Datasets:

Cartinoe5930

/

Politifact_fake_news

like 0

Mo Brooks "voted to cut off funding to destroy ISIS terrorists in the middle of the fight. The Republican endorsed by former President Donald Trump for an open U.S. Senate seat in Alabama tried to undercut the U.S. fight against the ISIS terrorist organization, according to one TV ad attacking him. U.S. Rep. Mo Brooks faces two other major GOP challengers in the May 24 primary and is being attacked in TV, radio and Facebook ads from Alabama’s Future, a super PAC formed to oppose his candidacy. In the ad, a narrator said Brooks voted "to cut off funding to destroy ISIS terrorists — in the middle of the fight." Small text appearing in the ad alludes to Brooks’ votes for two failed proposals that had more to do with congressional authorization of military action against ISIS than cutting off funding for such action. They pertained to two amendments to Defense Department appropriations bills. National security expert John Pike of GlobalSecurity.org said the amendments "had nothing to do with blowing up ISIS and had everything to do with a congressional assertion of having a role in the war powers." Votes were taken as US fought ISIS ISIS, also known as the Islamic State, seized control of territory in Syria and Iraq starting in 2014, the year the campaign to defeat the Islamic militant group took shape. One of Brooks’ votes regarding ISIS occurred in 2015 and the other in 2016, as major U.S. military operations were carried out. It wasn’t until mid-2017 that ISIS, after losing much of the territory it had seized, collapsed. So, it’s fair to say that the two Brooks votes occurred during, as the ad claimed, "the middle of the fight," according to Pike and national security expert Daveed Gartenstein-Ross, who oversees Valens Global, a private national security consulting firm. But both said the ad’s claim against Brooks is oversimplified. What Brooks’ two votes were for Alabama’s Future has spent $2.89 million in the 2021-22 election cycle, according to the nonprofit Open Secrets. It’s not clear who organized the group, which does not disclose its donors to the Federal Election Commission. Alabama’s Future did not respond to our requests for information about the claim in the ad we’re checking. But the ad — along with another version of the TV ad we’re checking, two radio ads and a Facebook ad — identifies the two Brooks votes. In both cases, Brooks voted in favor of an amendment to annual appropriations bills for the Defense Department. Neither amendment passed. On June 11, 2015, the House voted on an amendment to the 2016 appropriations bill. The amendment would have prohibited the use of funds for Operation Inherent Resolve, as the campaign to defeat ISIS was known, without Congress first enacting a law authorizing the use of military force against ISIS. The amendment failed on a vote of 231-196. Brooks was one of 33 Republicans to vote yes, along with 163 Democrats, including Pelosi, the House speaker. The other six Alabama House members, including the lone Democrat, Terri Sewell, voted no. The amendment’s sponsor, Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., said at the time that he wanted no money spent "for the war against ISIS after a certain date in March of next year unless Congress authorizes a war against ISIS." 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 second vote came on June 16, 2016, when the House voted on an amendment to the 2017 appropriations bill. The amendment would have prohibited funds being obligated for combat operations in Iraq or Syria unless an authorization for the use of military force, known as an AUMF, had been enacted. That amendment was proposed by Rep. Jim McGovern, D-Mass. He said at the time: "Quite simply, if you want the money to fight a war, then pass an AUMF." The amendment failed on a vote of 285-130. Brooks was one of 17 Republicans to vote for the amendment, along with 118 Democrats, including Pelosi. Again, the other Alabama House members voted no. The upshot of the votes Gartenstein-Ross said that had either amendment become law, the funding for the fight against ISIS would have come to an end — but in that case, Congress could simply have taken the separate step of authorizing such military action. "It’s highly likely" that Congress would have approved an authorization for the use of military force, he said. A key aim of the amendments was to give Congress authority over the military actions that had been originally authorized after the 9/11 terrorist attacks some 15 years earlier, Gartenstein-Ross said. That’s significant because that military force authorization specifically targeted organizations and persons who "planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001," and by the time Brooks’ amendment votes were taken, ISIS had split from al-Qaida, the terrorist group responsible for the 9/11 attacks, Gartenstein-Ross said. Michael O'Hanlon, director of research in foreign policy at the Brookings Institution, said some House members would only have supported funding for the war against ISIS if there were first congressional authorization. But some members voting for the amendments were simply trying to restore stronger congressional oversight on the use of force by the United States, he said. Brooks’ campaign noted that Brooks voted for the two appropriations bills themselves. In February 2015, Brooks raised questions about how spending money on fighting ISIS would affect other defense priorities and whether other nations would help the U.S. combat ISIS. And in June 2015, Brooks said an authorization of force proposed by President Barack Obama was "weak" because it was vague and had a three-year time limit. "If we’re going to get in there, the president needs to have whatever authorization he needs to win and I’ll vote for that kind of authorization for use of military force," Brooks said. "But I’m not going to vote for one that replicates the problems and loss of lives associated with Vietnam, where we don’t get in there to win, where we hamstring ourselves." Brooks has faced criticism for the votes before. A 2017 ad made a similar attack on Brooks, claiming he "voted to cut off funding to fight ISIS." A Birmingham TV station’s fact-check called the claim "true but misleading." Race could help decide Senate party control The Alabama race is to succeed Republican Sen. Richard Shelby, who was first elected to the Senate in 1986 and is not seeking re-election. The outcome could help determine which party controls the Senate, now split 50-50. Since campaign watchers rate the race as safe or solid Republican, the outcome of the May 24 primary is key. The other major GOP candidates are former Shelby aide Katie Britt and Army veteran Mike Durant. If no candidate receives a majority of the votes, a primary runoff election for the top two finishers would be held June 21. Our ruling Alabama’s Future claimed in an ad that Brooks "voted to cut off funding to destroy ISIS terrorists in the middle of the fight." The ad alludes to two votes, one in 2015 and one in 2016 during U.S. combat operations against ISIS in Iraq and Syria. Neither was an up-or-down vote on funding military operations against the terrorist group. What Brooks voted for were measures that would have required congressional authorization of military action against ISIS before any funding of such operations could be approved. The ad contains an element of truth, but ignores critical facts that would give a different impression. We rate it Mostly False. PolitiFact staff researcher Caryn Baird contributed to this repor

Ketanji Brown Jackson "gave a lecture talking about critical race theory as one of the components to consider when you are making decisions on the bench. A Republican senator claimed that Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson said judges should use critical race theory in making their decisions. Jackson would be the first Black woman on the U.S. Supreme Court if confirmed by the Senate. Critical race theory is a collection of ideas about systemic bias and privilege. Conservative elected officials have moved to bar critical race theory in public schools or state agencies, even when it isn’t being used. The attack on Jackson, a judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, came from Tennessee Sen. Marsha Blackburn. In a Fox News interview during a break on the second day of Jackson’s Senate confirmation hearings, Blackburn said Tennessee residents have concerns about Jackson and parental rights. "Whether you're in Virginia, whether you're in San Francisco, you want children to be taught facts in school, you don't want them indoctrinated. They're concerned about Judge Jackson," Blackburn said March 22. In 2015, she continued, Jackson "gave a lecture talking about critical race theory as one of the components to consider when you are making decisions on the bench." Blackburn is a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, which will recommend whether Jackson’s nomination by President Joe Biden should be considered by the full Senate. Her claim was similar to a narrower remark she made on the first day of the hearings, when she told Jackson that "you believe judges must consider critical race theory when deciding criminal defendants." Blackburn’s office cited a 2015 Jackson lecture on federal criminal sentencing policy. In the text of the speech, which is part of a record on Jackson assembled by the committee, Jackson said: Featured Fact-check Kanye West stated on October 16, 2022 in an interview Suggests fentanyl, not Derek Chauvin, killed George Floyd By Gabrielle Settles • October 18, 2022 "… no fewer than 97% of the cases in the federal criminal justice system are now resolved by guilty pleas, so in the vast majority of criminal cases, sentencing is really all there is. But even beyond that, learning about sentencing is important for all lawyers, even if criminal law is not your thing, because, at bottom, the sentencing of criminal offenders is the authorized exercise of the power of the government to subjugate the free will of individuals … "I also try to convince my students that sentencing is just plain interesting on an intellectual level, in part because it melds together myriad types of law — criminal law, of course, but also administrative law, constitutional law, critical race theory, negotiations and, to some extent, even contracts. And if that’s not enough to prove to them that sentencing is a subject worth studying, I point out that sentencing policy implicates and intersects with various other intellectual disciplines as well, including philosophy, psychology, history, statistics, economics, and politics." Republicans have questioned whether critical race theory influences Jackson’s views and work, including with a statement by Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky. Besides Jackson’s 2015 speech, the statement said that in a 2020 lecture, Jackson said a book on racism by Derrick Bell, who is seen as a leader of critical race theory, was an influential book to her. Prior to her nomination to the D.C. Circuit judgeship, Jackson served for eight years as a federal district court judge, having been appointed by President Barack Obama. She has also served as vice chair and commissioner on the U.S. Sentencing Commission. Jackson, having worked as a federal public defender, would be the first Supreme Court justice with extensive criminal defense experience since the late Thurgood Marshall. Our ruling Blackburn claimed that Jackson in 2015 "gave a lecture talking about critical race theory as one of the components to consider when you are making decisions on the bench." Jackson was speaking about sentencing policy, not how judges make decisions on the bench. She said sentencing policy is interesting on an intellectual level because it "melds together myriad types of law," as well as critical race theory, negotiations and contracts. We rate Blackburn’s statement Fals

