends in the Coterminous United States, Mid-1970s to Mid-1980s." The report was co-authored by two specialists with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, a federal agency. The report determined that New York state had lost 60% of its wetlands by the end of the 1980s. It was one of 22 states that had lost at least half of their wetlands by then, the report said. The 60% figure also appears in another federal report from 1990, "Wetlands: Losses in the United States, 1780s to 1980s." However, these reports are more than 30 years old. In fact, in his op-ed, Ryan acknowledges the difficulty of using old data: He writes that one of the shortcomings with current state wetlands law is that it only protects wetlands "12.4 acres and larger that appear on a set of jurisdictional maps. These maps were created in the 1970s and 1980s with outdated technology, leading to nearly 1 million acres of wetlands lacking any state-level protection." 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 So we checked with independent experts to see if any more recent data existed. Tom Langen, a professor of biology at Clarkson University, told PolitiFact New York that he wasn’t aware of any comprehensive studies in the last two decades. One study published in 2000, "Wetlands Status and Trend Analysis of New York State Mid-1980’s to Mid-1990’s," found a net gain of 17,619 acres of wetlands from the mid-1980s to the mid-1990s in five geographic zones in New York state. The gains were largely due to farmland abandonment, beaver proliferation, and restoration efforts. However, these increases accounted for less than 1% of the state’s existing wetlands acreage, They also didn’t encompass the entire state, making it hard to draw broader conclusions. Overall, Langen said, he’s doubtful that there’s been a substantial change from the 60% figure. Nicholas A. Robinson, an emeritus professor of law at Pace University who specializes in environmental law, agreed that it’s unlikely that there’s been a significant change in wetland cover since the studies in the early 1990s, and that 60% is likely still a safe figure to use. The scale of historical losses is so significant, Robinson said, that "measures are needed to curb that rate of loss." Our ruling Ryan said, "New York State has already lost 99% of its historic freshwater wetlands." New York state has not lost 99% of its wetlands. Ryan’s office acknowledged that they had mistakenly used the figure for New York City, and they changed the figure to 60% after we inquired. The 60% figure dates back to federal studies published in the early 1990s. That means their data is more than 30 years old. However, the limited studies that have been conducted since then have found only modest changes in wetland cover, and several experts said they do not expect that the percentage of wetland loss has changed dramatically during the past three decades. We rate the original 99% figure Mostly False. CLARIFICATION, March 30, 2022: The version of the op-ed that was published in Ducks Unlimited always included the 60% figure. Only the version published on Ryan’s Senate site initially used the 99% figure, according to his office. Our rating remains unchanged

The 2021 Georgia Senate runoff and the 2020 presidential election “were stolen. Days after Sen. David Perdue, R-Ga., lost his race against Jon Ossoff in January 2021, he conceded. But now as the Trump-backed candidate in the governor’s race, Perdue has a different account of what happened in his own race. "Most people in Georgia know that something untoward happened in November 2020," David Perdue told conservative radio host Brian Pritchard March 25. "I’ll just say it, Brian. In my election and the president’s election, they were stolen. The evidence is compelling now." What was his "compelling" evidence? Perdue suggested that a judge found merit in a case filed by plaintiffs seeking to inspect ballots in Fulton County, a Democratic stronghold. But the case, filed after the presidential election, was ultimately dismissed by the judge. In his primary battle against Republican Gov. Brian Kemp, Perdue is running on a campaign of echoing Trump’s falsehoods about the 2020 election. The Republican winner will face off May 24 and the winner will face Democrat Stacey Abrams. Perdue said the evidence is "compelling" of stolen elections. It isn’t. It would involve an improbable massive felonious conspiracy for multiple election officials to break the law and steal an election on behalf of a candidate. The argument also fails to explain how a scheme to elect Biden and Ossoff would allow Republicans to win House seats, including Andrew Clyde and Marjorie Taylor Greene. We contacted a spokesperson for the Perdue campaign to ask for his evidence that the presidential and Senate runoffs were stolen and did not get a response. The presidential election was not stolen The presidential election in Georgia, where Biden won by about 12,000 votes, was not stolen. Democrats had been making inroads in recent years in Georgia, a state with an increasingly diverse electorate. Trump, who had to defend his record amid a pandemic, lost. Courts rejected lawsuits filed on Trump’s behalf, including the U.S. Supreme Court which declined to review a case that alleged Georgia and other states exploited the pandemic to make election procedure changes. The presidential election was counted three times by Georgia, and the results each time showed that Biden won. Republican statewide election officials said that they found no evidence of systematic voter fraud. State officials certified the results on Nov. 20, 2020. When the state’s top elections official, Brad Raffensperger, certified the results, he said that "numbers don’t lie." "As secretary of state, I believe that the numbers that we have presented today are correct. The numbers reflect the verdict of the people, not a decision by the secretary of state's office or of courts or of either campaign." Evidence of fraud in Georgia is so isolated that it would not have changed the outcome of the election. The AP found that officials in 24 Georgia counties identified 64 potential voter fraud cases, representing 0.54% of Biden’s margin of victory. Of those, about half were determined to be an administrative error or mistake. The AP found similarly small numbers of potential fraud cases in other battleground states. The state elections board in Georgia referred 35 cases to prosecutors in February 2021, including four to the attorney general. Of those four, three were settled administratively and one remains pending. Some allegations remain under investigation. In Georgia, it is illegal to collect and submit multiple mail ballots. True the Vote, a conservative group, has alleged ballot harvesting. Last year, the Georgia Bureau of Investigation said there wasn’t enough evidence to proceed on the allegation, but the group has since said it has a witness. It has yet to reveal who that is.The State Election Board voted March 16 to issue subpoenas to the group, to obtain the name of their witness. The U.S. Senate runoff was not stolen In the Jan. 5, 2021, Senate runoff race, Democrat Jon Ossoff won about 50.6% of the vote while Perdue won 49.4%. (Democrat Raphael Warnock also beat Republican Kelly Loeffler.) 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 Perdue conceded three days later. "I want to congratulate the Democratic Party and my opponent for this runoff win," he said. The runoff was not within the 0.5% threshold to merit a statewide recount. On Jan. 19, 2021, Raffensperger certified the results, affirming that the returns "are a true and correct tabulation of the certified returns received by this office from each county." Kemp also had to sign off on the certification. Analyses by reporters at the Atlanta Journal-Constitution and by Georgia Public Radio found that Ossoff beat Perdue with strong turnout among Black voters. Ossoff ran TV ads showing how the COVID-19 pandemic disproportionately hurt Black Americans and showing his support for racial justice protests. Lawsuit seeking ballot inspection in Fulton was dismissed The only evidence Perdue cited during the radio interview pertained to a court case filed after the presidential election. The lawsuit does not prove that the election was stolen. Garland Favorito, a longtime critic of Georgia’s election infrastructure, filed a motion in December 2020 claiming fraudulent mail ballots had been counted in Fulton County. Favorito sought to inspect the ballots. Henry County Superior Court Judge Brian Amero issued an order May 21 to unseal the ballots but he later dismissed the case saying that the voters who filed the case lacked standing. State officials investigated the lawsuit’s allegations of counterfeit ballots and found they lacked evidence. That’s not to say the elections in Fulton County were smooth. A consultant in 2021 found that Fulton County elections had "myriad problems" with the processing of absentee ballots, such as failing to sufficiently protect rejected ballots in the mail room. But the consultant found no "dishonesty, fraud, or intentional malfeasance." Perdue filed a case in December similar to the dismissed lawsuit seeking to inspect the ballots. The case remains pending. Republicans seeking inspections of ballots in Democratic or battleground jurisdictions has become part of the strategy of Trump allies who make allegations of voter fraud. While such quests for ballot reviews have not changed any outcomes, they have added fuel to the efforts by state Republican lawmakers to pass new restrictive voting laws. Our ruling Perdue says his 2021 Georgia Senate runoff and the 2020 presidential election "were stolen." Perdue lacks evidence that either contest was stolen. He is mimicking the evidence-free claims by Trump and his allies about the presidential election, and now extending them to his own loss even though he conceded last year. Courts have rejected lawsuits alleging election wrongdoing and state election officials in Georgia — Republicans — said the presidential election was secure. State officials for both contests certified the results which showed that Biden beat Trump and that Perdue lost to Ossoff. The elections of 2020 and January 2021 in Georgia are over, and they were not stolen — they were won by Democrats. We rate this statement Pants on Fire. RELATED: The facts of a fair US election have only gotten stronger since Capitol attack RELATED: Tucker Carlson spins web of misleading claims as he alleges ‘meaningful voter fraud’ in Georgia RELATED: Ohio’s Josh Mandel repeats false claim of stolen 2020 election RELATED: Fact-checks about Georg

“Amy Coney Barrett overturned a $6.7M verdict after a prison guard repeatedly raped a 19-year-old inmate who was 8 months pregnant. Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson’s record on the sentencing of sex offenders became the target of Republican criticism during her U.S. Supreme Court confirmation hearings late March. In light of that, a Facebook post said Republicans should be reminded of an old ruling by Justice Amy Coney Barrett, who was confirmed to the Supreme Court in 2020 during the Trump administration. "Don’t EVER let Republicans who are attacking Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson forget this…," began a March 24 Facebook post. "Amy Coney Barrett overturned a $6.7M verdict after a prison guard repeatedly raped a 19-year-old inmate who was 8 months pregnant. 4 days after she gave birth, the guard demanded oral sex. Amy Coney Barrett reversed the lower court’s decision to award the victim money." 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 refers to a 2018 ruling by the U.S. Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals. Coney Barrett served on that court at the time, before becoming a Supreme Court justice. But the post leaves out some key context. Barrett, who was one of a three-judge panel, was not ruling on the $6.7 million jury award itself, but rather whether a Wisconsin county was liable to pay the damages. The award itself was not overturned, as the Facebook post implies, but the panel’s decision likely means the plaintiff will never see the money. Milwaukee County case Xavier Thicklen, a prison guard at the Milwaukee County Jail, was charged in 2014 with five counts of second degree sexual assault of a pregnant 19-year-old inmate. He denied those allegations and eventually pleaded guilty in 2014 to a lesser charge of misconduct in office, the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel reported. The woman who accused Thicklen won a civil lawsuit against the guard and Milwaukee County in the matter and in 2017 was awarded $6.7 million in damages, to be paid by the county under Wisconsin’s indemnification law, according to various news reports. 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 Milwaukee County appealed the verdict and the case was heard by Barrett’s court in Chicago. The three-judge panel unanimously ruled that the county was not liable for the damages. Under Wisconsin’s indemnification law, local governments are required to cover damages incurred while employees are acting within the scope of their jobs. But the court found the guard’s alleged actions were outside of his job duties and contrary to his training by the jail, so the law didn’t apply. The judgment against Thicklen, who was not party to the appeal, still stands, though the court seemed to acknowledge the plaintiff would likely not collect the award. "We have sympathy," for the plaintiff, the judges wrote, "who loses perhaps her best chance to collect the judgment." But Wisconsin law "does not make public employers absolute insurers against all wrongs," the decision said. In a similar case before the appeals court in 2020, Barrett sided with the majority, finding that a different Wisconsin county, Polk, was responsible for damages because the jail didn’t properly supervise or train a guard convicted of rape. Our ruling A Facebook post claims that Barrett, while serving on an appeals court, reversed a decision to award $6.7 million in damages to a pregnant inmate raped by a jail guard in Wisconsin. The claim leaves out the context that Barrett didn’t make the decision alone; it was the unanimous decision of a three-judge panel. Also, the court was only ruling on whether Milwaukee County was liable to pay the damages, not the award amount itself. The court ruled the county was not responsible under Wisconsin’s indemnification law because the guard acted outside of his job duties and his training. The statement is partially accurate but leaves out important details. We rate it Half Tru

In 1975, then-U.S. Sen. Joe Biden opposed efforts by President Gerald Ford to aid South Vietnam and evacuate refugees Last summer, when President Joe Biden evacuated the remaining U.S. troops out of Afghanistan — ending the longest war in the country’s history — many felt it paralleled President Gerald Ford’s exit from Vietnam. More recently, Biden’s stance on the Vietnam War when he was a senator has been circulating on social media. A March 8 Facebook post claimed that in 1975, then-U.S. Sen. Biden opposed efforts by President Ford to aid South Vietnam and evacuate refugees. "President Ford went to Congress for a relief package to allow American personnel and our allies to evacuate. However, there was ONE US SENATOR who opposed any such support," the post claimed. "THAT SENATOR WAS JOE BIDEN." 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 Facebook post cites the source for this claim as the 2018 book, "When the Center Held: Gerald Ford and the Rescue of the American Presidency," written by Donald Rumsfeld, who served as Ford’s secretary of defense. In a chapter about the Vietnam War, Rumsfeld mentioned a meeting Ford had in April 1975 with members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, including Biden, about extending aid to South Vietnam. "Repeatedly, a number of Senate Democrats dissented, including the young outspoken Senator Joe Biden (D-DE). In the heat of the discussion, I detected a difference in the attitudes of some members of Congress toward the Vietnamese," Rumsfeld wrote in the book. However, Rumsfeld himself was not present at this meeting, according to a meeting transcript that does not name him among the participants. He did not become Ford’s defense secretary until November 1975. His second-hand recollection of the meeting also does not completely capture Biden’s stance on Ford’s efforts in Vietnam. During the meeting, Ford, Secretary of State Henry Kissinger, Secretary of Defense James Schlesinger and the group of senators discussed emergency funding to evacuate U.S. citizens and Vietnamese refugees and provide military aid to South Vietnam. Biden pushed back against tying funding for military aid and the continued deployment of U.S. troops with evacuating U.S. citizens and Vietnamese refugees. Biden felt evacuation should be the priority as the situation in Vietnam worsened. "We should focus on getting them out. Getting the Vietnamese out and military aid for the GVN (Government of South Vietnam) are totally different," Biden said at the meeting, according to a declassified transcript from the Ford Library Museum. 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 "I feel put upon in being presented an all-or-nothing number. I don’t want to have to vote to buy it all or not at all. I am not sure I can vote for an amount to put American troops in for one to six months to get the Vietnamese out. I will vote for any amount for getting the Americans out. I don’t want it mixed with getting the Vietnamese out," Biden also said during the meeting. A little over a week after this meeting, Biden voted against the Vietnam Contingency Act of 1975, which would have provided emergency funds for evacuation and aid in Vietnam. Along with Biden, 16 other senators from both parties opposed the measure, which passed in the Senate. (A majority of the House of Representatives voted against the final version of the bill, so it failed to become law.) In a speech on the Senate floor before the vote, Biden expressed concerns that the legislation would be used to fund military aid, rather than evacuate refugees. "There is no question in anybody’s mind … that the bill’s section 2, containing $100 million, labeled as a ‘contingency fund’ may not be, but clearly could be, used for military aid to the South Vietnamese government," he said. Biden argued that the contingency fund was not a "diplomatic channel" and could even further aggravate the situation between North and South Vietnam. Ford’s funding proposal received criticism from many members of Congress, not just Biden. "The pushback from Congress, and this was from the majority of Congress, especially the Democrats, was not about funding the evacuation, but rather it was a wish not to throw good money after bad in support of the Saigon regime that was clearly going down in defeat," said James Willbanks, a military adviser to the South Vietnamese in 1972 who has written several military history books on the Vietnam War. After Saigon fell to the North Vietnamese military at the end of April 1975, Biden did support a resolution welcoming the first 130,000 refugees from Vietnam, Cambodia and Laos to the U.S. Around the same time, Congress approved and Ford signed a separate measure authorizing funds to assist refugees from Vietnam and Cambodia. Biden was not present to vote on this bill, but did give it a "favorable recommendation." Our ruling A Facebook post claims that in 1975, then-U.S. Sen. Biden opposed efforts by Ford to aid South Vietnam and evacuate refugees. This claim is based on a second-hand account from Rumsfeld’s book that lacks context about Biden’s stance at the time. Biden stated at the time that his priority was evacuating U.S. citizens and Vietnamese refugees from South Vietnam. He expressed concerns over funding that could be used to provide military aid to South Vietnam, instead of evacuating U.S. citizens and Vietnamese refugees. We rate this claim Mostly Fals

Putin beheaded bioweapon engineers in Ukraine Russian President Vladimir Putin has captured countless headlines in connection with his nation’s violent attack on Ukraine. But at least one circulating on social media credits him with violent acts that appear to be fabricated. "Putin Beheads Bioweapon Engineers in Ukraine," read the March 23 headline on Real Raw News, a blog site known for promoting wild claims about politicians and the military. According to the story, Putin called former President Donald Trump and told him that he had "ordered the execution of 12 international bioweapon engineers whom Russian forces had captured in Kyiv and other Ukrainian cities." The blog, which cites an unnamed Mar-A-Lago source for its story, claims Trump responded approvingly to the executions, and said to Putin, "I think you have the right idea." The post was shared across Facebook, and 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.) 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 There are no reports of Putin ordering the beheading of bioweapon engineers in Ukraine, and Liz Harrington, spokeswoman for Trump, told PolitiFact the claim is false. There is no evidence of bioweapon laboratories in Ukraine. There are public health labs in the country that study a number of pathogens and viruses, and we’ve reported that these kinds of labs exist in almost every country. The labs in Ukraine have nothing to do with biological warfare, public health experts have told us. PolitiFact reported that Real Raw News has a history of publishing fabricated stories of politicians being arrested or executed by the military. There’s no evidence that Putin executed bioweapon engineers and called Trump to talk about it. We rate this Pants on Fir

Twitter suspended a swimmer for tweeting about Lia Thomas On March 20, a Twitter account posing as Virginia Tech swimmer Reka Gyorgy tweeted criticism of Lia Thomas, the first transgender woman to win an NCAA swimming tournament. "My finals spot was stolen by Lia Thomas, who is a biological male," the account @RekaGyorgy_ said. "Until we all refuse to compete nothing will change. Thanks for all the support retweets and follows I won’t stop fighting." PolitiFact previously debunked claims that the real Gyorgy tweeted this. But now, some people are claiming that Twitter suspended Gyorgy from using its platform. "The girl who lost her spot in the NCAA swimming championship just got suspended from Twitter for her post about Lia Thomas," reads a Facebook post with an image of the fake Twitter account’s handle and the words "Account suspended." 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 account that was suspended wasn’t Gyorgy’s — it was the imposter account pretending to be her. In fact, Gyorgy told PolitiFact that she doesn’t have a Twitter account. 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 Sergio Lopez Miro, the director and head coach of Virginia Tech’s swimming and diving team, also told PolitiFact the account was "fake" and didn’t belong to Gyorgy. The account also went by another name before changing to @RekaGyorgy_, Reuters and the Associated Press reported: @amanda191923. Gyorgy has complained about NCAA rules that allowed Thomas to compete against her and other swimmers "who are biologically female." In a March 20 letter to the NCAA, Gyorgy said: "Every event that transgender athletes competed in was one spot taken away from biological females throughout the meet." But the Twitter account that apparently expanded on this letter did not belong to Gyorgy, and it was not Gyorgy who was suspended from the platform. We rate this post False.

"David McCormick fired Pennsylvanians and bragged about shipping their jobs to Asia. The race for the GOP nomination for an open U.S. Senate seat in Pennsylvania has been marked by attacks exchanged between two of the leading Republicans, Dr. Mehmet Oz and Dave McCormick. Ads from Oz, the physician and talk show host, have targeted the business record of McCormick, who is the former chief executive of the Bridgewater Associates hedge fund. One Oz TV ad begins with the narrator saying: "David McCormick fired Pennsylvanians and bragged about shipping their jobs to Asia." At the same time, text on the screen says, "bragged about ‘helping companies to move work offshore’" and cites as its source an Oct. 12, 2005 Tribune Review article. The ad portrays McCormick as a Wall Street insider who "will sell us out." It includes a clip of Oz speaking at his own campaign event, saying that he, like former President Donald Trump, "came from outside politics." Similar claims about McCormick and outsourced jobs have also been featured in TV ads launched by the Oz campaign and by a super PAC supporting Oz. Oz’s campaign did not respond to our requests for information to back up the claim. The article cited in the ad does not prove Oz’s claim. The ad’s Tribune Review reference In 2003, a former Pittsburgh-based software company named FreeMarkets cut 50 Pittsburgh jobs, according to local news reports. McCormick was the company’s CEO at the time. A few weeks after the cuts, a local news report said McCormick announced that the company would open a facility in India employing more than 100 people. A company spokesperson said, according to the article, that the new center would not affect the employment at the Pittsburgh headquarters, which had about 650 people after the 50 layoffs. 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 A McCormick campaign spokesperson told PolitiFact: "Any jobs created in India or outside of the U.S. were completely separate of any decisions and organizational job layoffs in Pittsburgh." In the 2005 article cited in Oz’s ad, McCormick is not quoted about the company or the layoffs. That article was about McCormick’s appointment to a top Commerce Department post in President George W. Bush’s administration. The article made one reference to offshoring. "McCormick said his experience as a corporate CEO helping companies to move work offshore, and as a platoon leader in the Army during the first Gulf War, will serve him well in his new post," the article said. McCormick was the under secretary for export administration and headed the department’s Bureau of Industry and Security, which worked to advance U.S. national security, foreign policy and economic interests, according to a White House statement at the time. Pennsylvania race 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. The other major GOP candidates include conservative commentator Kathy Barnette, real estate developer Jeff Bartos and Carla Sands, who served as President Donald Trump's ambassador to Denmark. The major Democratic candidates include Lt. Gov. John Fetterman and U.S. Rep. Conor Lamb. The primaries are May 17. Overall, 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 An Oz campaign ad said McCormick "fired Pennsylvanians and bragged about shipping their jobs to Asia." In 2003, McCormick was the CEO of a Pittsburgh company that cut 50 jobs. That same year, the company announced plans to open a center in India. In a 2005 news article cited by Oz’s ad, McCormick does not mention the company or the job cuts. The article paraphrased him as saying that his work in "helping companies to move work offshore" and his military leadership service would help him in a new position with the U.S. Commerce Department. Oz’s ad contains an element of truth but ignores critical facts that would give a different impression. We rate it Mostly Fals

Ketanji Brown Jackson “believes in abortion on demand up to the moment of birth. Rep. Bob Good, R-Va., recently said Supreme Court nominee Ketanji Brown Jackson "detests the constitution" and essentially thinks there should be no restrictions on abortion. "Here’s someone…who believes in abortion on demand up to the moment of birth," Good said during a March 22 interview on the The John Frederick Show, a conservative broadcast. Good, a self-described "biblical conservative," represents Virginia’s 5th Congressional district spanning from Danville north past Charlottesville to Warrenton. A fact-check of Good's statement reveals he's invented a position for Jackson that she's never taken. The chief problem centers on his use of the phrase "abortion on demand." The landmark Roe v. Wade court ruling doesn’t grant the right to an abortion on demand up to the moment of birth. It basically protects the right until a fetus can survive outside the womb, often at the 23rd or 24th week of pregnancy. After that, states may ban abortions, but they must leave an exception if a doctor determines one is needed to protect the life or health of a mother. In other words, Roe and subsequent Supreme Court decisions upholding Roe did not establish an unfettered path to rare late-term abortions, let alone to "abortion on demand up to the moment of birth." Jackson’s record on abortion rights Jackson has "a scant record" on abortion and has "never ruled on an abortion case," according to the American Bar Association’s journal. Like many other judicial nominees, she won’t say whether she thinks Roe and other Supreme Court precedents were properly decided. "I have a duty to refrain from critiquing the law that governs my decisions," she said in 2021 when Roe came up in her confirmation hearings for a U.S. Court of Appeals judgeship. In this year’s hearings, Jackson has indicated that she’d be reluctant to tinker with Roe. She said Roe and other Supreme Court rulings affirming it are "settled law, " and "all precedents of the Supreme Court must be respected." Good’s argument We asked Good to back his claim that Jackson supports "abortion on demand up to the moment of birth." His office sent us four talking points. None of them offers an opinion or statement by Jackson on Roe nor shows a desire by her to allow unrestricted abortions until the moment of birth. Here are Good’s points: Jackson clerked for Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer in 2000 when he wrote the majority opinion in Stenberg v. Carhart. The court struck down a Nebraska law that banned "partial-birth" abortions because its penalties created an undue burden on a "woman’s right to choose." Also, the law did not have an exception for when a mother’s health was endangered. Good’s office wrote, "At no time has Judge Jackson repudiated that opinion as one she disagreed with." 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 As a private-practice lawyer in 2001, Jackson co-wrote an amicus brief supporting a successful defense by women’s groups of a Masachussetts law barring protestors from blocking the entrances of abortion clinics. Good’s office noted that one of the groups behind the suit was pro-abortion-rights NARAL and said Jackson’s brief advocated banning "pro-life Americans from exercising their free speech rights to protest." Jackson’s brief, however, specifically notes that the ban is content-neutral; its provisions apply to any protestors who block free entrance into clinics regardless of what they are protesting. "NARAL endorses Judge Jackson’s nomination to the Supreme Court," Good’s office noted. "In her testimony…(Jackson) affirmed her commitment to the right to an abortion as created by Roe v. Wade and refused to provide any opinion on what viability is or whether that ‘line’ could move based on medical science," Good’s office wrote. Jackson did decline to answer a question on moving the line, noting that a Mississippi case pending in the high court - which she might have to rule on - raises that issue. Our ruling In October 2020, PolitiFact gave a False rating to then-Vice President Mike Pence’s claim that Joe Biden and Kamala Harris support abortion "up to the moment of birth." The Democratic running mates hadn’t made that statement and said they supported Roe. Good goes beyond Pence’s claim. He says Jackson "believes in abortion on demand," which means all abortions sought - anytime in pregnancy - would be granted. Jackson has never said that. She’s never ruled on abortion rights. She won't say whether she thinks Roe v. Wade was properly decided. What she has said is that Roe and other Supreme Court rulings affirming it are "established law," and she will respect high court precedents in all of her decisions. Roe allows states to ban rare late-term abortions and "partial-birth abortions" if they provide exceptions when a doctor determines a mother’s life or health is endangered by her pregnancy. The most we know is that Jackson will respect that precedent. Good’s statement says, with no credible evidence, that Jackson wants to scuttle precedents allowing late-term bans. We rate Good’s statement Pants on Fire!