At the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson advocated that “each and every criminal defendant in D.C. Corrections custody should be released. Republicans have portrayed Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson as soft on criminals. Sen. Marsha Blackburn, R-Tenn., suggested the federal judge "consistently called for greater freedom for hardened criminals." During the Senate Judiciary Committee hearing March 21, Blackburn said to Jackson, "At the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, you advocated and again I quote for ‘each and every criminal defendant in D.C. Corrections custody should be released.’ That would have been 1,500 criminals back on the street if you had had your way." Blackburn’s statement creates an impression that Jackson advocated for releasing incarcerated defendants en masse, and that’s wrong. The senator also cherry-picks part of Jackson’s April 10, 2020, ruling in one case in which she actually denied an inmate’s request for release. We contacted Blackburn’s office to ask for her evidence about President Joe Biden’s Supreme Court nominee and did not get a response by our deadline. Jackson’s record on releasing defendants The case at hand was a motion by a defendant, Sean Ray Wiggins, who sought to be released from the D.C. jail to home confinement due to the COVID-19 pandemic. At the time of Jackson’s ruling in April 2020, 41 inmates had tested positive for COVID-19 in the jail. Jackson was a U.S. District Court judge in Washington, D.C. Prosecutors opposed Wiggins’ request for release, arguing he was a danger to the community. Wiggins had pleaded guilty to participating in a large heroin trafficking conspiracy, and law enforcement found a significant amount of ammunition at his home when they arrested him. Jackson did make the statement that Blackburn quotes about releasing defendants: "The obvious increased risk of harm that the COVID-19 pandemic poses to individuals who have been detained in the District's correctional facilities reasonably suggests that each and every criminal defendant who is currently in D.C. DOC custody — and who thus cannot take independent measures to control their own hygiene and distance themselves from others — should be released," Jackson wrote. But Blackburn omits that Jackson also wrote that there are constraints on judicial authority and that statutes mandate an assessment of an inmate’s flight risk and dangerousness and that releasing dangerous defendants "poses substantial risks to probation officers, law enforcement, and the public at large." She concluded that Wiggins had not met the conditions for release and denied his motions. The Congressional Research Service wrote that many of Jackson’s decisions about releasing defendants during the pandemic "did not rely on it to grant release automatically" and that her decisions reflect "attention to case-specific circumstances." The report cites multiple examples of when Jackson denied motions for release: 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 Hartley James Lee, who was charged with possession of firearms. Jackson wrote that she agreed with recent precedents that "rejected emergency motions for release of otherwise healthy and potentially violent defendants based solely on the generalized risks that COVID-19 admittedly creates for all members of our society." Jackson cited a ruling by a magistrate judge who concluded that Lee was not likely to comply with release conditions and that he may act violently if released. Robert Leake, a defendant charged with drug and gun offenses, which Jackson described as "serious and dangerous." Jackson said that while Leake had mild asthma, he had a history of noncompliance with conditions of release, so there wasn’t a compelling reason for his release. ​​Jeremy Sears, pleaded guilty to distribution of child pornography. He sought release due to conditions including diabetes and asthma. Jackson wrote that Sears was at high risk of reoffending without treatment and had not had any sex offender treatment while in custody. In at least two decisions in 2020, the Congressional Research Service found, Jackson granted release to federal offenders based in part on the pandemic after examining factors specific to each offender: D’Angelo Dunlap, an inmate who had serious underlying medical conditions including a heart abnormality. Dunlap, a heroin addict, pleaded guilty to two counts of bank robbery. Jackson wrote that Dunlap "did not have a weapon and did not specifically threaten violence" and that he didn’t pose a danger to anyone but himself. She ordered him released, with the first six months of his 36-month term of supervised release under home incarceration. Morris Gemal Johnson, who was convicted of weapons-related offenses. Johnson was an honorably discharged veteran with no prior criminal history who completed two tours in Afghanistan and had since been diagnosed with post-traumatic stress disorder. Johnson had generally complied with release conditions for the 3.5 years it took to bring his case to trial. In a case unrelated to the pandemic, Jackson granted release to a 72-year-old prisoner who had served 49 years in prison and had medical conditions. LaVance Greene in 1971 fatally shot a marshal as Greene assisted his half brother from escaping custody during a funeral furlough. Greene, 23 at the time, was found guilty of felony murder and armed robbery. Prison officers supported his request for release and said he was a model inmate. Our ruling Blackburn said that at the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, Jackson advocated that "each and every criminal defendant in D.C. Corrections custody should be released." Blackburn plucked out part of a statement by Jackson in an April 2020 ruling while omitting that the judge also wrote that statutes mandate assessment of an inmate’s flight risk and the danger they pose. Jackson concluded that the inmate had not met the conditions for release and denied his motion. Blackburn’s statement suggests that Jackson released all inmates who came before her en masse, and that’s wrong. Jackson denied some inmates’ requests for release and granted other ones, taking into account factors such as the likelihood they would reoffend and whether they would comply with conditions of release. We rate this statement Mostly False. RELATED: Joe Biden keeps promise to name first Black woman to Supreme Cou

The Russian airstrike on a maternity hospital in Mariupol, Ukraine, had “the makings of yet another false flag operation” led by the U.S On March 9, Russia blasted a maternity hospital in the Ukrainian port city of Mariupol. Fatalities from the airstrike included a pale, bloodied pregnant woman who was photographed as she was carried from the hospital on a stretcher. Her baby died with her, the Associated Press reported. The attack left a crater in the ground, cars in flames and facilities damaged. Ukrainian officials said at least 17 people were injured, and at least five have died since the attack, according to CNN. Ukrainian emergency employees and volunteers carry an injured pregnant woman from a maternity hospital that was damaged by shelling in Mariupol, Ukraine, on March 9, 2022. (AP) "A strike on a maternity hospital is a final proof, proof of a genocide of Ukrainians taking place," Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelensky said after the attack. Russian officials, meanwhile, teetered between denial, justification and disinformation. They asserted that the hospital was empty and being used as a base for armed forces, and they falsely claimed that certain pregnant victims were crisis actors. Those and other claims casting doubt on the Mariupol hospital attack found a home on the far-right U.S. channel One America News Network. In a March 11 segment, OAN host Pearson Sharp baselessly suggested that the airstrike was a U.S.-led "false flag." "The United States has a long, storied history of conducting false flag operations in pursuit of its own political agenda," Sharp said, citing U.S. allegations of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq and unspecified "false flag gas attacks" that he claimed the U.S. orchestrated in Syria. Sharp continued: "It looks like we have the makings of yet another false flag operation, this time in the far-flung land of Ukraine, where Biden and his cronies are desperately trying to cook up more conflict to distract from their monumental failures here in America …" The OAN host went on to claim that the hospital had "no patients inside." U.S. Defense Department spokesperson Eric Pahon told PolitiFact that Sharp’s claims are "ridiculous." Several independent experts characterized Sharp’s "false flag" allegation in the same way. "There is no evidence the United States has been militarily engaged in any element of the conflict in Ukraine, let alone the bombing of a hospital in Mariupol," said Graham Brookie, the senior director of the Atlantic Council’s Digital Forensic Research Lab. "There is no legitimate reason that the United States would make worse a war that it has publicly denounced and is actively engaged in trying to end with every lever at its disposal." In an email to PolitiFact, OAN’s Sharp said that other stories of questionable veracity have come out of Ukraine, such as the heroic yet unverified tale of the "Ghost of Kyiv" fighter pilot. He also pointed to another time in the segment where he hedged slightly, saying, "We’re not saying we know what happened here, or that this was a false flag." "All I’m saying in my report is that we have a journalistic duty to question what we’re told, rather than straightaway accept it as fact," Sharp told PolitiFact. "Everyone is ignoring the whole point." Governments have plotted some false flags throughout history, albeit sparingly. But Sharp went beyond merely questioning what Ukrainian and international officials have said. 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 "As usual, OAN does not provide any evidence for their claim," said Scott Radnitz, director of the Ellison Center for Russian, East European and Central Asian Studies at the University of Washington. "This war is one of the best-covered ever, considering the wide availability of smartphones. The bombing of the hospital in Mariupol had multiple eyewitnesses and its aftermath was caught on camera." Journalists from the Associated Press, who were the last reporters left in Mariupol before getting out as Russia besieged the city, shot photos and video of the wreckage. Smoke rises after shelling in Mariupol, Ukraine, on March 9, 2022. (AP) "We watched smoke rise from a maternity hospital," they reported. "When we arrived, emergency workers were still pulling bloodied pregnant women from the ruins." A pregnant woman who later gave birth to a baby girl was photographed at the scene and gave the AP her eyewitness account: "We were lying in wards when glass, frames, windows and walls flew apart … We don’t know how it happened. We were in our wards and some had time to cover themselves, some didn’t." Mariana Vishegirskaya stands outside a maternity hospital that was damaged by shelling in Mariupol, Ukraine, on March 9, 2022. (AP) Additional footage was posted to Telegram, including by Zelensky and the city council in Mariupol. Several news organizations also verified videos from the hospital. A U.N. spokesperson laid the blame on Russia in a press briefing March 11. By claiming without evidence that the hospital had been a base for Ukrainian military activity, the Russian Foreign Ministry effectively admitted to the attack, Brookie said. Michael O’Hanlon, a senior fellow and the director of research in foreign policy at the Brookings Institution, said it wouldn’t make sense for the U.S. to gin up a false flag as Sharp alleged. "Biden and team are trying to keep us out of this war," O’Hanlon said. "So concocting stories of atrocities would serve little purpose and might even be counterproductive." But Sharp’s segment would have been welcomed by Russian officials seeking to avoid blame, and by Russian state media, where such false narratives regularly get amplified, experts said. "Wars always involve propaganda, and aggressors benefit when their actions that might incur global condemnation are obscured or blamed on the other side," Radnitz said. "OAN, whether deliberately or inadvertently, assists Russia in this effort." Our ruling Sharp said the attack on the Mariupol hospital had "the makings of yet another false flag operation" by the U.S. There is no evidence that the attack was staged or a false flag carried out by the U.S. Its aftermath was documented by workers, witnesses and journalists on the ground. We rate OAN’s claim Pants on Fir

Biden "wants to buy lithium from China for electric cars. In late February, President Joe Biden met with a group of California business and government leaders to highlight new domestic efforts to mine lithium and other materials to help power electric cars and wind turbines. But some social media users appear to have the news a little twisted. "So Brandon wants to buy lithium from China for electric cars (that) we can’t afford to charge in stations that don’t exist in a grid that can’t handle it!! Are we really that stupid?" read a March 14 Facebook post that’s been shared on the platform over 14,000 times. The Brandon reference is part of a chant used to mock Biden. 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 White House isn’t trying to buy more lithium from China for electric vehicles; it’s trying to buy less. Biden’s Feb. 22 meeting was about the U.S. trying to distance itself from purchasing foreign materials like lithium — particularly from China — by mining more domestically. The White House did not respond to a request for comment. In the virtual meeting, the president announced several investments aimed at expanding domestic supply of lithium, cobalt and other materials that are used to make electric vehicles, computers, solar panels and wind turbines. 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 U.S. currently gets many of these materials from China. According to the 2021 BP Statistical Review, China has 7.9% of the world’s lithium reserves. The U.S. has 4.0%. While the majority of reserves are in South America and Australia, China has become the third largest lithium producer in the world, spending over $60 billion over the past decade to build up the industry. To shore up production at home, Biden announced that his administration is giving $35 million to American mining company MP Materials to expand a project in Mountain Pass, California. The money will strengthen MP’s ability to process rare earth materials domestically for U.S. manufacturing. The initiative is part of an effort to make the U.S. less dependent on foreign products amid the supply chain disruptions that have helped fuel inflation. MP is expected to invest another $700 million in the supply chain by 2024. "We can’t build a future that’s made in America if we ourselves are dependent on China for the materials that power the products of today and tomorrow," Biden said Feb. 22. "And this is not anti-China, or anti-anything else. It’s pro-America." Biden also discussed efforts to extract lithium from around California’s Salton Sea and estimated that U.S. demand for the material will increase by 400% to 600% over the next several decades. Our ruling A Facebook post claims that Biden wants to buy lithium from China for electric cars. While the U.S. already buys foreign products like lithium from China, Biden’s recent announcement highlighted efforts to stop this and expand domestic mining of the material. We rate the post Fals

“Gov. Tony Evers brought Republicans and Democrats together to cut income taxes for the middle class. Wisconsin Republicans and Democrats both want credit for a massive tax cut signed into state law last summer. In a sign of the times, the two parties can’t agree on whether the move — part of the Republican-written state budget that Democratic Gov. Tony Evers signed into law — was a bipartisan one or not. Republican leadership said no. Evers said yes. The Wisconsin Initiative, a group whose website says it works to enact progressive policies, hold elected officials accountable and find solutions to issues facing the state’s working families, says yes, too. A pro-Evers television ad from the group says the move would help working families with rising costs and declared that Evers "brought Republicans and Democrats together to cut income taxes for the middle class." But that doesn’t exactly describe what happened. Let’s take a look. How the tax cut plan unfolded When Evers released his two-year spending plan for the state Feb. 16, 2021, it included a net increase of $1 billion in taxes over the biennium. He aimed to give tax breaks to the lower and middle classes and raise taxes on businesses and the wealthy. Republicans didn’t care for it. They removed his tax increases and breaks and, after learning the state would receive more than $4 billion extra in tax collections over the next three years, proposed a plan to cut more than $2 billion in taxes in their own budget. That included lowering one tax bracket from 6.27% to 5.3%, covering incomes up to $263,000 for individuals and up to $351,000 for married couples. The nonpartisan Legislative Fiscal Bureau estimated at the time that about three-quarters of the cuts would go to those making $100,000 or more a year. When Evers signed that budget, he cheered the tax cut and said it delivered on his promise to cut taxes for middle-class families. Republicans didn’t like that, either. "Governor Tony Evers deserves NO credit for signing our budget," Senate Majority Leader Devin LeMahieu, R-Oostburg, said in a statement at the time, arguing it was not a bipartisan victory but rather that Evers was "boxed into a corner." 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 Evers said his signature on the Republican-written budget by nature made it a bipartisan effort. "I signed the budget — simple as that. I could have vetoed that," he said at the time. Evers signed the budget, but the tax cut plan was written by Republicans When reached by PolitiFact Wisconsin, Morgan Grunow, executive director of the Wisconsin Initiative, pointed to bipartisan support as the Republicans’ budget moved through the Legislature as well as Evers’ final signature. When it passed the state Assembly on June 29, 2021, four Democrats joined Republicans in supporting it. Three Democrats in the state Senate voted for the plan the next day before sending it to Evers’ desk. "At the end of the day, Governor Evers introduced the budget, Democrats and Republicans both voted for it, and Evers signed into law," Grunow wrote in an email. "Bipartisan agreement on anything, especially this day and age, seems to align with the idea of bringing people together. The final vote tally speaks for itself." It’s correct that Evers has long pushed for middle-class tax cuts. He campaigned on cutting state income taxes by 10% for Wisconsinites making $100,000 a year or less. (PolitiFact Wisconsin rated that campaign promise as a Compromise last July because he’d pledged to do so in his first budget, not his second.) But it was the Republican-written budget, not his own, that eventually accomplished that goal for him. And while the budget that was ultimately signed into law received bipartisan support in both legislative chambers, Evers didn’t personally spur those Democratic lawmakers to join with their Republican colleagues. His actions didn’t necessarily bring people together — the pieces unfolded on their own. Our ruling The Wisconsin Initiative claimed Evers "brought Republicans and Democrats together to cut income taxes for the middle class." The end result of the maneuvering was that both sides — Evers and Legislative Republicans — signed off on tax cuts. But it was more the result of political maneuvering and budgetary good fortune than bipartisan outreach on the part of Evers. Our definition of Half True is a statement that is partially accurate but leaves out important details or takes things out of context. That fits here. window.gciAnalyticsUAID = 'PMJS-TEALIUM-COBRAND'; window.gciAnalyticsLoadEvents = false; window.gciAnalytics.view({ 'event-type': 'pageview', 'content-type': 'interactives', 'content-ssts-section': 'news', 'content-ssts-subsection': 'news:politics', 'content-ssts-topic': 'news:politics:politifactwisconsin', 'content-ssts-subtopic': ' news:politics:politifactwisconsin' });