Photo shows Nicole Kidman reacting to Will Smith slapping Chris Rock An image of actress Nicole Kidman at the Academy Awards on March 27, with her mouth open and arms outstretched, is being shared on social media as an example of another celebrity reacting to actor Will Smith slapping comedian Chris Rock. "Nicole Kidman reacting to the Chris Rock and Will Smith incident at the #Oscars," a March 27 tweet said. "A NEW MEME IS BORN." We’ve already debunked a claim that photos in a grid showing actors and actresses apparently aghast were taken that night — they were taken in 2017, when "La La Land" was mistakenly announced as Best Picture, and its producers had to hand over their Oscars to the cast and crew of the real winner, "Moonlight." Unlike those shots, this one of Kidman was taken in 2022. But she wasn’t wide-eyed in that moment because of Smith. 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 9, 2022 in a Facebook post “Donald Trump is back on Twitter,” thanks to Elon Musk. By Sara Swann • October 10, 2022 The photo was taken by Los Angeles Times photographer Myung Chun. Vulture reported that it was posted to Getty Images hours before the altercation between Smith and Rock happened, during the untelevised first hour of the ceremony. Chun told Vulture that Kidman appeared to be excited to spot actress Jessica Chastain across the room when she reached out her arms and waved to her with both hands. "Shortly thereafter, Chastain walked over to greet Kidman and her husband Keith Urban," Chun told Vulture. We rate this post False.

Photos show celebrities reacting to Will Smith slapping Chris Rock A grid showing the shocked faces of 12 celebrities is being shared on social media with the claim it shows actors, actresses and directors reacting to Will Smith slapping comedian Chris Rock at the Academy Awards on March 27. But we did reverse image searches of the aghast faces and found that’s not the case. These posts were flagged as part of Facebook’s efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about our partnership with Facebook.) Featured Fact-check Instagram posts stated on October 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 grid of photos has been online since 2017, when "Moonlight" won Best Picture at the Oscars. But that night, "La La Land" was first wrongly named as the award’s winner and its producers were making their acceptance speeches when it was revealed that there had been a mistake — "Moonlight" was the actual winner. Actors including Matt Damon, The Rock, Busy Phillips, Meryl Streep, Salma Hayek and David Oyelowo were all reacting to the blunder. We rate these posts False.

Foo Fighters drummer Taylor Hawkins died from a COVID-19 vaccine Foo Fighters drummer Taylor Hawkins died in Bogota, Colombia, on March 25, before the band was scheduled to perform at a festival in the city that night. The Foo Fighters tweeted a statement mourning what it called a "tragic and untimely loss." No cause of death has been released, but at least one Facebook post claims without evidence that Hawkins, who was 50, died because of the COVID-19 vaccine. 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 post attempts to connect a New York Post article that said Hawkins’ heart weighed double the average for men of his age, and myocarditis — inflammation of the heart — which has been associated with COVID-19 vaccines in rare cases. We found no credible reports to support the claim that Hawkins died from the vaccine. 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 On March 26, the Bogota municipal government issued a statement that the city’s emergency center had received a report of a patient with "chest pain" and sent an ambulance, the Associated Press said. Health workers unsuccessfully tried to revive Hawkins. The Colombia attorney general’s office released a preliminary toxicology report that said medical examiners found evidence of 10 types of substances in Hawkins’ body, NPR reported, including opioids, benzodiazepines, and antidepressants. Hawkins had a history of drug use, and a 2001 heroin overdose left him in a coma, according to the Los Angeles Times. RELATED VIDEO Since COVID-19 vaccines became widely available in the United States, the deaths of high-profile people — Bob Saget and Betty White among them — have been falsely attributed to the vaccine, especially in between when a death is announced and before its cause is known. We don’t yet know why Hawkins died, but there’s so far nothing to support the claim that he died because of a COVID-19 vaccine. We rate this post False.

Will Smith slapped Chris Rock “to take attention away from Ukraine. On March 27, during a live broadcast of the Academy Awards, actor Will Smith slapped comedian Chris Rock. While some people have claimed that the moment was staged, others have gone a step further and connected it to global affairs. "will smith slapping chris rock was planned as a distraction to take the attention away from ukraine WAKE UP!!!!," one tweet said. But there’s no evidence to support this claim. Here’s what happened. Rock said that actors Javier Bardem and his wife Penelope Cruz were both nominated for Oscars, and joked that if she lost, Bardem couldn’t win. "He is praying that Will Smith wins, like ‘Please, lord!’" Rock said. Smith, who was nominated for Best Actor for his role in the movie "King Richard" laughed along. Then Rock turned his attention to Smith’s wife, actress Jada Pinkett Smith, who has alopecia, which causes hair loss. "Jada, I love you, ‘G.I. Jane 2,’ can’t wait to see it," he said, apparently referring to Pinkett Smith’s shaved head. (Starring in the 1997 production of "G.I. Jane," actress Demi Moore sported a shaved head.) Smith continued to laugh while Pinkett Smith’s smile faded and she rolled her eyes. Smith then strode on stage and slapped Rock in the face. "Wow, wow," Rock said, as Smith returned to his seat. "Will Smith just smacked the s--- out of me." 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 Smith then shouted angrily at Rock, "Keep my wife’s name out your f------ mouth!" "Wow, dude," Rock said. "It was a G.I. Jane joke." "Keep my wife’s name out your f------ mouth!" Smith shouted again, louder this time. Rock appeared uncharacteristically rattled and then proceeded to present the award for Best Documentary. When Smith later accepted the Oscar for Best Actor, he apologized to the Academy and to his fellow nominees, and through tears, said, "I am being called on in my life to love people, and to protect people, and to be a river to my people. I know to do what we do you got to be able to take abuse, you got to be able to have people talk crazy about you. In this business you got to have people disrespecting you, and you got to smile and you got to pretend like that’s okay." He compared himself to Richard Williams, who he portrayed in "King Richard," and said, "Love’ll make you do crazy things." He ended his acceptance speech laughing, and said, "I hope the Academy invites me back." The Los Angeles Police Department told reporters in a statement that it was aware "of an incident between two individuals during the Academy Awards" but that "the individual involved has declined to file a police report." The Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences initially tweeted that it "does not condone violence of any form" and later said it was conducting a formal review of Smith’s conduct. RELATED VIDEO "The Academy condemns the actions of Mr. Smith at last night’s show," the Academy said. "We have officially started a formal review around the incident and will explore further action and consequences in accordance with our Bylaws, Standards of Conduct and California law." The Los Angeles Times reported that the Academy also called an emergency meeting Monday morning to address the incident. While what happened between Rock and Smith at the Oscars drew widespread media attention, tweets, hot takes and texts between family and friends at a moment when Ukraine is fighting against a Russian invasion, claims that the incident was staged to detract from an overseas war are unfounded. We rate this claim False.

Gas prices are high “due to the Democrats’ war on fossil fuels. Across the country, gas prices are climbing to record-setting numbers, putting consumers in a bit of a pinch when it comes to their daily commute. As prices have crept up, politicians have been quick to point fingers. Republican U.S. Sen. Ron Johnson of Wisconsin, in a March 18, 2022 tweet about the burden the high prices were placing on truck drivers, blamed the "astronomical gas prices" on the "Democrats’ war on fossil fuels." But is that true? Have policies instituted by Democrats in recent years caused gas prices to skyrocket? Or is there another reason? Let’s take a look. Coronavirus, Russian invasion of Ukraine playing major role in prices When we reached out to Johnson’s office, aides sent a host of information about the senator’s claim, arguing that President Joe Biden’s policies regarding American oil production and transportation are to blame for the hike in prices. Alexa Henning, Johnson’s deputy chief of staff for communications, cited suspension of drilling and mining on Bureau of Land Management property, the cancellation of the Keystone XL pipeline and signing an executive order barring federal funding from being used to subsidize fossil fuels. So let’s take a look there first: Were gas prices forced upward because of policies like these, enacted by the Biden Administration? In short, no. Gas prices have been rising since the initial wave of the coronavirus hit the United States in early 2020. According to a March 9, 2022 piece from PolitiFact National, gas prices were the lowest in May 2020 at $1.87 per gallon, but since then have experienced upward growth. In January 2021, when Biden was inaugurated, gas prices were already at $2.33 per gallon, ahead of any policies put into place by the new administration. As of March 2022, prices were around $4 a gallon, on average, according to PolitiFact. Aside from that, the halt of the Keystone XL pipeline, which many Republicans have pointed to as a cause for rising prices, would have likely had a very miniscule impact on the global oil trade, said Gregory Nemet, a professor at the University of Wisconsin-Madison’s La Follette School of Public Affairs. "There are 95 million (barrels) per day of global oil production, and only 0.5 million barrels per day from the Keystone XL so it would have a very small effect, when it would come online," Nemet said in an email. What’s more, the action did not shut down any existing supply. The Keystone XL was not projected to be finished until the first quarter of 2023. 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 RELATED VIDEO window.gciAnalyticsUAID = 'PMJS-TEALIUM-COBRAND'; window.gciAnalyticsLoadEvents = false; window.gciAnalytics.view({ 'event-type': 'pageview', 'content-type': 'interactives', 'content-ssts-section': 'news', 'content-ssts-subsection': 'news:politics', 'content-ssts-topic': 'news:politics:politifactwisconsin', 'content-ssts-subtopic': ' news:politics:politifactwisconsin' }); But there have been other factors as well. One of the biggest: The coronavirus pandemic. According to a March 9, 2022 report from the New York Times, gas prices have risen largely in response to the ongoing impact of the coronavirus pandemic and the disruptions it caused to global supply and demand. The report notes that during the early months of the pandemic, when people were largely confined to their homes in hopes of limiting the spread of the virus, gas prices plummeted. There was more gasoline available than consumers looking to buy it. So producers of gasoline started decreasing output. As those restrictions have loosened and life has returned to normal, demand for gas has gone up, the report said, with demand now outpacing the limited supply of gas. Supply and demand are largely out of Biden’s control, but the administration hasn’t exactly been sending positive signals to the oil and gas industry by pushing for reduced emissions and other forms of cleaner energy, the Times report noted. But, as the Times article said, that stance has played only a "very, very small role in pushing gas prices up." Another factor linked to rising gas prices: The Russian invasion of Ukraine and the economy-choking sanctions placed upon Russia by the United States and other countries. According to the PolitiFact National report, Russian oil accounts for about 4% of America’s supply. Europe is far more reliant on Russia’s oil, and has far less ability to compensate to make up for the lack of oil it’s getting, forcing gas prices up. "In a global market, those price pressures will be felt in the U.S.," the PolitiFact report said. "If American producers can get a higher price on the global market, that’s where some of their production will go, raising prices back at home." In short, there are a lot of factors that influence the rising cost of oil and gasoline in the United States and abroad, but policies put into place by Democrats and the Biden Administration likely aren’t the root cause. "The bottom line is that these two global forces: economic recovery and disruption from Russia are what has made gasoline prices rise," Nemet said. "U.S. oil production has doubled the past 15 years and yet we still have these high prices. This to me is evidence that expanding supply in the U.S. can only have modest impacts for U.S. gasoline consumers." Our ruling Johnson claimed that the "astronomical gas prices" are "due to the Democrats’ war on fossil fuels." He noted, among other things, halting subsidies for oil companies, ending fossil fuel company drilling on public lands and ending the Keystone XL pipeline. Experts say those things could have had a small impact, but it’s more likely that the effect of the coronavirus pandemic on the supply and demand for oil, and Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and the subsequent sanctions are having a much larger impact. We rate this claim Mostly False, meaning the statement contains an element of truth, but ignores critical facts that would give a different impression. 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' });

CNN staged a fire in Edmonton, Canada, and claimed it was filmed in Ukraine CNN anchor Don Lemon has been reporting from Ukraine. In a clip that shows him wearing a helmet and standing in front of a fire following an air strike near Lviv, he talks about a fuel depot burning after what Ukrainian officials called a Russian attack. But some people watching the broadcast noticed the appearance of someone in the background wearing a jacket bearing the word "Edmonton," and pointed to that moment as evidence that what they were seeing was a hoax. "CNN=Fake News," one March 28 tweet said. "CNN makes a fire in Edmonton, Canada, resemble attacks in Lviv, Ukraine. However, the images clearly show firefighters' uniforms with ‘Edmonton’ written on their back. This is another example of why you shouldn’t trust the MSM." "Idk but this seem very odd. #donlemon in #ukraine ? What do you think?," a March 27 Facebook post said. "#cnnisfakenews." 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 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 If you search for terms like "Edmonton" and "firefighter" and "Ukraine," you’ll find not evidence of a staged disaster, but news stories about how a Canadian charity donated firefighting gear to Ukrainians. "Firefighter Aid Ukraine, an Edmonton organization providing critical firefighter gear to Ukraine for nearly a decade, believes the jacket is likely one of many donated to first responders," reported CTV News. In fact, Firefighter Aid Ukraine posted a screenshot of CNN’s coverage on Facebook on March 26 because it showed Ukrainian firefighters "near Lviv wearing gear donated by Edmonton firefighters." RELATED VIDEO An April 2019 Instagram post from the group shows piles of jackets bound for Ukraine. A 2018 post says: "Sharing more gear outside Lviv." The second photo in this post shows someone holding up a jacket that says "Edmonton" that resembles the one that appears in the CNN broadcast. We rate claims that this jacket is evidence that CNN staged the scene, or that Lemon isn’t in Ukraine, False.