The word "alcohol" derives from the Arabic term for "body-eating spirit With alternative names like "devil’s water" and "poison," alcohol has quite a reputation. According to some social media users, even the word "alcohol" itself has alarming origins. "The word ‘alcohol’ is said to come from the Arabic term ‘Al-khul’ which means ‘BODY-EATING SPIRIT,’" reads one March 14 Facebook post. Al-khul is also "the origin of the term ‘ghoul,’" according to the 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.) We found no link between the origins of the word "alcohol" and body-eating spirits. 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 English word "alcohol" has Arabic roots that trace back to the word "al-kuhl" or "al-kuhul," which refer to the cosmetic kohl, according to news reports and the Online Etymology Dictionary. "It derives from a reference to kohl, which was a kind of powdered eyeliner made via an extraction or distillation process from a natural mineral," German news organization Deutsche Welle reported. So the Arabic term "al-khul" does not refer to anything nefarious or ghoulish. Meanwhile, the Facebook post is also wrong in linking al-khul to the origin of "ghoul." The Online Etymology Dictionary traced the origin of the word "ghoul" to the Arabic term "ghul," which referred to "an evil spirit that robs graves and feeds on corpses." When debunking the claim in 2021, Africa Check reported that the word alcohol "has never been connected with a ‘body-eating spirit.’" We rate this claim Pants on Fir

“In April 1997, there was a ‘gas out’ conducted nationwide in protest of gas prices. Gasoline prices dropped 30 cents a gallon overnight. In the wake of rising gas prices amid Russia’s attacks on Ukraine, social media users have revived a more than 10-year-old myth about a surefire way to drive down costs at the pump. "In April 1997, there was a ‘gas out’ conducted nationwide in protest of gas prices," or so the long-repeated story goes. "Gasoline prices dropped 30 cents a gallon overnight." Facing higher gas prices than Americans have seen in years, some posts, such as this one from March 17, shared a call to action: "Don’t pump gas on April 15, 2022!" "If running low, just get your gas the day before on April 14 or the day after on April 16," it said. "Every little bit helps." The post was flagged as part of Facebook’s efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about our partnership with Facebook.) This 1997 "gas out" hoax has been circulating online for years. PolitiFact looked into it about 10 years ago and rated it Pants on Fire. Other news outlets also debunked the story in 2007, 2011 and 2019. (Screenshot from Facebook.) In 2012, Patrick DeHaan, a senior petroleum analyst at GasBuddy.com, told PolitiFact there’s no evidence to support the idea that a boycott drove gas prices down in 1997 and called the claim "an outright myth." We reviewed online news archives and found no evidence of a successful gasoline boycott in 1997. There were mentions of later gasoline boycotts — including one promoted by email chains in 1999 — but, in the end, the prices of gas "had no major fluctuations," at the time of said boycotts, PolitiFact reported. In April 1997, the average national price of a gallon of gasoline varied only slightly, according to U.S. Energy Information Administration data. Prices were as follows: 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 $1.203 for the week ending April 7 $1.199 for the week ending April 14 $1.199 for the week ending April 21 And $1.195 for the week ending April 28. There was no indication from the weekly average prices that a boycott had dropped the price of gas by 30 cents overnight at any point during the month. "Depending on ongoing market events at the time, the impact on demand could cause pump prices to decline," said Devin Gladden, a spokesperson for AAA. "However, a one-day event is likely to have a limited impact since longer-term trends could still cause prices to continue moving along that set direction." It takes time for gas prices to respond to changes in oil prices, and oil prices are influenced by changes in supply and demand. Boycotting the purchase of gasoline for a single day is unlikely to have a significant impact. As both DeHaan and others noted, it has the effect of simply shifting sales from one day to another. Our ruling A post claimed there was a ‘gas out’ conducted nationwide in protest of gas prices. Gasoline prices dropped 30 cents a gallon overnight." PolitiFact found no evidence to suggest that this boycott happened, and the experts we consulted in 2022 and 2012 knew of no such protest in 1997. It often takes time for gas prices to respond to changes in demand, so it is unlikely a single-day boycott would drive down prices as quickly and drastically as the post suggests, experts said. We rate these claims Pants on Fire. RELATED: How high are gasoline prices today, really? RELATED: Persistent high gas prices don’t prove price gouging — and neither do comparisons to 2008 gas pric

“Ukraine has been shooting residents of Donetsk and Lugansk just because they wanted to speak Russian. Russia has deployed a misinformation campaign as the country invades Ukraine, creating, as the New York Times put it, "an alternate reality where the invasion is justified and Ukrainians are to blame for violence." A recent Facebook post seems to echo Russian talking points, claiming that "for eight years, Ukraine has been shooting residents of Donetsk and Lugansk just because they wanted to speak Russian." This post was flagged as part of Facebook’s efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about our partnership with Facebook.) We’ve previously debunked Russian President Vladimir Putin’s claims that ethnic Russians are Ukrainian targets of genocide. He called Russia’s attack on Ukraine a mission "to protect people who, for eight years now, have been facing humiliation and genocide perpetrated by the Kyiv regime." But there’s no evidence to support this. Civilian deaths in Eastern Ukraine have plummeted, according to the United Nations’ Commission on Human Rights. We also found no evidence to support the claim that people are being assassinated for wanting to speak Russian. On March 11, NPR aired a story in which reporter Eleanor Beardsley traveled across Ukraine to investigate Putin’s claims that Russian-speakers were being killed there. 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 "That’s a big hoax," said the owner of a language school in Kyiv where students primarily study Russian. "There’s nothing of that going on." Ukraine’s Parliament has made Ukrainian the country’s official language, , but the law doesn’t prohibit the use of Russian and most of the country speaks it fluently, Beardsley reported. Russian is Ukrainian President Volodymr Zelenksy’s first language. Vadim Lyakh, mayor of Slovyansk, a town in the eastern Donbas region, said "there’s absolutely no discrimination" and that while the town’s official correspondence is in Ukrainian, "people continue to speak Russian at work and at home, as we always have." RELATED VIDEO Since Russia’s military presence started growing on Ukraine’s borders in December, "claims of ‘genocide’ of Russian speakers in eastern Ukraine have been a constant background hum on Russian state propaganda channels," Russian journalist and fact-checker Alexey Kovalev told the New York Times. The U.S. State Department calls this framing "Russophobia," a label the Russian government uses whenever it "wants to play the victim, when it is actually the aggressor." Ukraine appealed to the U.N.’s International Court of Justice in the Hague to rule on the Russian government’s claims of genocide "in the Luhansk and Donetsk oblasts of Ukraine," calling them false. The court ruled 13-2 on March 16 that the Kremlin’s justification for the war was unjustified and ordered Russia to stop its invasion. Judges from Russia and China were the two dissenting votes. We rate this post False.

Photos show “Ukrainian farmers are slowly starting to build their own army. Footage of tractors towing away large weaponry has repeatedly circulated on social media since Russia invaded Ukraine. Tractors have emerged as an unlikely symbol of Ukraine’s resilience. Certainly, farmers are among those hardest hit by Russia’s attack. Ukraine’s leaders have called on the agricultural sector to maintain food supply as crops and fields are threatened by bombings and missiles. So while these posts may have the effect of raising pro-Ukrainian morale, some of the images they share may deserve a more skeptical look as they haven’t been verified. "Ukrainian farmers are slowly starting to build their own army," read a March 16 caption alongside a collage of five images showing Russian tanks, jets, and warships hitched onto tractors. 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 first picture, showing a farmer hauling away a massive warship, was posted by a satirical Twitter account named "Sputnik_Not," referencing Russia’s state-owned news agency, Sputnik News. A reverse image search revealed that the user photoshopped the tractor against the backdrop of the Admiral Kuznetsov — a Russian aircraft carrier. The photo was published on the actual Sputnik News website on Oct. 30, 2018. 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 second image, showing the farming vehicle towing a Russian tank, and the third image, depicting a rocket attached to a tractor, also appeared on the satirical Twitter account. We couldn’t verify the authenticity of the photo showing the tank being towed, though it appears to be a screengrab from footage surfacing on tabloid sites and social media. A reverse image search on TinEye dated the image back to March 5. PolitiFact found an earlier version of the third photo in Getty Images archives. That image depicted the Russian rocket in transit. According to the Getty caption, it was taken by photographer Bill Ingalls for NASA on Oct. 9, 2018, in Kazakhstan — without a green tractor attached and thousands of miles away from Ukraine. The fourth picture in the Facebook post shows a tractor resting slightly above the water, supposedly pulling a Russian nuclear submarine. It was photographed in France on Sept. 21, 2004, and was digitally altered to include the tractor. The central image in the collage depicted an aircraft hitched to a tractor. It was taken during a celebration of Croatia’s military in 2011 and ran with a story published by 24sata.hr, a Croatian news outlet. Only one of the images included in the compilation could not be verified. Still, none of them accurately reflect the enduring conflict in Ukraine or point to farmers in the country "slowly starting to build their own army." We rate this claim False

Russian President Vladimir Putin “was assassinated. The headline of a March 19 blog post begins with a word that draws readers’ attention: urgent. "News that Russia President ‘Vladimir Putin’ was assassinated by unknown armed forces," it continues. "Russia declares a state of emergency." The blog post is being shared on social media, but clicking the link and reading past the headline reveals not more information about the alleged killing, but gibberish and what appear to be ads for work-from-home products. 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.) There’s nothing more in the blog post about Putin, let alone about him being killed or Russia declaring a state of emergency. 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 On March 18, Putin made his first public appearance — speaking at a Moscow rally — since Russia invaded Ukraine. There have been no reports since then that the Russian president was assassinated. RELATED VIDEO On March 3, U.S. Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., suggested that someone should kill Putin, which the Biden White House said doesn’t reflect the U.S. government’s position. President Joe Biden has called Putin a "murderous dictator" and a "pure thug," and the New York Times reported on March 20 that Russia had summoned the American ambassador to Moscow to warn him that Biden’s name-calling had endangered the countries’ relations. We rate this post Pants on Fire.

“Putin Vows to ‘Crush’ Child Traffickers in Ukraine According to one narrative being shared on social media, Russia has a noble aim for its war against Ukraine: to end child trafficking there. "Putin vows to ‘crush’ child traffickers in Ukraine," read what looked like a headline in a screenshot shared March 2 on Facebook. The headline came from Real Raw News, an outlet known for sharing misinformation, including a similar claim on Ukraine that PolitiFact rated False. "Putin is wanting to destroy the bio labs and confront many other crimes against humanity such as child sex trafficking," read another post from Feb. 25, referencing a separate debunked claim that Ukraine has U.S.-funded bioweapons labs. "Putin is cleaning up our mess," said another lengthy and grammatically problematic post from Feb. 27. Ukraine is where "all the child trafficking and heroin money is washed," the post said. 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.) There is no evidence that Putin’s decision to wage war in Ukraine has been motivated by a desire to rid the country of child trafficking. And although they don’t mention QAnon, these claims echo ideas central to the conspiracy theory, experts told us. QAnon has as one of its assumptions that the world is run by a cabal of Satan-worshiping pedophiles that include famous Democrats and celebrities. Putin did not mention child trafficking in speeches or public meetings in the months leading up to the invasion, according to transcripts published by the Kremlin and reviewed by PolitiFact. In one of those events, Putin claimed that ethnic Russians living in areas of Ukraine controlled by Russian separatists "have been literally tortured by constant shelling and blockades" and that they were "forced to seek shelter in their basements — where they now live with their children." Putin’s stated goal for the war has been to protect ethnic Russians against "humiliation and genocide" perpetrated by Ukraine and to "demilitarize and denazify" the country, according to a speech he gave on Feb. 24. PolitiFact rated Putin’s claim of genocide False. The Real Raw News article said that its information came from an anonymous source at Mar-a-Lago with knowledge of multiple phone calls between Putin and Trump. But Real Raw News is known for fabricating sources, stories, headlines and even bylines. The Kremlin’s transcripts of Putin’s conversations, meanwhile, reveal no such correspondence. 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 would make little sense for Russia to attempt to "crush" child trafficking in Ukraine, as it has a more serious problem with human trafficking than its neighbor, according to the State Department’s latest Trafficking in Persons report. Both countries struggle with the issue, but Ukraine acted to solve it between 2020 and 2021, while Russia failed to make "significant efforts" to eliminate the problem, the report said. While Ukraine convicted traffickers, increased financial assistance to victims, and launched awareness campaigns, Russia "convicted only one trafficker," "did not initiate any new prosecutions of suspected traffickers," and "offered no funding or programs to provide services for trafficking victims," the report said. Some recent Facebook posts explicitly made the connection between Ukraine and QAnon beliefs. "Ukraine was the epicenter of the cabal's satanic operations," said a Twitter post shared on Facebook as a screenshot but since deleted. "We will find that many of these ‘labs’ & underground bunkers in Ukraine hosted a lot of the cabals workings." Travis View, an expert on QAnon and co-host of the podcast QAnon Anonymous, said the pattern of these claims fits with past QAnon activity: "QAnon followers typically incorporate current events into their conspiracy theories, and the developments in Ukraine are no different." Jared Holt, a researcher who studies disinformation for the Atlantic Council think tank, said QAnon’s support for Putin is partly explained by followers’ support for Trump. The former American president has praised Putin publicly, including lauding his strategy in Ukraine in the early days of the conflict. Another element at play is QAnon’s antagonism towards the traditional media and its vulnerability to disinformation from Russia, according to View and Holt. "Putin represents a figure akin to Trump," Holt said, in that they are both unfairly portrayed as a villain by corrupt authorities. In their eyes, Holt said, "Putin is fighting against a corrupt, Satanic cabal that has captured the Western world." Our ruling A post on Facebook alleged that Russia started its invasion of Ukraine to fight child trafficking. The claim originates in an article published by a website known for fabricating stories and sources. There is no evidence that ending child trafficking is a goal of the war in Ukraine. Russia itself is failing to deal with human trafficking within its own borders, according to a report by the U.S. State Department. And while Putin has been very descriptive about his reasons for invading Ukraine, child trafficking has never been mentioned. We rate the post Fals

A photo shows "NATO resupplying Ukrainian farmers anti-tank supplies. An old photo of an Indian Air Force helicopter hauling a tractor has been recontextualized online amid Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. Thousands of Facebook users are sharing a post that falsely claims the image shows NATO assistance in Ukraine. The widespread image, shared March 10 on Facebook and with at least 29,000 likes, is the latest in the flurry of out-of-context photos and videos that have gone viral since the start of the war. "NATO resupplying Ukrainian farmers (with) anti-tank supplies," the Facebook post 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.) 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 picture in the post dates back to at least 2020. PolitiFact found an earlier version of the same photo via reverse image searching. Mahindra Tractors, an Indian tractor manufacturer, posted it on Twitter in November 2020. It then appeared in some articles online. "A ‘Tough’ flight which only Mahindra Tractor can dare dream of @ 11,000 ft," the company wrote in the Nov. 2, 2020, tweet. Mahindra Group, the company’s parent conglomerate with headquarters in India, did not immediately respond to PolitiFact’s inquiry asking where and when the photo was snapped and what it showed. We did not immediately hear back from NATO, either. But it is clear that the photo predates Russia’s 2022 assault on Ukraine and does not show NATO airlifting anti-tank supplies to farmers in the country, as the viral Facebook post claimed. The chopper in the 2020 photo is labeled, "Indian Air Force." India is not a member of NATO. We rate this Facebook post Fals