The United Nations sent out an email instructing staff not to use the words “invasion” or “war’” when referring to Ukraine The United Nations is being criticized by some online who claim the organization told staff members that they couldn’t use the words "war" or "invasion" when discussing the conflict between Russia and Ukraine. "The United Nations has sent out an email instructing U.N. staff not to use the words ‘invasion’ or ‘war,’ when describing the big red flashes that are causing buildings to fall down with dead people inside them…" one March 17 Facebook post 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 online claims started after The Irish Times newspaper on March 8 reported that the U.N. had banned its staff from using "war" or "invasion" when referring to Ukraine. The publication soon revised its story, removing the word "ban" from its headline and first paragraph and instead wrote that the organization in an email had instead "advised" its staff to avoid the words. The U.N. confirmed to PolitiFact that the email cited is legitimate, but social media posts that claim the message represents official instructions need more context. A regional U.N. office did send out an email to staff members on March 7 instructing them to refrain from using "invasion" or "war" when describing Russia’s attack, but U.N. representatives later said the message went to a small number of people and doesn’t represent the organization’s official policy. They also pointed out instances of various U.N. leaders using the words on social media after the email was sent. On March 8, Naomi O’Leary, the reporter of the Irish Times story, shared screenshots of the email on Twitter. UN staff were instructed not to use "war" or "invasion" and to use "conflict" or "military offensive" instead, according to an internal email seen by the Irish Times.It comes as the Kremlin cracks down on the use of the same words within Russia https://t.co/o3tseMf6Mh pic.twitter.com/rylBseiKo8— Naomi O'Leary (@NaomiOhReally) March 8, 2022 The message, sent by an official with the U.N. Regional Information Center for Western Europe, gives staff "specific examples of language to use/not use at the moment," including choosing "conflict" and "military offensive" over "war" and "invasion." It also recommended that staff not add the Ukrainian flag to any official or personal social media accounts. A follow-up email sent a day later, which O’Leary also shared on Twitter, suggests that the instructions were reversed to allow use of the words. "Sharing today’s updated Ukraine messaging from the U.N. system. Please note the change from guidance sent by [the] U.N. system just yesterday (below) concerning key messaging language re: ‘conflict’ and/or ‘military offensive’ as today’s approved key messages now refer to ‘war’ and/or ‘invasion,’" the email says. 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 Shortly after the Irish Times story was published, Melissa Fleming, the U.N.’s under-secretary general for global communications, tweeted that no "official communication has gone out to global staff to refrain from using certain words." Fleming, as well as the official U.N. spokesperson account, pointed to a March 7 tweet by Rosemary DiCarlo, the organization’s under-secretary-general for political and peacebuilding affairs, in which she used both "invasion" and "war." Nearly two weeks on, it is painfully clear that those suffering the most after Russia's invasion of #Ukraine are civilians - killed, wounded, displaced. This war is senseless. We are ready to support all good-faith efforts at negotiation to end the bloodshed.— Rosemary A. DiCarlo (@DicarloRosemary) March 7, 2022 In a subsequent tweet, Fleming wrote that the email was sent by a "local office" without clearance and "does not represent the official position of the organization." O’Leary, the Irish Times reporter, obtained an earlier email from Feb. 25, one day after Russia launched its attack. This time it was from New York’s United Nations Development Programme. It said that U.N. Secretary General António Guterres had decided to use the phrase "military operations" in lieu of "invasion" or "incursion." Guterres’ preference does not extend to the word "war," which he has used several times to refer to the conflict in Ukraine. Stephane Dujarric, a spokesperson for Guterres, told PolitiFact that it was a "mistaken impression" that U.N. staff were told to avoid using certain words to describe the situation in Ukraine. He also pointed to DiCarlo’s tweet and others as evidence of top U.N. officials using the words. "It is simply not the case that there was some sort of global instruction to all U.N. staff not to use words like ‘war’ or ‘invasion’ to describe the situation," Dujarric said. He said that the March 7 email went out to about 25 people and he reiterated that it was "not an official edict" to staff around the world. Our ruling A Facebook post claims that the U.N. sent an email instructing staff not to use the words "invasion" or "war" when referring to Ukraine. The email is real and instructed some U.N. staff members not to use the terms. But it came from a regional U.N. office and officials say that it did not reflect the organization’s official policy. Top U.N. leaders have used the words on social media before and around the time the email was sent. For a statement that’s partially accurate but leaves out important details, we rate this Half Tru

“If you look at windmills” and the greenhouse gas emissions from building to retiring them, “the overall return is negative. Eli Bremer is one of seven Colorado Republicans vying to be the party’s nominee to face Democratic Sen. Michael Bennet in the midterm elections. Bremer, a former pentathlon Olympian, criticized Democrats’ emphasis on renewable energy, saying that it isn’t as green as Democrats make it out to be. "If you look at windmills, there’s a lot of greenhouse gas emission cost that we gloss over," Bremer said in a Fox News interview March 23. "We extract the raw materials from the ground, process them, assemble them, maintain them for the lifespan of the windmill, then we decommission them. Virtually every expert that I’ve talked to believes that the overall return is negative." Is it true that in terms of greenhouse gas emissions, the lifetime return on wind turbines is negative? We reached out to Bremer’s campaign to see what experts he relied on, and we didn’t hear back. But what he said runs counter to every major study of this issue. While Bremer was singling out windmills, the fact is that no matter what the fuel — natural gas, wind, solar, coal, etc. — you have to build whatever it is you’re going to use to generate electricity. "Industrial infrastructure requires energy inputs and in that way, windmills or power plants, or for that matter, football stadiums, are the same," said Carey King, assistant director at the University of Texas at Austin Energy Institute. The energy used in construction emits greenhouse gases. Once you’ve emitted those greenhouse gases, you can’t undo them. But that doesn’t mean all sources of electricity are equal. The key question, King said, is how does wind compare to other ways of making power? Unlike a plant powered by natural gas or coal, where you have to burn fuel and release more greenhouse gases every day to make electricity, a wind turbine requires a tiny amount of energy once it’s up. The longer it stays in service, the lower its lifetime carbon footprint per kilowatt hour, because the initial greenhouse gas emissions tied to construction (and end-of-life decommissioning) get spread out over more years and electrical output. There are two ways to look at the emissions of windmills, and we’ll consider both. There’s the energy payback time and lifetime carbon footprint. Energy payback time For decades, researchers have been assessing how long a windmill must generate power before it creates more energy than it took to build it. This work folds in all the steps that go into turning wind into electricity. Study after study has found that when all is said and done, a properly placed turbine nets out positive fairly quickly. A 2016 study from Danish engineers looked at onshore and offshore turbines and found that the "energy payback time" for all technologies was less than one year. A group of engineers in Texas did similar work and reported in 2016 that "the payback times for CO2 and energy consumption range from 6 to 14 and 6 to 17 months," with on-shore facilities having a shorter payback. The longest payback period we found came from a 2019 study from engineers at the University of Texas at Arlington who factored in the wind speeds from a working wind farm in Texas with 200 turbines. By their calculations, a turbine at that wind farm that lasts 20 years will reach a full energy payback in less than six years. They examined in detail the energy it took to move the turbine components from where they were made in Spain to the Lone Star Wind Farm near Abilene, Texas. They also measured the energy it took to get raw materials to the factories in Spain where manufacturing took place. The wind at the Lone Star Wind Farm varies and the researchers used that data to find the actual average wind speed through the year. Across all studies that compare the energy that goes into the wind power system to the energy it produces, whether it takes one year or six, a wind turbine lands in positive territory. 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 There’s not an exact mapping of energy inputs to greenhouse gas emissions. But "a faster energy payback period should translate into a lower carbon emissions per kilowatt hour," said King with the Energy Institute. Carbon footprint Another way to compare different sources of electricity is to look at how much carbon dioxide, and its equivalents, it takes to produce a certain amount of power — often measured in kilowatt hours. In 2021, natural gas and coal produced about two-thirds of America’s electricity. Wind accounted for about 9%, hydropower for about 6% and solar about 3%. !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"); In 2021, a team at the National Renewable Energy Laboratory reviewed the findings from about 350 studies of the carbon footprints of all major energy sources. The higher the grams of carbon dioxide equivalents per kilowatt hour, the greater the carbon footprint. Here’s what they found in terms of median grams of CO2 equivalents per kilowatt hour: Wind: 13 Nuclear: 13 Hydropower: 21 Solar: 43 Natural gas: 486 Coal: 1,001 !function(e,i,n,s){var t="InfogramEmbeds",d=e.getElementsByTagName("script")[0];if(window[t]&&window[t].initialized)window[t].process&&window[t].process();else if(!e.getElementById(n)){var o=e.createElement("script");o.async=1,o.id=n,o.src="https://e.infogram.com/js/dist/embed-loader-min.js",d.parentNode.insertBefore(o,d)}}(document,0,"infogram-async"); The high numbers for fossil fuels stem from the ongoing need to burn fuel to make power. A windmill emits about one fourtieth as much greenhouse gases as a natural gas-fired power plant. Our ruling Bremer said once you factor in the emissions that come from building and putting up a windmill, you end up with a net negative. This is not correct, based on the most comprehensive assessments that compare the carbon footprint of all sources of electricity across their lifetimes. Wind power comes out far ahead of fossil fuels like natural gas and coal, because it doesn’t require the constant release of greenhouse gases to produce electricity. It takes between one to six years for a wind turbine to produce more power than is used to build, install, maintain and retire it. In terms of carbon footprint, a wind turbine produces about 40 times less greenhouse gases than a natural gas-fired plant. We rate this claim Fals

Republicans “nominated the 1st Black woman to the SCOTUS & she was BLOCKED & filibustered by… Joe Biden. News reports have described Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson’s bid to the U.S. Supreme Court as "historic" because she is the first Black woman to be nominated to serve as a justice. But some social media posts are claiming that a Republican president was the first to take that step, not President Joe Biden, who announced on Feb. 25 that he had selected Jackson as his nominee to succeed retiring Justice Stephen Breyer. "Remember when the Republicans nominated the 1st Black woman to the SCOTUS & she was BLOCKED and filibustered by Joe Biden?" one March 25 Facebook post said. "FRAUD," read another post that has since been edited. "It was Republicans who nominated the 1st Black woman to the SCOTUS & she was BLOCKED & filibustered by… wait for it……Joe Biden. Media: Crickets." That post included a photo of Judge Janice Rogers Brown. 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.) First: Brown, a Black woman, was never nominated to the Supreme Court. She was considered a potential contender to replace the first woman on the Supreme Court, Sandra Day O’Connor, when O’Connor retired in 2006. Biden, then a U.S. senator, said on a July 3, 2005, episode of "Face the Nation" that if Bush nominated Brown, "I can assure you that would be a very, very, very difficult fight and she probably would be filibustered." But that moment never came to pass because then-President George W. Bush initially nominated Judge John Roberts to succeed O’Connor. Following the death of Chief Justice William Rehnquist, Bush said he wanted Roberts to be confirmed as Rehnquist’s replacement instead. Bush then nominated White House counsel Harriet Miers for O’Connor’s spot, but after Miers requested that the president withdraw her nomination amid criticism that she was unqualified to serve on the highest court, Bush nominated Judge Samuel Alito, who was confirmed in 2006. 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 few years earlier, on July 25, 2003, Bush nominated Brown, then an associate justice on the California Supreme Court, to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. At the time, Republicans held a 51-48 majority in the Senate but they struggled to get the 60 votes needed to end debate and vote on judicial nominees. Democrats were filibustering several of Bush’s nominees to prevent them from joining a federal bench, and in November 2003, Democrats signaled they would do the same to Brown, reported the Chicago Tribune, which called the judicial filibusters "unprecedented in Senate history." Biden was among the 43 senators to vote against ending debate on Brown’s nomination, and that filibuster ultimately lasted for two years until a group of senators reached a bipartisan agreement that cleared the way for her confirmation. Biden again voted against ending debate on the nomination but the motion passed, and Brown was confirmed on June 8, 2005, with a vote of 56-43. Biden also voted against her nomination. RELATED VIDEO Our ruling A Facebook post says "Republicans nominated the 1st Black woman to the SCOTUS & she was BLOCKED and filibustered by Joe Biden." The post gives the misleading impression that Biden filibustered Brown’s Supreme Court nomination, and that’s wrong. Brown was never nominated to the Supreme Court. She was considered enough of a candidate that Biden said she would probably be filibustered if Bush did tap her for the court. Biden was also among Senate Democrats who filibustered Brown’s nomination to a federal appeals court. But there was no Supreme Court nomination to filibuster. The Facebook post omits significant context and the main premise is wrong. We rate it False.

A photo of President Joe Biden leaving for Europe that the White House tweeted wasn’t actually taken on March 23 On the morning of March 23, President Joe Biden’s verified Twitter account tweeted an image of him saluting as he boarded a helicopter on the South Lawn of the White House, which looms behind him, flanked by green bushy trees and a scrum of reporters photographing him. "I’m on my way to Europe to rally the international community in support of Ukraine and ensure Putin pays a severe economic cost for his war of choice," Biden tweeted from @POTUS. But some social media users have alleged that the photo is old, pointing to the trees as evidence. "This picture, tweeted by the White House yesterday, was clearly not taken yesterday," one image being shared on Instagram says. An account sharing the image claimed that "Biden tweeted a stock photo yesterday with trees covered in leaves taken in the middle of summer." 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 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 evidence for this claim, according to other social media posts, is that other trees at the White House don’t have leaves on their branches. Biden was boarding the helicopter on the south side, where southern magnolia trees abut the White House. According to Yale University, the tree is relatively hardy, growing in cold climates like Washington, and "because it can maintain its beautiful leaves year round, it is often planted as an ornamental flowering tree." RELATED VIDEO Photos of Biden before he left for Europe that day that were taken by news organizations including Getty and Reuters show the trees full of leaves. In this video shared by USA Today, both those trees and bare trees behind the helicopter can be seen. We rate this post False.

Ketanji Brown Jackson has "a weak record — defund police, abolish ICE and now a completely open border policy. During the Senate Judiciary Committee hearings for U.S. Supreme Court nominee Ketanji Brown Jackson, Republican senators excoriated her as weak on law enforcement, sometimes by making misleading statements about her sentencing of child pornography offenders and the release of jail inmates. None of the senators accused Jackson of wanting to defund the police or to abolish Immigration and Customs Enforcement. But that was the attack made by Mick McGuire, a Republican candidate for U.S. Senate in Arizona. In an ad posted on Facebook and Instagram on March 24, the final day of the hearings, McGuire shared excerpts of an interview he did two days earlier on Fox Business. McGuire claimed that Jackson has "a weak record — defund police, abolish ICE and now a completely open border policy." That line of attack is one that we’ve fact-checked several times, usually deployed by Republican candidates for public office against their Democratic contenders. McGuire, the former head of the Arizona National Guard also called Jackson part of the "radical left," a common theme in campaign ads on social media and among Republicans. We found no evidence that Jackson has a record on defunding the police, abolishing ICE or supporting a completely open border — positions that undoubtedly would have drawn sharp criticism during the hearings. McGuire’s campaign did not respond by our deadline to our requests for evidence for the claim. After we published this fact-check, a campaign spokesperson said McGuire was "referencing the movement of the Left, not a specific reference to Ms. Brown Jackson." That contradicts McGuire’s own comments, which were directly about Jackson. Defunding the police Calls to "defund the police" emerged following the 2020 murder by a white Minneapolis police officer of George Floyd, a Black man. Some activists called for eliminating police departments entirely, while others wanted to reexamine the functions of police departments and redirect some of their funding to other services. Jackson has several family members, including a brother, who have served as police officers. The International Association of Chiefs of Police and the Fraternal Order of Police have endorsed her nomination. Jackson has been a judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit since 2021, having been nominated to that court by President Joe Biden, who also nominated her to the Supreme Court. Before that, she was a judge on the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, appointed by President Barack Obama in 2013. She also worked as a federal public defender, and would be the first Supreme Court justice to do so. There is no mention of defunding police in a 78-page review of Jackson’s record by the nonpartisan Congressional Research Service. The Republican National Committee made no mention of police in its news release entitled, "Biden’s Pick Is A Radical, Left-Wing Activist Who Will Rubberstamp His Failed Agenda." And we found no other statements by the committee related to McGuire’s claim. After searching on Google and Nexis, a research database, we found no statements by Jackson showing support for defunding the police. ICE and ‘open border’ Jackson has written three legal opinions considering challenges to the Department of Homeland Security’s expedited removal of immigrants illegally in the United States. In two of them, she ruled in favor of the challenges, according to the Congressional Research Service report. ICE is part of the department. 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 But that "sample size is too small to support firm predictions about how she might approach immigration law matters more generally," the report said. In any case, those rulings were on a specific immigration policy. We found no statements by Jackson indicating she wanted ICE abolished, or open borders. It’s unclear what’s McGuire’s interpretation of "open border." Some regard the term as no enforcement of immigration laws at U.S. borders, others apply it to lax immigration policies. We’ve done several fact-checks debunking claims that Democrats want to abolish ICE or eliminate border enforcement. The Senate Judiciary Committee, divided 11-11 between Democrats and Republicans, is expected to vote on Jackson’s nomination on April 4. A final vote would then come from the full Senate, which is divided 50-50, but Vice President Kamala Harris, a Democrat, could break a tie vote. Arizona race could decide party control McGuire is running in the Aug. 2 primary against several other major Republican candidates: Arizona Attorney General Mark Brnovich, businessman Blake Masters, businessman Jim Lamon and Justin Olson, a member of the state utility commission. The winner will take on Democratic Sen. Mark Kelly. He won the seat in a 2020 special election that was held to replace the late John McCain, a Republican. The 2022 race is rated by campaign watchers as a toss-up and as "battleground Democratic." It’s one of the Nov. 8 contests that could determine which party controls the Senate. Our ruling McGuire said Jackson has "a weak record — defund police, abolish ICE and now a completely open border policy." There is no evidence that Jackson has stated support for any of those measures. The baseless statement is false and ridiculous. We rate it Pants on Fire! PolitiFact staff researcher Caryn Baird contributed to this report. UPDATE, March 28, 2022: This fact-check has been updated to include a response we received from the McGuire campaign after publication. RELATED: Marsha Blackburn misleads about Jackson’s record on releasing criminals during the pandemic RELATED: Josh Hawley misleads on Judge Jackson and child pornography sentencing RELATED: GOP Ariz. Senate hopeful Lamon falsely claims that Biden wants to give ‘illegal immigrants’ $450,0

Ketanji Brown Jackson “says she gave pedophiles lighter sentences (because) it’s different when they use computers vs mail to get volumes of child porn. This makes ‘total sense’ according to Jackson. Some Republican senators lobbed misleading attacks on Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson during her Supreme Court confirmation hearings, accusing the nominee of going easy on child pornography offenders throughout her career. During the second day of the hearings on March 22, right-wing commentators furthered those attacks by sharing a shortened, out-of-context clip of Jackson speaking. The clip, they falsely claimed, showed Jackson defending her record and advocating for light sentences for child pornography offenders who view the content online. "Jackson says she gave pedophiles lighter sentences bc its different when they use computers vs mail to get volumes of child porn," said Jack Posobiec, a former One America News Network personality now affiliated with Turning Point USA, in a March 22 tweet. "This makes ‘total sense’ according to Jackson." The tweet was shared more than 2,000 times, including by Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, R-Ga., who also posted screenshots of it on Facebook and Instagram. Other commentators also shared the text and video from the tweet, and right-wing websites like LifeNews.com published entire articles with dubious headlines such as, "Ketanji Brown Jackson Defends Light Sentences for Child Pornographers, Not as Bad if They Just Use a Computer." The posts were flagged as part of Facebook’s as part of Facebook’s efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about our partnership with Facebook.) But Posobiec’s viral tweet omitted context about what she said and changed her words. Jackson was summarizing a 2012 report concerning federal sentencing guidelines for child pornography, the Associated Press reported. She was not arguing that child pornography isn’t as bad if it’s viewed online, or saying she gives offenders who use the internet lighter sentences. The 2012 report, she explained, discussed how the amount of child pornography a defendant accesses is not as indicative of the seriousness of the offense as it used to be; the internet has made such content more widely available. The guidelines "made total sense before, when we didn’t have the internet," she said, but now they were outdated. Jackson was formerly the vice chair of the U.S. Sentencing Commission, the independent and bipartisan agency created by Congress to create sentencing guidelines aimed at helping judges hand down sentences that are proportional to the crime committed and the circumstances of it. Featured Fact-check Instagram posts stated on October 19, 2022 in a post The diphtheria vaccine is a “poison dart” with side effects worse than the symptoms of diphtheria. By Andy Nguyen • October 24, 2022 The 2012 report by the commission found that the sentences in two-thirds of child pornography cases in 2011 that did not involve production came in below the sentencing guidelines. It also said that the existing sentencing scheme "no longer adequately distinguishes among offenders based on their degrees of culpability" in the age of the internet. Several sentencing "enhancements" that trigger harsher punishments based, for example, on the use of a computer or the volume of images possessed, "now apply to most offenders and, thus, fail to differentiate among offenders in terms of their culpability," the report said. "These enhancements originally were promulgated in an earlier technological era, when such factors better served to distinguish among offenders. Indeed, most of the enhancements … were promulgated when the typical offender obtained child pornography in printed form in the mail." During the March 22 hearing, Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., brought up that report and Jackson’s work as the vice chair of the sentencing commission. He asked: "What we are dealing with here is an issue, which even this committee and members of this committee have not loathed to address again: the original law was written at least nine or 10, maybe longer, years ago, and the quantity of material was relevant to the sentencing. But now that we have computer access to voluminous amounts of material, it has raised the question, has it not, within the judiciary as to the appropriate sentencing in today’s circumstances. This was a question that was raised before the sentencing commission, was it not?" The video shared by Posobiec and others left out Durbin’s question, along with the opening portion of Jackson’s response. Here’s how Jackson answered in full: "It was, senator. The Sentencing Commission has written at least one report — it did when I was there — looking at the operation of this guideline. As you said, the guideline was based originally on a statutory scheme and on directives, specific directives by Congress at a time in which more serious child pornography offenders were identified based on the volume, based on the number of photographs that they received in the mail. That made total sense before, when we didn’t have the internet, when we didn’t have distribution. But the way that the guideline is now structured, based on that set of circumstances, is leading to extreme disparities in the system because it’s so easy for people to get volumes of this kind of material now, by computers. So it’s not doing the work of differentiating who is a more serious offender in the way that it used to. So the commission has taken that into account, and perhaps even more importantly, courts are adjusting their sentences in order to account for the changed circumstances. But it says nothing about the court’s view of the seriousness of this offense." Our ruling Posobiec said, "Jackson says she gave pedophiles lighter sentences bc it’s different when they use computers vs mail to get volumes of child porn. This makes ‘total sense’ according to Jackson." Jackson did not say this. The full context of the clip presented in Posobiec’s tweet shows that Jackson was discussing the findings of a 2012 report from the U.S. Sentencing Commission, not explaining her own rulings or defending child pornography offenders who commit their crimes via the internet. The report detailed how the federal sentencing guidelines had fallen behind the times as the internet changed the way most child pornography offenders were accessing the content. We rate this tweet Fals

“Hunter Biden has been arrested! In the world of online misinformation, Hunter Biden, President Joe Biden’s son, was arrested in August and had his home raided by the military in October. Neither of those claims were true. But now, according to a March 24 Facebook post, he’s been busted again. "Breaking News!" the post says. "Hunter Biden has been arrested!" There’s no evidence to support this claim. 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 Searching online and in court case databases, we found no news articles, reports or warrants to corroborate that Hunter Biden is in custody. The Facebook post offers a source for this information that further undermines its credibility: "Vice President John F. Kennedy Jr." RELATED VIDEO Kennedy is, of course, not the vice president, nor is he alive. He died in a plane crash in 1999. Some followers of the QAnon movement believe he isn’t dead, and want him to run on a ticket with former President Donald Trump in the 2024 presidential election. But that’s not possible. We rate this post Pants on Fire.

John F. Kennedy Jr. is alive and the author of anonymous QAnon messages John F. Kennedy Jr., the son of former President John F. Kennedy who, like his father, died young, has made several appearances in PolitiFact’s fact-checks over the years. We’ve debunked claims that he’s the father of former White House press secretary Kayleigh McEnany, that he once publicly championed a Donald Trump presidency, that President Joe Biden plotted to kidnap him, and that former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is responsible for his death. None of that is true, and neither is a new claim being shared on Facebook: that Kennedy is alive, and that he’s Q, the author of anonymous message board postings that have grown into the QAnon movement. "The prince of America is back," reads the text over an image of Kennedy shared on Facebook on March 24. 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.) Kennedy, his wife and his sister-in-law were killed in a plane crash on July 16, 1999. Kennedy, then the founder and publisher of George magazine, was piloting a single-engine Piper Saratoga when it plunged into the Atlantic Ocean. 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 National Transportation Safety Board determined that the crash probably happened after Kennedy, who was inexperienced at flying his plane alone at night, became disoriented in haze. Their bodies were recovered in seas southwest of Martha’s Vineyard, Massachusetts, on July 21, 1999 after a recovery team of Navy divers searched the ocean floor for about 18 hours, the Washington Post reported at the time. Kennedy’s body was found in the cockpit, still strapped to his seat. His cremated remains were scattered at sea. RELATED VIDEO Now in present day, the New York Times reported in February that separate teams of computer scientists identified the two men as the likely authors of anonymous QAnon messages. Their names: Paul Furber, one of the first online commentators to draw attention to the messages, and Ron Watkins, who ran a website where the messages started appearing in 2018. Both have denied that they are Q. But we know it’s not the late JFK Jr. We rate this post Pants on Fire.