"What is happening here is not so different from what we're seeing happening in Russia, where you have got state TV and controlled messaging across the board. Speaking on Fox News amid Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, former Democratic presidential candidate Tulsi Gabbard falsely claimed that Russia and the U.S. are largely the same when it comes to the suppression of free speech. The March 15 claim by Gabbard, a former congresswoman from Hawaii, came shortly after Russia arrested a journalist who protested the war on state TV and enacted a law threatening up to 15 years of prison time for spreading "false information" about the Ukraine invasion. Fox News host Jesse Watters teed up Gabbard’s segment by playing a clip from ABC’s "The View," when a host suggested that Gabbard and Fox News host Tucker Carlson should be federally investigated for "shilling" for Russian President Vladimir Putin. Watters then claimed Democrats are "seeking out ways to silence free speech." "Tulsi, it is striking when you see Putin propaganda and you line it up against Biden propaganda," he said. "Do you think that we’re at risk of kind of moving in that direction right now?" Gabbard responded that the U.S. is "moving in that direction," claiming its leaders and media are "afraid of even a single voice coming out as challenging the power elite." She continued: "This is why we’re seeing not only still most of the mainstream media very vigorously defending and pushing the Biden propaganda … It’s not enough that they also have Google and Big Tech basically working for them and with them to control what information we see and what information we don’t see … "This is what’s so dangerous about the place that we’re in right now as a country, where this idea, this principle, this foundation of freedom of speech, freedom of expression is directly under threat and under attack. And you’re right, it’s not so different. What’s happening here is not so different from what we’re seeing happening in Russia, where you’ve got state TV and controlled messaging across the board. This is where we’re at." Five experts told PolitiFact that Gabbard is wrong. The claim is "absurd," said Scott Gehlbach, a professor of political science and an expert on Russia and Ukraine at the University of Chicago. "In Russia, one can now face up to 15 years in prison for simply calling a war a war," Gehlbach said. "In the U.S., citizens such as Tulsi Gabbard are free to make not only truthful but untruthful statements without fear of legal sanction." Russia’s ‘extraordinary powers of censorship’ Russia has long trampled its independent press and citizens’ freedom of speech. Opposition leader Alexei Navalny, a prominent Putin critic, was arrested in 2021 and recently added to the country’s registry of terrorists and extremists. The Kremlin’s restrictions, tightened further since its invasion of Ukraine, have driven citizens to use virtual private networks and encrypted servers to access factual information. "The state in Russia is criminalizing speech and locking people up," said Rutgers Law School professor Ellen Goodman, the co-director of the university’s Institute for Information Policy and Law. "That is not happening in the U.S. — not at (the) hands of private parties or state." 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 Russia shuttered its main independent broadcasters and cut access to international outlets like the BBC. It also blocked Facebook and Instagram and hamstrung users' ability to use Twitter. Each of those platforms — along with TikTok, which suspended new videos and live streaming in Russia in response to Russia’s law against "false" information — remain available in the U.S. Russian President Vladimir Putin attends his annual news conference in Moscow, Russia, on Dec. 23, 2021. (AP) "Russia is exercising extraordinary powers of censorship unseen in Russia since the Soviet era," said David Kaye, a clinical professor of law at the University of California, Irvine, and the former United Nations special rapporteur for freedom of opinion and expression. And it is filling the information void entirely with state-controlled media pushing the government’s messages. "Is there anything remotely like this in the United States? No," Kaye said. "The U.S. government lacks power under the Constitution to engage in the kind of actions taking place in Russia." News organizations in the U.S. operate independently of the government’s demands and create a diversity of information not easily found in countries with state-controlled media. That includes the U.S.’s state-owned outlets like Voice of America, which have editorial independence. And while mainstream U.S. news organizations sometimes produce similar coverage, that’s a far cry from "having that consensus chiefly stem from government coercion," said UCLA law professor Eugene Volokh, a Ukrainian-American and expert on First Amendment law. He added that speech in the U.S. is "immeasurably freer" than in Russia. Gabbard’s argument Gabbard told PolitiFact that she was not saying that "our lack of freedom of speech in the United States is as bad as in Russia," but that it’s heading that way. Institutions in Russia and the United States "exert great control and influence" over what people see and hear, causing people to fear that they will "suffer" if they say or do something different, she wrote in an email. "In Russia, it is a powerful state/government which exerts such control," Gabbard said. "In the United States, there is similar control but instead of the state directly having such control, it is giant tech and social media companies which are politically aligned with and work closely with those who hold political and institutional power." Gabbard’s argument echoes conservative allegations of Big Tech bias and censorship against them. But plentiful research has cut against those claims. In 2021, Twitter revealed that a study showed right-leaning news outlets were amplified on its platform more than left-leaning news outlets, and that tweets from right-leaning accounts similarly outpaced tweets from left-leaning accounts in the U.S. and other countries. Another 2021 study by researchers at New York University concluded that the allegations that social media companies censor conservatives are "unfounded." "I know of no academic research that concludes there is a strong systemic bias — liberal or conservative — in how social media platforms identify what to show to users or in how they enforce their terms of service in content moderation decisions," said Steven L. Johnson, an associate professor of commerce at the University of Virginia who has studied social media. Some Republicans, including former President Donald Trump, have had accounts suspended, restricted, or marked with fact-checking labels. But those penalties have generally resulted from specific violations of the various platforms’ community guidelines. Our ruling Gabbard said, "What is happening here is not so different from what we're seeing happening in Russia, where you have got state TV and controlled messaging across the board." Since its invasion of Ukraine, Russia — a country with a long history of suppressing free speech and access to information — has restricted dissenting voices, independent news reporting and public discourse on social media platforms, including with a new law threatening prison time for spreading "false" information about the war. Those measures are without parallel in the U.S., where freedom of speech, expression and the press are enshrined in the Constitution. We rate Gabbard’s claim Pants on Fir

“Virginia women are paid 80 cents for every dollar paid to Virginia men. March 15 was Equal Pay Day and U.S. Sen. Tim Kaine, D-Va., was tweeting. "Virginia women are paid 80 cents for every dollar paid to Virginia men," he wrote. "We must pass the Paycheck Fairness Act to close the gender gap." Kaine’s office said his figure comes from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, which issues an annual report comparing the pay of women to men who work at least 35 hours a week at a principal job. The latest report found that in 2020, Virginia women received a median weekly pay of $1,002 compared to $1,260 for men. In other words, women made 79.5% as much as men which, rounded up, matches Kaine’s figure. It’s important to know that the 80% figure is not an apples-to-apples pay comparison of men and women performing the same work. Instead, it refers to median pay for all jobs held by men and all jobs held by women. Nationally, women were paid 82.3% as much as men in 2020. That means that the pay gap in Virginia was 2.8 percentage points larger than the nation’s. The bureau, however, cautions that its 2020 figures were affected by the COVID-19 pandemic, which caused deep drops in employment, particularly among low-wage workers. BLS reports from 2015 to 2019 show the wage gap in Virginia was typically about 1% larger than the nation’s. Since 2015, there’s been little movement in Virginia or nationally in how much women make compared to men. It’s hovered at 80% in Virginia and 81% across the U.S. Is it all discrimination? Kaine’s tweet calls for passage of the Paycheck Fairness Act, a bill that would combat "pay discrimination" against women and LGBTQ workers. It would require employers to prove that pay disparities between men and women are job related and would make it easier to file class-action suits alleging pay discrimination. The Democratic bill narrowly passed the House in April 2021 but has been stalled in the Senate, unable to get the 60 votes needed to break a Republican filibuster. 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 PolitiFact has written before, many researchers have concluded the causes of gender pay disparity go far beyond discrimination. "The most important source of the gender wage gap is that women assume greater responsibility for child-rearing than men," June O’Neill, an economist at Baruch College, wrote in a 2010 op-ed for the The Wall Street Journal. "That influences women's extent and continuity of work, which affects women's skills and therefore wages. In addition, women often seek flexible work schedules, less stressful work environments, and other conditions compatible with meeting the demands of family responsibilities. Those come at a price—namely, lower wages." A 2009 analysis by the nonpartisan CONSAD Research Corp. in Pittsburgh also concluded that the wage gap is not simply a product of sexism. CONSAD found that three-fourths of the disparity can be explained by other trends common to women: they tend to choose occupations that have relatively low wages, they tend have degrees leading to lower-paying occupations than men and they tend to have a shorter work history and take more time off from work for childbirth and child care. CONSAD said these factors, when considered, reduced the pay gap to between 4 and 7%, which could be result of discrimination. A 2013 study by the American Association of University Women tried to even out the child-rearing effect on women’s pay. It found a 7% wage gap between men and women a year after graduating college and a 12% gap 10 years out - even after accounting for other factors. Our ruling Kaine tweeted, "Virginia women are paid 80 cents for every dollar paid to Virginia men." His comment comes from the Bureau of Labor Statistics’ latest report comparing the pay of men and women working full-time jobs. In 2020, Virginia women earned 79.5% as much as men. Rounded up, that matches Kaine’s figure. The 80% figure is not a pay comparison of men and women doing the same work. It refers to the median pay of all jobs held by men and all jobs held by women. Kaine cited the statistic correctly. We rate his tweet True.