“The Simpsons” predicted Russia’s invasion of Ukraine A collection of images from "The Simpsons," the long-running animated TV show on Fox, is surfacing on social media, where users are falsely claiming that it "predicted " Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. "The Simpsons, who predicted everything, also saw this war," one post sharing the collage wrote. "The situation is serious, everyone goes to the shelters." "Oh look," another post said. "The Simpsons predicted the Ukraine ‘war’ too. How fun is life in the DS Matrix?" 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 animated TV show has, on occasion, predicted the future — including Lady Gaga’s Super Bowl halftime show and Donald Trump’s presidency. But it did not predict Russia’s war in Ukraine. As fact-checkers at Reuters have reported, the images from "The Simpsons" that supposedly allude to the war were doctored. The first picture, showing a Ukrainian soldier aiming a rifle at Russia President Vladimir Putin, is a composite of multiple scenes. The screengrab is from episode 11 of season 30, "Mad About the Toy." In the episode, the soldier appeared against the backdrop of a desolate, war-torn background. Much of the defining allusions to the invasion were superimposed onto the original frame. Neither the Ukrainian flag nor the number "2022" appeared in the scene. The image of Homer waving a Ukrainian flag was also inserted into the picture from episode 8 of season 17, where the Simpson patriarch can be seen carrying a U.S. flag at an Italian airport. The addition of Putin, wearing a red T-shirt and grimacing at the soldier, originated from a clip posted onto the show’s Facebook page ahead of the 2016 presidential election. In the scene, Putin, disguised as an American citizen, waited in line to cast his vote. The second image, depicting a large projectile with a nuclear insignia buried into the Simpsons’ backyard, is not an authentic image from the animated TV show. A reverse image search shows the image of the explosive — without the cartoon family’s house in the background — goes to 2016 when it appeared as a "limited-time decoration" in a Simpsons-themed game. The "05/05/2022" text does not appear on the original photo. The third image of an orange, mushroom-shaped cloud rising from the outskirts of a city originated from an episode of "The Simpsons" that was released in 2010. Though the photo was not digitally altered, the episode made no reference to Ukraine. We rate claims that these images show "The Simpsons" predicting Russia’s invasion of Ukraine Fals

Says Gov. Tony Evers gave $2.4 million in COVID relief money to Planned Parenthood affiliates throughout Wisconsin “to bail them out and fund abortions. There are lots of things Wisconsin Gov. Tony Evers and former Lt. Gov. Rebecca Kleefisch, who’s running to unseat Evers this fall, don’t agree on. One big one: How to treat Planned Parenthood of Wisconsin, the state’s largest reproductive health care provider. Kleefisch, a Republican who opposes abortion, supported legislation under former Gov. Scott Walker that cut funding for Planned Parenthood in 2016. She’s touted that on the campaign trail as recently as last month. Evers, a Democrat who backs abortion rights, campaigned on restoring funding to the organization, but has been stifled in his attempts to do so by the Republican-controlled Legislature. He did, however, allocate a small portion of federal COVID-19 relief dollars to Planned Parenthood clinics throughout the state, which Kleefisch latched onto in a March 9 campaign email. "Tony Evers was caught giving $2.4 MILLION of our state’s federal COVID relief funds in grants to Planned Parenthood affiliates throughout Wisconsin to bail them out and fund abortions," the email reads. A quick search of the state Department of Administration’s list of grantees shows those funds were indeed awarded to Planned Parenthood clinics. But Kleefisch’s purported reason why Evers allocated the money is where her argument goes awry. Let’s take a look. Evers did send $2.4 million in COVID relief dollars to Planned Parenthood When asked for evidence to back up the claim, Kleefisch’s communications director Alec Zimmerman sent two documents from the Department of Administration that list grant awards to Planned Parenthood. The first grants were among those distributed to nonprofit organizations that provided "critical services to individuals in the areas of health care, housing and shelter, adult education" and other services, according to a Nov. 3, 2020, news release from Evers’ office announcing the grant program. Evers directed $10 million of the state’s money from the federal Coronavirus Aid, Relief and Economic Security (CARES) Act toward the grant program. Twenty-one Planned Parenthood of Wisconsin clinic locations received grants that added up to $1.4 million. Those included Appleton, Blair, Delavan, Eau Claire, Green Bay, Kenosha, La Crosse, Manitowoc, Oshkosh, Portage, Racine, Sparta, Waukesha, West Allis, West Bend and Wisconsin Rapids, as well as the Madison South clinic and Milwaukee’s Capitol, Mitchell Street, Northwest and Wisconsin Avenue locations. Evers also awarded a $1 million grant to Planned Parenthood of Wisconsin on Feb. 8 as part of his Equitable Grant Recovery Program, aimed at supporting organizations that work to eliminate disparities in health, child development, education and other areas. A grant announcement from the Department of Administration said up to $82 million in grants may be given for those purposes. 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 This grant program, too, is using COVID-19 relief dollars — this time from the federal American Rescue Plan Act. So Kleefisch is right that Evers sent $2.4 million in grant money to Planned Parenthood in Wisconsin — though we’ll note he wasn’t "caught" doing it. Recipients were posted on a government web site. Giving money to Planned Parenthood doesn’t always mean funding abortions Her claim veers off track in the second half: Did Evers give the money to Planned Parenthood specifically to "bail them out and fund abortions?" "The ‘bail out’ language was obviously general but it’s worth pointing out that the Walker/Kleefisch Administration stripped Planned Parenthood of its state funding so you have to wonder if the move to give them grants was intentional," Zimmerman wrote in an email. That’s conjecture, not evidence. And, as noted, Planned Parenthood is a major provider of heath-care services. Abortion services make up a small share of the organization’s overall services — 3% in 2019, according to the latest annual national report. And in Wisconsin, only three clinics can provide them. That’s the Madison East location, Milwaukee’s Water Street Health Center and the Sheboygan clinic. None of those clinics got money from the nonprofit grant program. Mike Murray, vice president of public affairs for Planned Parenthood of Wisconsin, said in an email that neither pot of funding would be used to fund abortion services as Kleefisch claimed. All CARES Act money is explicitly prohibited from being used for abortions under the Hyde Amendment, which prevents federal dollars from being used for that purpose in most cases. The American Rescue Plan Act funds aren’t restricted by Hyde, but in this case still are not being directed toward abortions. The CARES Act dollars went toward family planning services, treatment and testing for sexually transmitted infections and cancer screenings, Murray said. The American Rescue Plan Act funding will support "investments to reduce health inequities that have been exacerbated by the pandemic." Planned Parenthood of Wisconsin does, of course, provide abortion services. But Kleefisch didn’t say Evers gave money to an organization that performs those services. She said he gave them the money specifically to fund abortions. That’s off the mark. Our ruling Kleefisch claimed Evers gave Planned Parenthood affiliates in Wisconsin $2.4 million in federal COVID relief money "to bail them out and fund abortions." Evers did give them grants funds, but they’re not being used to pay for abortions. Our definition of Mostly False is a statement that contains an element of truth but ignores critical facts that would give a different impression. 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' });

CNN tweeted a picture of a Serbian resort and said it was in Ukraine A screenshot of what looks like a tweet from CNN’s verified breaking news Twitter account shows a building surrounded with rubble and a description that places the photo in Ukraine. "These are the remains of the once famous ukrainian resort hotel Peace after the air attack by russian bombers," reads the purported and poorly-edited tweet, which is accompanied by three Ukrainian flag emojis and the hashtag #StandingWithUkraine. Another Twitter account, sharing the screenshot, suggested that CNN was using false information to help Ukraine. "The Ukrainian Mir Hotel, which, according to CNN journalists, was ruthlessly bombed by the Russian Armed Forces," the tweet says. "Oh no, wait. This is the Serbian resort Zvonachka-Banya, awaiting reconstruction. By the way, they are looking for an investor. Send CNN a thank you for the ad." 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 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 Matt Dornic, a spokesperson for CNN, told us the screenshot of what looks like a CNN tweet is fake. "CNN did not publish that photo or text as it relates to our coverage of the war in Ukraine," he said. We couldn’t find evidence that CNN tweeted this or used the hashtag #StandingWithUkraine. It’s not on Twitter, and even if an account deletes a tweet, an echo remains in Google search results where you can see part of what a tweet said even if the link is dead. No such trace exists for this one. Searching for any tweets about hotels from this CNN account, the most recent is from January and concerns the death of comedian Bob Saget. We also found no news stories about Hotel Mir in Kyiv on CNN’s site. On March 12, the network reported that Russian missile and airstrikes had caused damage in the north and south of Kyiv, including the hotel Ukraine, about 100 kilometers north in the city of Chernihiv. RELATED VIDEO Doing a reverse image search for the building in the tweet, we found a link to a 2020 YouTube video titled "Hotel Mir, Zvonacka Banja 2020." It shows drone footage of the building, which is in disrepair. We rate claims that this tweet is authentic False.

Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson called former President George W. Bush and former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld as “war criminals in a legal filing. From 2005 to 2007, Supreme Court nominee Ketanji Brown Jackson worked as a federal public defender, often representing clients who couldn’t afford lawyers of their own — including Guantanamo Bay detainees. Republican senators have called Jackson’s experience as a federal public defender into question during her confirmation hearings. Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, repeatedly claimed that, while defending clients accused of terrorism, Jackson called former President George W. Bush and former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld "war criminals." "I don’t know you well, but I’ve been impressed by our interaction, and you’ve been gracious and charming," Cornyn said on March 22. "Why in the world would you call Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld and George W. Bush war criminals in a legal filing? It seems so out of character for you." Jackson asked if he was referring to habeas petitions she’d filed, and Cornyn said he was talking about when she’d represented a man the Defense Department had identified as an "intelligence officer for the Taliban." "You referred to the secretary of defense and the sitting president of the United States as ‘war criminals,’" he said. "I was representing my clients and making arguments," Jackson replied. "I’d have to take a look at what you meant. I did not intend to disparage the president or the secretary of defense." On March 23, Cornyn again made this claim, saying Jackson "accused (Bush and Rumsfeld) of war crimes. Now, I don’t understand the difference between calling somebody a ‘war criminal’ and accusing them of war crimes." Cornyn based his claim on habeas petitions from 2005, which Jackson co-filed on behalf of people detained at Guantanamo Bay, the New York Times reported. A habeas petition refers to civil action against an agent that holds a defendant in custody. The petitions named as respondents Bush and Rumsfeld, in their official capacities, and two Guantanamo Bay officials. The Times said they were "essentially boilerplate habeas corpus petitions" that allege the U.S. government had tortured the detainees. The petition filed on behalf of Khiali-Gul, for example, reads: "By the actions described above, Respondents’ acts directing, ordering, confirming, ratifying, and/or conspiring to bring about the torture and other inhumane treatment of Petitioner Khiali-Gul constitute war crimes and/or crimes against humanity" in violation of the Geneva Conventions. The petition alleged that "severe physical and psychological abuse and agony" were intentionally inflicted on Khiali-Gul in an effort to coerce him into providing information or confessions. It said that he had been severely beaten, interrogated while chained in painful positions, exposed to extreme temperatures, held in isolation for prolonged periods of time and deprived of adequate medical care, among other things. Drew Brandewie, a spokesperson for Cornyn, said, "If someone is being accused of war crimes, then they are implicitly being accused of being a war criminal." He also emphasized the number of petitions: "This wasn’t a one-off, random instance. It was deliberate, multiple times." But legal experts told PolitiFact that simply filing a brief that alleges a respondent’s actions "constitute war crimes" is not tantamount to calling a person a war criminal. Victor Romero, a professor at Penn State Law, said it wasn’t fair to claim that arguments made on behalf of a client are equivalent to a lawyer making a direct accusation. "To do so would fundamentally misunderstand the lawyer’s professional role to be a zealous advocate by mistaking such arguments as the equivalent of that person’s private opinion," he said. This is especially true in the case of a habeas petition. Bush and Rumsfeld were named "because they had ultimate control over Judge Jackson’s client’s liberty," said Jonathan Hafetz, a professor at Seton Hall Law School. The petition’s purpose was to "determine the legality of her client’s detention." 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 petitions were "essentially a template" and identical language was used by other lawyers in different detainee petitions, according to a New York Times report. "It is important for a defense attorney to zealously raise all possible defenses," said Leila Sadat, a law professor at Washington University and senior research scholar at Yale Law School. Asked to address Cornyn’s claims, Jackson said public defenders don’t choose their clients but must "provide vigorous advocacy." With regards to the petitions filed, she said: "We were assigned as public defenders, we had very little information because of the confidentiality or classified nature of a lot of the record and as an appellate lawyer it was my obligation to file habeas petitions on behalf of my clients." Stephen Vladeck, the Charles Alan Wright Chair in Federal Courts at the University of Texas School of Law, said in a series of tweets that the implication that Jackson specifically called Bush and Rumsfeld war criminals was, "at the very least, misleading." The filings had to name Bush and Rumsfeld for procedural reasons, Vladeck said, and the respondents named in the petitions "automatically changed" when President Barack Obama was inaugurated in 2009. And when President Obama came to office on January 20, 2009, the captions automatically changed, so that they became [Detainee] v. Obama instead of [Detainee] v. Bush — reinforcing the point that naming these defendants officially is not a claim about their personal conduct.— Steve Vladeck (@steve_vladeck) March 22, 2022 Brandewie, Cornyn’s spokesperson, said that even if Jackson was "required" to name Bush and Rumsfeld, that "doesn’t negate her accusation or somehow make it not count. It’s context, maybe, but it doesn’t devalue the meaning of what she wrote in the petition." Penn State’s Romero countered that alleging a law has been violated is "not the same as a court declaring after a trial that one is a ‘war criminal.’" "No reasonable person would mistake an attorney’s claim made in the service of their client with their personal opinion about the criminality of an individual," he said. Our ruling Cornyn claimed Jackson referred to former President George W. Bush and former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld as "war criminals in a legal filing." Jackson co-filed habeas petitions that alleged Bush and Rumsfeld had mistreated and tortured Guantanamo Bay detainees in ways that "constitute war crimes." But the filings did not call either man a "war criminal." Experts said that, as a defense lawyer, Jackson was obligated to raise all possible defenses on behalf of her clients. In addition, they said it is unfair to claim that arguments a lawyer has made on behalf of a client are equivalent to that lawyer making direct accusations of criminality. Cornyn’s statement is partially accurate but leaves out important details and context. We rate it Half True. RELATED: Russia’s invasion of Ukraine is especially lawless. Could Putin be tried for war crimes? RELATED: Tenn. Sen. Marsha Blackburn wrong about Ketanji Brown Jackson and critical race theory RELATED: Josh Hawley misleads on Judge Jackson and child pornography sentencing CORRECTION: We updated the story with the correct affiliation of legal expert Leila Sada