A recent on-air protest can’t be real because "there are no live on air television broadcasts in Russia. None. Ever. A producer working for Channel One, a Russian-owned news channel, recently made headlines for staging a protest against her country’s invasion of Ukraine on the station’s evening live newscast. Marina Ovsyannikova walked out behind a news anchor on the show Vremya on March 14, shouting, "Stop the war. No to war," according to the Guardian. She held a sign with words written in English and Russian. It was signed, "Russians against the war." Ovsyannikova was hailed as a hero by many for her open display of opposition to the war less than two weeks after Russia enacted a new law that could punish anyone deemed to be spreading "false information" about the invasion to 15 years in prison. Ovsyannikova so far has avoided a harsh sentence. She was interrogated for 14 hours, she said, and fined about $270, not for her on-air protest, but for a prerecorded video she filmed where she apologized for helping spread Russian propaganda on the network, according to The New York Times. But some on social media are saying Ovsyannikova’s protest was staged and amounted to just another propaganda effort in the battle for public opinion over the war. It couldn’t have been real, they say, because there are no live TV broadcasts in Russia. But that isn’t true, experts told PolitiFact. "There are no live on air television broadcasts in Russia. None. Ever," read a March 15 Facebook post. Because there are no live broadcasts, the post said, Russia staged the protest to distract attention and to get people talking about the "good Russians." This post was flagged as part of Facebook’s efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about our partnership with Facebook.) Several experts we spoke with said there are regular live news and other broadcasts on Russian television. Farida Rustamova, an independent journalist who writes about Russian issues on her substack page, said many broadcasts, including news shows, sports, speeches by Russian President Vladimir Putin and other events are shown live. Rustamova is one of many Russian journalists who have recently fled the country after the government’s crackdown on free speech. She said her sources who work for state TV told her that the news is still being broadcast live, but in response to Ovsyannikova’s protest, there now may be a delay of 30 seconds to a minute. 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 Julia Davis, a journalist and Russian media analyst who created the website Russian Media Monitor, also said that Russian television shows are broadcast live on a regular basis. "On various shows on their top channels, I've seen some of the hosts stumble (one fell)," she wrote to PolitiFact in an email. "Sometimes there are curse words they have no time to bleep. All of the above would have been removed if the shows weren't actually streaming live." Davis said on one live show she watched, producers forgot to cut the cameras during a commercial break. "I could see the hosts interacting with guests," Davis said. "Again, that would have been removed if the show wasn’t streaming live. In fact, later uploads did not contain those mishaps." Roman Badanin, a journalist from Russia who recently wrote for CNN about his experience leaving the country in 2021 due to the threat of arrest, also told PolitiFact that "most of the news shows," including on Channel One, "are broadcast live" in the country. Badanin is now a student at Stanford University. One reason the news is broadcast live in Russia is that the country has so many time zones due to its large size, Rustamova said. "This is why recording news in advance is pointless. Evening news in Vladivostok, the capital of the Far East, goes on the air at 9 p.m., when it is 1 p.m. in Moscow. It is impossible to repeat this issue in 8 hours to Moscow, as the news will become outdated. Therefore, the news is broadcast live to the Far East, Siberia and Moscow." She said Ovsyannikova’s protest was only seen by viewers in Moscow and Central Russia. Rustamova pointed us to an article on the news site DW that included an interview with Elena Afanasyeva, the former planning director of Channel One. Afanasyeva told DW that "All Channel One news is broadcast live," according to an English translation. Our ruling A Facebook post said that a Russian journalist’s protest during a state TV broadcast couldn’t be real because "there are no live on air television broadcasts in Russia. None. Ever." But experts we spoke with, including journalists who have worked in Russia, said that is not true. There are many live broadcasts, including the news show that was interrupted by an employee’s protest. There has been no evidence presented that shows her actions were staged as part of a Russian propaganda effort. We rate this claim Fals

A video shows current “leaked footage of heavy war between Russia vs Ukraine Real images showing violence and horror from Russia’s invasion of Ukraine have been hard to avoid as they stream across news stations, social media and more. The truth of the destruction makes it even more perplexing when we see claims about the war that rely on unrelated video or images. One recent Facebook video claimed to contain "leaked footage of heavy war between Russia vs Ukraine" but consists of clips taken from videos made more than five years ago. The March 15 video looks like a TV news broadcast, with a chyron that says, "Live: War strike between Ukraine and Russia," and text on the screen that says "breaking news." 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 footage is a compilation made from old videos. Some of it is from a 2015 video created by a Turkish company about the Ukrainian army, and some is from a 2014 video filmed in the Donbass region of Ukraine. Featured Fact-check Viral image stated on October 22, 2022 in an Instagram post A CNN headline shows Uganda’s president saying he doesn’t support Ukraine because it would be “disgusting.” By Ciara O'Rourke • October 24, 2022 Beginning at the 27-second mark in the Facebook video, we see two vehicles, one firing missiles. Identical footage appears at the 1:02 mark in the 2015 video by Turkish company Haci Productions about the Ukrainian army. The company created the video as thanks for a different video made by Ukrainian volunteers about the Turkish Air Force. That footage also is repeated in the Facebook video, appearing again at the 1:30 mark. At the 41-second mark in the Facebook video, men are firing rifles, and a tank with the marking "132" on the front drives down a street. The exact same footage is also found in a 2014 video called "Battle of Ilovaisk," starting at the 3:06 mark. The battle took place in August 2014 and resulted in "the biggest loss of life in Ukraine's war against Russian-backed separatists," according to a 2019 BBC News report. Finally, at the 3:35 mark in the Facebook video, the image of tanks that is shown is from a 2014 Ukrainian news story. We rate the claim that this video shows current leaked footage of war between Russia and Ukraine False.

The presence of apes calls into question the concept of evolution Herschel Walker, the former Georgia football star vying to join the U.S. Senate, questioned evolution during a recent church appearance. "At one time science said, man came from apes. Did it not?" Walker said at Sugar Hill Church in Northern Gwinnett County, outside of Atlanta, Ga., on March 13. "If that is true, why are there still apes? Think about it." Walker, a former NFL player, is seeking the GOP nomination to challenge Democratic Sen. Raphael Warnock in the November election. Walker’s skepticism misconstrued how evolution theory works, so we wanted to talk to experts who could break it down. Humans and modern-day apes both evolved from ancient apes, who are now extinct. Anthropologists using genetic and fossil evidence pinpoint it between 6-8 million years ago. Humans and the apes seen today evolved differently over time. Jessica Thompson, an assistant professor of anthropology at Yale University, said to think of evolution not as something linear, but rather as a series of splits. "Just as how one person can have many children, and those children can have many children, none of those people will be exactly the same as the others, but they will all still be closely related. As the generations pass, they become less and less closely related in terms of shared genetic material. And also, they will start to look more and more different from one another," Thompson said. For example, if a person had brown hair, some of their descendants would also likely have brown hair. But it's unlikely every one of their descendants would have brown hair; some may have blonde hair or red hair. "You would not ask, ‘If all these red-haired people descended from a brown-haired person, then how is it possible to still have brown-haired people around today?’" Thompson said. 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 The apes alive today are not the same kinds of apes that were alive millions of years ago. As apes evolved, they followed their own trajectories and did not develop the same characteristics as humans, such as walking upright. It’s a misconception that every animal is evolving with the goal of becoming human or more human-like. "Walking upright would not have been the best solution for every animal. In fact, humans are rare for evolving this particular adaptation at all," Thompson said. In 2016, PolitiFact fact-checked a similar claim by conservative radio host Rush Limbaugh. While discussing the incident of a boy falling into a gorilla enclosure at the Cincinnati Zoo, Limbaugh questioned why Harambe, the gorilla that was shot and killed during the incident, had not evolved into a human. The presence of gorillas doesn’t negate the concept of evolution. Modern-day gorillas and modern-day humans both evolved from a common ape ancestor. PolitiFact rated Limbaugh’s claim False. Evolution is often called into question in a religious context, but evolution does not necessarily contradict Christianity. A number of influential Christian scholars and leaders believed in both the science of evolution and God. "The Big Bang, which nowadays is posited as the origin of the world, does not contradict the divine act of creating, but rather requires it. The evolution of nature does not contrast with the notion of creation, as evolution presupposes the creation of beings that evolve," Pope Francis said in 2014. Walker’s campaign declined to comment specifically on his remarks about evolution. Our ruling Walker talked about the presence of apes to question the concept of evolution. Genetic and fossil evidence show that humans and apes both exist today because they evolved 6-8 million years ago from a common ape ancestor. Over time, humans and apes followed separate evolutionary trajectories to develop their unique characteristics known today. We rate this claim Fals