"Documents were published confirming Moderna created the COVID-19 Virus. As Russia’s war in Ukraine captures headlines, one anti-vaccine website is seeking to turn reader attention back to an unproven claim about COVID-19’s origins. "Whilst you were distracted by the Battle for Ukraine, documents were published confirming Moderna created the COVID-19 Virus," read a March 14 headline on a story published on The Expose, a British website that describes itself as "run by extremely ordinary, hardworking people who are sick and tired of the fear-mongering, lies and propaganda perpetuated by the mainstream media." Beneath the headline, the story — which carried the anonymous byline of "a concerned reader" — alleged that new evidence "​​proves beyond a reasonable doubt that the COVID-19 virus was created by the very pharmaceutical giant that has made billions" from a vaccine. 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.) That’s because it drew a sweeping — and false — conclusion from a recent scientific paper that the lead author of the study itself said he can’t endorse. About the claim The Expose’s story refers to a Feb. 23 article in the Daily Mail regarding a recent scientific paper published in Frontiers in Virology. The Daily Mail said it stoked "fresh suspicion that Covid may have been tinkered with in a lab." Both the Daily Mail and The Expose stories said the paper’s authors discovered a portion of genetic code found in the SARS-CoV-2 virus that causes COVID-19 is a match for a part of code found in a gene sequence vaccine-maker Moderna filed a patent for in 2016 for cancer research — three years before the virus was discovered. According to The Expose, the likelihood of that match is so rare that it amounts to smoking gun evidence that Moderna created the virus that causes COVID-19. "They calculated that the chances of a 19 nucleotide sequence patented by Moderna randomly appearing in Covid-19 in circumstances where it does not appear anywhere else in nature are 1 in 3 trillion," The Expose wrote. (Nucleotides are the basic building blocks of nucleic acids, like DNA and RNA.) The Expose goes on to conclude that Moderna released SARS-CoV-2 "in order to sell their vaccines and to destroy the immune systems of their customers because our immune systems reduce their profits." We reached out to Moderna for comment about the claim but did not receive a response. The study The actual study at the center of The Expose’s claim was published Feb. 21 and authored by seven researchers working at institutions across the globe, including University of Oregon, University of Padova in Italy, University of Michigan and University of South Florida, as well as Pan Therapeutics, a for-profit company in Switzerland that develops anti-cancer drugs. The paper’s authors wrote that during a search of an online database known as BLAST for a 12-nucleotide sequence found in the COVID-19 spike protein, they discovered a 19-nucleotide sequence they said was an exact reverse match found in the Moderna-patented gene sequence. They wrote that such a finding "may occur randomly but other possibilities must be considered." BLAST, or Basic Local Alignment Search Tool, is an online tool from the National Library of Medicine that lets users compare "nucleotide or protein sequences to sequence databases." The paper’s authors said the matching code sequence was found in the virus’ furin cleavage site, one of the three main regions of the coronavirus, and one that researchers believe plays a key role in enabling the virus to penetrate deeply into a person’s lungs and cause serious illness. Dr. Bala Ambati, an ophthalmologist and a research professor at the University of Oregon, was first author on the study. He told PolitiFact that the peer-reviewed article was "published as a perspective, the main purpose of which was to stimulate discussion." 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 "We understood from the beginning that this match could be random chance and stated this in the article very prominently," he said. Asked whether the study proves the article’s claim that it was definitive proof that "Moderna created the COVID-19 virus," Ambati said the researchers’ only goal is further study. "We are not casting aspersions on any person, company, or country. We do not control social media and therefore can't respond to it," he said. Criticism by researchers Referencing statements by scientists who responded to the Frontiers in Virology study, Health Feedback fact-checkers noted that the matching code sequence "isn’t unique" to the gene patented by Moderna and also "can occur in nature." The same sequence was found in some chimney swifts and some bacterium, the scientists showed. The Daily Mail article itself quoted two critics. Lawrence Young, a virologist from Warwick University, told the Mail described the study’s finding as a "quirky observation" but not a "smoking gun." Simon Clarke, a microbiologist from Reading University, said that the match was "surely entirely coincidental." Experts we spoke with agreed. "It’s an interesting coincidence, but nothing so amazing that it’s slam dunk evidence of much of anything, much less that Moderna somehow predicted COVID-19 and patented the sequence," said Dr. David Gorski, an oncologist and managing editor of the website Science-based Medicine, told PolitiFact. Gorski said the 12-nucleotide sequence the study’s authors searched for isn’t very large. "One would expect, by random chance alone, lots of matches doing a BLAST search," he said. Gorski wrote more in depth about the topic here. Dr. Stanley Perlman, a professor of microbiology and immunology at the University of Iowa, whose lab studies coronavirus infections, said the claim is not supported "by any believable data." What we know about COVID-19’s origins The question of COVID-19’s origin continues to be a matter of discussion and ongoing research. In 2021, PolitiFact found that scientists had generally concluded that the virus resembles naturally occurring viruses. They were also paying attention, though, to the theory that it somehow leaked from a research lab in Wuhan, China. The World Health Organization in 2021 established the WHO Scientific Advisory Group for the Origins on Novel Pathogens to evaluate and advise the organization about studies into the origin of COVID-19 and other pathogens. It’s expected to release a report soon about which studies are urgently needed, a WHO epidemiologist told Nature. And President Joe Biden in August 2021 said the U.S. would continue to work with the WHO in that investigation. In February, scientists released two studies that again pointed to a large food and animal market in Wuhan as the likely source of COVID-19, a development that received wide coverage. Ambati said there are reasonable hypotheses about the origin of COVID-19 either being from a lab leak or from natural sources, but said most of them "are not prospectively testable." "We want to stimulate discussion amongst all concerned on both ‘sides’ of the issue to try to produce prospective experiments that can prove or disprove their hypotheses. That is the major purpose of our perspective paper," Ambati said. Our ruling An article claims that a recent study that found a matching stretch of code in the COVID-19 virus and a synthetic gene sequence patented by Moderna is proof that "Moderna created the COVID-19 virus." There was a matching 19-nucleotide sequence found, but experts described it as likely coincidental and not definitive evidence of a lab leak or a creation by Moderna. The study’s authors did not say it proved anything, but rather they hoped their hypothesis would provoke further discussion and experiments. We rate this claim Fals

Photo shows a Home Depot worksheet on “privilege” used to train its employees A photo showing a Home Depot pamphlet about racial and social privilege is circulating on social media with the assumption that it depicts required training for the company’s employees. The document, called "unpacking privilege," defines social and white privilege and gives examples of what different types of privilege look like, including class privilege, able-bodied privilege and cisgender privilege. "Home Depot is now #Woke," read a March 22 Facebook post that shared a picture of the pamphlet. "Welcome to The Home Depot where you can find guilt on every aisle," read another posted March 23. The posts were flagged as part of Facebook’s efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about our partnership with Facebook.) The document is real, and while it may have given users the impression that it represented a company-wide program, it doesn’t. Featured Fact-check Instagram posts stated on October 10, 2022 in a post “Premature babies are at a much higher risk of injury from immunizations than full-term babies.” By Andy Nguyen • October 13, 2022 "While we fully support diversity across our company, this material was not created or approved by our corporate diversity, equity and inclusion department," Home Depot spokesperson Margaret Smith told PolitiFact in an email. "This was a resource in our Canadian division and not part of any required programming." When asked how the document is used by Home Depot Canada, Smith said that employees are not required to review the pamphlet or complete any training associated with it. The material was made available as a resource in an internal company platform, she said. To access the file, Home Depot employees would have to do so using the company’s intranet. Our ruling A Home Depot document about racial and social privilege is being shared online with the interpretation that it represents required training for the company’s employees. The document is real, but it is not used in any company-wide training and employees are not required to review it. It was created by Home Depot’s Canadian division as an internal resource that could be accessed online and it was not made or approved by the company’s corporate office. While the pamphlet is legitimate, social media posts about it are leaving out important details about its scope that give a different impression. We rate the claim Half Tru

News networks covered Brett Kavanaugh’s confirmation hearing live but not Ketanji Brown Jackson’s hearing On March 23, Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson sat before members of the Senate Judiciary Committee for the third day of her confirmation hearing for a spot on the U.S. Supreme Court. Jackson’s historic nomination and aggressive questioning by Republican senators dominated the week’s news headlines. But some social media users suggested that news networks’ coverage of the hearing revealed liberal biases. "Remember during the Kavanaugh confirmation hearings when literally every network was covering it live? Where’s that with Jackson? Once AGAIN, more PROOF that the MSM are covering for pedos," one March 22 Facebook post says, alluding to criticism from Republican lawmakers who say Jackson was too lenient when sentencing people convicted of possession of child pornography. PolitiFact found that Jackson’s approach to sentencing in child pornography cases did not significantly differ from that of other judges. 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.) First, let’s look at coverage of Jackson’s hearing. We looked at the websites of several news outlets after the hearing got underway on March 23. NBC News, ABC News, CBS News, Fox News, CNN, MSNBC, PBS NewsHour, NPR and One America News Network all had live coverage of the hearing. NBC, ABC, CBS, Fox, CNN, MSNBC, PBS, and NPR were all streaming the hearing live on their sites. There were news stories on all the sites, and many had live analysis of the hearing. The television broadcasts were less consistent. PolitiFact reporters in different states flipped through the channels on their TVs and found that MSNBC and OAN were airing the hearing live. CNN discussed the hearing among other news, such as about refugees fleeing war in Ukraine. Local news channels in at least two states — affiliates of NBC, ABC and CBS — were carrying regular programming, such as "The View" on ABC and "The Price is Right" on CBS. Without the benefit of a time machine, we don’t know what we would find flipping through television channels on Sept. 6, 2018, day three of Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh’s confirmation hearing. But online news coverage from that day is similar to how outlets have reported on Jackson’s hearing. And transcripts for programming that aired on CNN that day show that while the network aired some of the hearing and discussed it, it broke away for other news, such as an investigation into an active shooter in Cincinnati and coverage of social media company leaders testifying before lawmakers. It’s important to remember that Kavanaugh’s hearing happened in two rounds. The first occurred Sept. 4-7, 2018, when he appeared before the Judiciary Committee and answered lawmakers' questions about his judicial record and beliefs. 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 was before Christine Blasey Ford’s sexual assault allegations against Kavanaugh became public. Here’s what happened next: On Sept. 13, the New York Times reported that U.S. Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., had referred a matter concerning Kavanaugh to federal investigators. She didn’t say what it was about, but two officials "familiar with the matter" told the Times the incident involved possible sexual misconduct between Kavanaugh and a woman when they were in high school. A few days later, Ford revealed her identity in an interview with the Washington Post, and two other women also accused Kavanaugh of sexual misconduct. On Sept. 17, Ford and Kavanaugh agreed to testify before the Judiciary Committee. That testimony happened on Sept. 27, and Kavanaugh vigorously denied the assault allegation. It’s perhaps this exceptional day of the confirmation hearing that people remember in contrast to Jackson’s confirmation hearing. ABC, CBS and NBC skipped their usual daytime TV lineups to air the hearing live, Variety reported at the time. "Every major broadcast and cable network suspended regular programming to carry gavel-to-gavel coverage," the New York Times also reported. But comparing Jackson’s hearing to this day of Kavanaugh’s is not apples-to-apples. It was not scheduled or anticipated until revelations of the sexual misconduct allegations against Kavanaugh, and it dealt wholly with those allegations as opposed to the questions of jurisprudence that came up during the original hearing dates. RELATED VIDEO Senators confirmed Kavanaugh’s Supreme Court nomination on Oct. 6, 2018. The Senate Judiciary Committee is expected to vote on Jackson's nomination on April 4; that’s followed by a vote from the full Senate. We didn’t find evidence that coverage of Jackson’s hearing is wildly out of step with coverage of the usual days of Kavanaugh’s hearing, and it’s not true that no news networks are covering her hearing live. We rate this post False.

Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson “gave child porn offenders sentences below the guidelines and below what the prosecutors were requesting,” showing she is “soft on child pornography offenders. On Day One of the U.S. Supreme Court confirmation hearing for Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson, Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., accused her in an op-ed of having a "pattern of going soft on child pornography offenders." "In fact, in every case for which I can find records and Judge Jackson had discretion, she gave child porn offenders sentences below the guidelines and below what the prosecutors were requesting," Hawley wrote. "This isn’t a one-off. It’s a pattern." During the hearing, Hawley listed seven specific sentences Jackson had handed down. "In every case of these seven, Judge Jackson handed down a lenient sentence which was below what the federal guidelines recommended and below what prosecutors requested," Hawley said March 21. The next day, other Republicans, including Sens. Ted Cruz of Texas and Mike Lee of Utah, pressed Jackson on the same point. Cruz focused on the victims of child porn. "Do you believe the voice of the children is heard when your sentences for those who are in possession of child pornography are far below what the prosecutors are asking for?" Cruz asked March 22. For Hawley, Cruz and Lee, the gap between what prosecutors were seeking and the sentences Jackson handed down is proof of her leniency. It’s not the revealing yardstick they make it out to be. Judges regularly give lesser sentences than what the government wants, and that’s particularly true for child pornography offenses. A review of sentencing guidelines for child pornography offenders Sentencing guidelines have been around since Congress introduced them in the mid-1980s. For lawmakers, they were a way to take discretion away from judges and make sure that federal offenders paid the full price for their crimes. Instead of judges meting out justice as they saw fit, the U.S. Sentencing Commission, an independent agency created by Congress, would give them a table to match each crime and situation to a prison sentence. In 2003, Congress passed the PROTECT Act to crack down on crimes against children. Penalties for child pornography went up. Within the decade, the system showed signs of strain. "Despite strong congressional belief, a growing number of federal judges instead view most offenders who possess or trade child pornography as mostly harmless to others," wrote University of Texas law professor Melissa Hamilton in 2010. The guidelines were written before the internet made widespread sharing of images and videos possible. Penalties under the guidelines increase based on the number of images, and more and more offenders have been subject to those longer sentences. Judges and prosecutors make a distinction between people who exchange child pornography, and those who produce it. Because to produce it means someone personally committed child abuse. In contrast, having the pornography can take place without having direct contact with the children depicted. In 2012, the U.S. Sentencing Commission found that two-thirds of the sentences in non-production cases were shorter than the sentencing guidelines. (A 2005 U.S. Supreme Court decision made the guidelines advisory, not mandatory.) That trend continued. In 2021, a follow-up U.S. Sentencing Commission analysis of non-production crimes found that if anything, the disparity between the guidelines and actual sentences had become more frequent. "As the U.S. Sentencing Commission’s data shows, judges across the country routinely impose sentences far below what the guidelines recommend," University of North Carolina law professor Carissa Byrne Hessick said. Hessick said that in her view, Jackson is no more lenient than the average federal judge. 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 Jackson’s cases and recommendations from prosecutors Hawley documented the number of times that Jackson issued sentences shorter than the guidelines. But he left out that sometimes, prosecutors also recommend shorter prison terms. Analyzing data from 2019, the U.S. Sentencing Commission said government recommendations went below the guidelines about 20% of the time. That’s about how often the pattern showed up in Hawley’s examples of Jackson’s cases. The seven cases Hawley mentioned generally involved non-production child pornography crimes, although one included a man who, in addition to possessing pornography, made plans to have sex with a minor. Among those cases, in two instances, prosecutors sought sentences below the guidelines. In one, the guideline minimum was 97 months and prosecutors suggested 24 months. Jackson gave three months. In the other, the guideline minimum was 151 months, and prosecutors asked for 72 months. Jackson gave 60. In four cases, prosecutors recommended the low-end of the guideline range, and in one, they sought a sentence three months above the minimum. Jackson’s sentences in those five cases were below the guidelines and below the prosecutors’ recommendations. But this list is not the full story. Hawley omitted two additional cases where the charge was having or sharing child pornography. In one, prosecutors filed no recommendation at all, and in the other, they suggested a sentence that was more than 50% below the minimum suggested by the guidelines. To sum it up, out of nine cases — all but one involving possession or distribution of child pornography — prosecutors in Jackson’s courtroom were mum or went below the guidelines four times. In five cases, they opted for a sentence equal to or three months above the low-end of the guidelines. It bears noting that for more severe cases that combined possession of child pornography with attemped or actual sexual abuse of a minor, Jackson generally accepted the prosecution’s recommendation. In one instance, she handed down a sentence that was eight years longer than what the guidelines recommended. We contacted Hawley’s office and his staff referred us to comments he or his office had made to the press and reiterated the information Hawley presented during the hearings. Other judges issue sentences shorter than what prosecutors want Hawley, and Cruz, emphasized how much shorter Jackson’s sentences were than what prosecutors sought. She appears to have company, including among judges elevated to federal appeals courts during the Trump administration. Ralph Erickson was confirmed to a seat on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 8th Circuit in 2017. During his time as a district court judge, Erickson handed down child pornography sentences less than the prosecution requested eight times between 2014 and 2015. Joseph Bianco joined the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit in 2019. He sentenced child pornography offenders to less than what the prosecution wanted three times between 2011 and 2018. For Ohio State University law professor Douglas Berman, this is no surprise. Prosecutors, he said, often go high in their sentencing recommendation, not because they expect to get it, but as a way to frame the judge’s decision. "Prosecutors know going in that the defense will ask for the lowest plausible sentence," Berman said. "They then ask for the highest sentence that they think is appropriate. They want to signal to the judge the parameters of what a reasonable range is." Berman added that the focus on prison time is just one part of the overall punishment. Jackson included long periods of supervised release, generally for 10 years after serving time, and in one case for 20 years. Berman said it’s an underappreciated component of sentencing. "You can’t go to certain parts of your community and you can’t travel without permission," Berman said. "Someone is monitoring your computer 24/7. These are very strong restrictions on your liberty." Our ruling Hawley said Jackson "gave child porn offenders sentences below the guidelines and below what the prosecutors were requesting" showing she is "soft on child pornography offenders." Hawley’s claim has an element of truth: Jackson’s sentences were below the guidelines and below the prosecutors’ recommendations. But Jackson’s approach to sentencing in child pornography cases did not significantly differ from that of other judges, data show. A comprehensive federal study found that for these crimes, sentences are shorter than what the guidelines suggest more than two-thirds of the time. Prosecutors sometimes recommend sentences below the guidelines, too. Hawley failed to prove that Jackson is any more lenient than federal judges on average. We rate this claim Mostly Fals

Joe Biden’s announcement that the Justice Department will name a chief prosecutor for pandemic fraud means “the government is going to investigate itself. In a TikTok video that excerpts President Joe Biden’s State of the Union address, Biden can be heard off-screen announcing that "the Justice Department will soon name a chief prosecutor for pandemic fraud." Attorney General Merrick Garland is seen nodding in agreement from a seat in the House chamber. The TikTok user responded with skepticism: "You’re telling me the government’s going to investigate itself for pandemic fraud?" This post 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.) On March 10, the Justice Department named Associate Deputy Attorney General Kevin Chambers as the director for COVID-19 fraud enforcement. So far, according to the Justice Department, that effort has resulted in more than 240 civil investigations for alleged misconduct related to pandemic relief loans. 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 Chambers plans to focus on "large-scale criminal enterprise and foreign actors who sought to profit at the expense of the American people." RELATED VIDEO This isn’t a task force that will investigate the federal government. Before Biden said that he was announcing the soon-to-be-named pandemic fraud prosecutor, he said: "We’re going to go after the criminals who stole billions in relief money meant for small businesses and millions of Americans. We rate this post False.

The drug labels for the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine “were blank when they should have contained all these diseases and adverse events" listed in a confidential report Misinterpretations of COVID-19 vaccine adverse events have been a common source of misinformation throughout the pandemic. Now, some social media users are homing in on a list of adverse events mentioned in a Pfizer vaccine safety report to create another false narrative. "It's quite revolting to think that the inserts for these vaccines were blank when they should have contained all these diseases and adverse events," said one video posted on BitChute, a video-hosting platform. "You really have to go through this yourselves, but this is really the bombshell news of the day, of the week, of the year." A since-removed Instagram post similarly scrolled through the 9-page list of adverse events at the end of Pfizer’s document. The post was captioned: "They knew all along. The CDC ACIP had these documents and STILL voted to give to children. These people are pure evil." The social media posts also gave the impression that the adverse events were nefariously hidden from the public in a confidential report. 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). The adverse events listed on the Pfizer report aren't necessarily caused by vaccines. And the vast majority of those events may not have happened to any vaccine recipients at all. The document is marked confidential because it contained privileged commercial or financial information, not because it was trying to hide safety data. What is an adverse event? Adverse events are any and all health issues that arise after someone receives a drug, whether or not it's caused by the drug. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration defines an adverse event as "any unfavorable and unintended sign (e.g., an abnormal laboratory finding), symptom, or disease temporally associated with the use of a drug, and does not imply any judgment about causality." Reports of adverse events are collected while a drug is undergoing clinical trials and after it has been released to the general public. Documentation of adverse events aren't restricted to just healthcare providers and researchers — anyone can submit a report to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System, the federal vaccine adverse event tracking system. VAERS accepts all reports and does not require proof that an event was caused by the vaccine — only that it occurred sometime after administration. Not all adverse events that have been reported are included in a drug label because investigation may show they are not related to the drug. When an adverse event has been evaluated to be likely caused by the drug, however, it is then considered an adverse reaction. These are added to drug package inserts along with other safety information and proper usage guidelines. Pfizer’s document The Pfizer document that’s the source of these social media posts is an analysis of adverse event reports collected from December 2020 through the end of February 2021. During this period, the company’s COVID-19 was under emergency use authorization. Contrary to the assertions of many social media posts, the alphabetized list of adverse events at the end of the Pfizer report is neither a comprehensive catalog of conditions that have been reported as adverse events, nor a running log of diseases and side effects caused by vaccination. The 9-page appendix in the Pfizer report lists adverse events of special interest – pre-specified conditions the FDA asks researchers and drug companies to monitor for in relation to a drug. Inclusion in this list does not mean that the condition has actually been observed post-vaccination. The bulk of the document that appears before the appendix, on the other hand, consists of adverse events that patients or others reported having occurred following vaccination. Pfizer submitted this information to the FDA as part of its application for the vaccine’s full approval for people age 16 and older. These adverse events come from a variety of sources, including reports directly sent to the company, health authorities, cases in medical research, and both non-interventional and clinical studies. All adverse events were included regardless of whether or not they were related to the vaccine. 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 Pfizer report also explicitly notes the limitations of adverse event reporting, stating that all reports are voluntarily submitted, and inclusion does not necessarily indicate causality. ‘Confidential’ does not mean maliciously concealed Pfizer’s document is dated April 2021, and the FDA recently released it in response to a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request from Public Health and Medical Professionals for Transparency, a group that says its aim is to "obtain and disseminate the data relied upon by the FDA to license COVID-19 vaccines." Among its members are a number of people who are known to have spread misinformation around COVID-19. The group posted the documents on its website, without any contextual information. Pfizer’s document does have a "confidential" label and says that: "The information contained in this document is proprietary and confidential. Any disclosure, reproduction, distribution, or other dissemination of this information outside of Pfizer, its Affiliates, its Licensees, or Regulatory Agencies is strictly prohibited." But a "confidential" label does not necessarily mean that Pfizer or the FDA were hiding crucial safety information from the public. By law, the FDA is prohibited from publicly disclosing the existence of new drug applications until they are approved. While this information can be made available by request, portions that fall under a FOIA exemption for trade secrets and commercial or financial information that is privileged or confidential must be removed prior to release, as in the case of this document. Safety data for the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine have been publicly available since 2020. The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention says that the COVID-19 vaccines are safe and effective for both children and adults. Our ruling Social media posts claim that the drug labels for the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine "were blank when they should have contained all these diseases and adverse events" listed in a confidential report. In an application submitted to the FDA, Pfizer included a pre-specified list of "special interest" potential adverse events that the FDA asks researchers to look out for. The social media posts mischaracterized that list. The listing of those adverse events in this document does not mean that they actually occured in patients. Nor do the adverse events reported after receiving the company’s COVID-19 vaccine necessarily mean that the vaccine caused them. And the document is marked confidential not because the company was trying to conceal safety information, but because it contained privileged commercial or financial information. When an investigation determines that a specific adverse event was likely caused by a drug, it is then considered an adverse reaction. Adverse reactions are added to drug package inserts along with other safety information and proper usage guidelines. The social media posts fail to acknowledge these important caveats. We rate the posts False. RELATED: How an alternative gateway to VAERS data helps fuel vaccine misinformation RELATED: Federal VAERS database is a critical tool for researchers, but a breeding ground for misinformati

Video shows “Russian soldiers using weapons that have been in a cupboard since Soviet times. Russia’s attack on Ukraine has been more challenging than its leaders expected, analysts say. And while some experts have attributed that to poor coordination, logistical challenges and Ukrainian defense, one TikTok video suggests part of the reason for Russia’s difficult road so far is its use of outdated equipment. The video shared on Facebook March 13 showed camouflaged soldiers attempting to fire what appears to be a rocket-propelled grenade. Instead, the grenade fails to launch and the camera captures what looks like the soldiers scrambling for cover. "Russian soldiers using weapons that have been in a cupboard since Soviet times," read a caption written across the video. The headline below the video says "#russian" and "#ukraine." 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.) Fact-checkers at Lead Stories found a longer version of the same video on YouTube with the caption, "KDF officers Escape death after their RPG failed to launch" posted on Feb. 23. This video shows the soldiers running and collapsing nearby while the person filming them can be heard laughing. KDF stands for Kenya Defence Forces and the uniforms the soldiers are seen wearing appear to match those seen in an image posted March 20, 2022, on the Kenya Defence Forces official Facebook page. We reached out to the Kenya Ministry of Defence, but have not gotten a response. We contacted experts for more information. 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 Scott Boston, a senior defense analyst at the RAND Corporation, researches land warfare, with an emphasis on Russian military capabilities. "I can’t tell who they are," Boston said of the soldiers in the video, "but they aren’t uniformed as Russian soldiers in general nor do they have the armbands we are usually seeing." U.K. Royal United Services Institute analyst Nick Reynolds told Lead Stories that the uniform seen in the video did recall that of Kenyan military: "The camouflage pattern and, in particular, the body armour design indicate that the personnel in question are from the Kenyan Defence Forces," he said in Lead Stories’ fact-check. We found the video had been shared widely in the last month, however, with claims that it shows soldiers from Ghana, Nigeria and Ukraine. What we do know: the uniforms do not appear to match ones we found in photos of Russian soldiers. Our ruling A video claimed to show Russian soldiers fleeing for safety after failing to fire a rocket-propelled grenade. One expert told us the soldiers in the video don’t appear to be Russian, based on their uniforms and lack of armbands. The uniforms do not seem to match ones in photos we found of Russian soldiers. The uniforms appear to match those worn by the military in Kenya, based on images and a longer version of the video found on YouTube. We rate this claim Fals