"Almost half of every dollar that we spend on gas, it goes to New York State. Since October, State Sen. Pam Helming, R-Canandaigua, has been calling for the temporary suspension of New York State’s gas tax because of rising gas prices. During a recent radio interview, Helming told Fingerlakes1.com that the state’s gas tax is about 50 cents per gallon. "Almost half of every dollar that we spend on gas, it goes to New York State," she said. A few minutes later, she repeated the claim: "Again, almost half of every single dollar that each person spends on gas goes to New York State." She also made the claim in a Facebook post, though the post was edited after we contacted her office for this fact-check. Really? Half of every dollar that New Yorkers spend to fill their tanks goes to state government? We checked with the state Department of Taxation and Finance. Spokesman James Gazzale sent us a breakdown of all the state taxes that are collected on a gallon of motor fuel. The total state tax is 33.35 cents per gallon. The state taxes are generally fixed and do not change with the price per gallon. The components of the state tax, per gallon are: Excise tax: 8 cents Petroleum business tax: 17.3 cents State sales tax: 8 cents, but 8.75 cents in the New York City area Petroleum testing fee: .05 cents The petroleum business tax is set every year. The state sales tax rate has been fixed at 8 cents per gallon since 2006. In addition to the state taxes, motorists also pay a local sales tax, which varies by county but is around 4 percent of the price per gallon, as well as a federal excise tax of 18.4 cents per gallon. For a New Yorker filling up in a county where the local sales tax is 4 percent, they can expect to pay a total of 67.75 cents in all taxes per gallon. Jared Walczak, vice president of state projects at the Tax Foundation, said that the percentage of money that consumers pay to the state government for gas taxes falls when gas prices rise. That is because much of New York's taxes are set on a cents-per-gallon rate, not a percentage of the price per gallon. 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 Not including the federal excise tax, the gas tax in New York was 48.22 cents per gallon, as of Jan. 1, Walczak said. If fuel costs $4.33 per gallon, the gas tax in New York would be 11 cents on the dollar, he said. When we reached out to Helming’s office, spokeswoman Krista Gleason told us that a staff person incorrectly briefed Helming. The staff has since removed references to her incorrect claim to avoid promoting the error. Helming correctly said during the interview that the gas tax in New York is about 50 cents per gallon. Helming’s office relied on gas tax information from the American Petroleum Institute when making that claim. Our ruling Helming said almost half of every dollar that motorists spend on gas goes to New York State. The gas tax in New York is about 50 cents per gallon, not including the federal excise tax, but a gallon of gas now costs more than $4, meaning that the tax is far lower than half the cost of gas. Helming said the money "goes to New York State," which is also wrong. Part of the gas tax is levied by counties and stays local. We rate her claim False

“A West Virginia inspection sticker on an Uber” proves the car was not in Ukraine As news networks report on Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, one particular video clip prompted conspiracy claims about the authenticity of the reports. Social media users on Facebook questioned if a shot up car was really in Ukraine, pointing to video that showed it had a window decal that looked like a West Virginia inspection sticker. "I don't care what side you are on, because it is happening on both sides. This is why America has no trust in the media. A West Virginia inspection sticker on an Uber in ‘Ukraine’", said a March 13 Facebook post. "How did a car from WV end up in Ukraine on NBC News," another 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.) Captain R.A. Maddy of the West Virginia State Police confirmed that the sticker was an inspection decal that expired in September 2021. But that doesn’t mean that the car itself wasn’t in Ukraine. Here’s the evidence. The origins of the video The video of the car can be traced back to a March 13 NBC Nightly News report about the shooting of journalist and documentary filmmaker Brent Renaud, who was in Ukraine with colleague Juan Arrendondo to cover the war. As the report described the danger in Ukraine, it showed several vehicles that had been burned or shot up, including the car in question. The report gave a larger picture of the vehicle, showing that it was an Uber vehicle with what appeared to be Ukrainian text along the side. Top: Screenshot of vehicle from a March 14, 2022 Fox News report. Bottom: A screenshot of a Facebook user’s claim. While news reports showed the full side of the car, which had an Uber logo and what appears to be Ukrainian print, the Facebook posts only provided a view of the car’s decal sticker. It’s not clear if the car in the Facebook posts was the one that Renaud and Arrendondo were attacked in. We reached out to Uber, but did not receive a response. 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 An NBC spokesperson verified that the video was indeed real, and that it was licensed from Reuters. A spokesperson at Reuters confirmed that the video was taken in Irpin, Ukraine, which is right next to Kyiv, Ukraine’s capital. NBC has since taken down their report, due to fair usage rights. "We shared the video during the allotted time period that is customary for some fair usage videos," the NBC spokesperson said. Other news sites, including Fox News, have also aired the clip with the Uber car. It’s feasible for the car to have been moved from the U.S. to Ukraine, said Robin Grove, CEO of Classic Automotive Relocation Services (CARS) USA, a company that ships classic and high-end vehicles across the globe. "U.S. rules and laws are that U.S. cars with titles may be exported as long as they are not stolen," Grove said, pointing to the U.S. Customs and Border Protection’s rules on exporting a motor vehicle. "They are allowed to ship to any country that is not on the sanction list as long as governmental protocols are adhered to." Ukraine doesn’t fall on that list of sanctions, so it’s possible for a vehicle to have been shipped there. The United Nations reported in an October 2020 study that between 2015-2018, the U.S. "exported a significant number of used vehicles to Europe, specifically Eastern Europe." In 2018, the U.S. shipped 34,871 cars to Ukraine. Our ruling A Facebook post claimed that "a West Virginia inspection sticker on an Uber" proves the car was not in Ukraine. A West Virginia State Police Captain confirmed that the decal on the car was an expired sticker from the state. However, this doesn’t mean that the car wasn’t in Ukraine — a spokesperson for Reuters, which owns the video, confirmed that the video was filmed there. It's not uncommon for cars to be exported from the U.S. to other countries, including Ukraine. We rate this claim False.

“As soon as Biden took office, he eliminated all subsidies for fossil fuels. On his web show, conservative commentator Bill O’Reilly took President Joe Biden to task for policies he said have encouraged higher gasoline prices. One of the reasons that gasoline prices have recently reached record levels in raw dollars, O’Reilly said March 15, is that "as soon as Biden took office, he eliminated all subsidies for fossil fuels." Days after entering office, Biden did issue an executive order telling federal agencies to curtail certain subsidies for fossil fuels over which the executive branch had control. However, these changes only affected a modest slice of all fossil fuel subsidies. The bulk of such subsidies can only be overturned by congressional action, not unilaterally by Biden. O’Reilly did not respond to questions submitted through his website for this article. Biden’s executive order Biden announced his executive order on Jan. 27, 2021. It addressed a range of policies related to climate change, including efforts to curb fossil fuel subsidies. Specifically on subsidies, the executive order said that federal agencies needed to "take steps to ensure that, to the extent consistent with applicable law, federal funding is not directly subsidizing fossil fuels." Various analyses of the executive order have pointed to at least two types of subsidies that would be at risk under Biden’s order. One involves a tax deduction for payments of environmental penalties by fossil fuel companies. Another involves federal funding for the construction and maintenance of shipping infrastructure typically used by fossil fuel producers. However, in his remarks at the event to unveil the executive order, Biden indicated that the order would not, by itself, end all fossil fuel subsidies. "Unlike previous administrations, I don't think the federal government should give handouts to big oil to the tune of $40 billion in fossil fuel subsidies," Biden said. "And I'm going to be going to the Congress asking them to eliminate those subsidies." There is no clear figure totaling up the annual cost of fossil fuel subsidies, because the industry and environmentalists have long disagreed on what qualifies as a subsidy. However, the lower end of published estimates suggests an annual figure of $20 billion, roughly two-thirds of which comes from federal policies and one-third of which comes from state policies. Despite Biden’s executive order, "the lion’s share of federal subsidies remain in place," said Sujatha Bergen, director of health campaigns at the Natural Resources Defense Council, an environmental group. Biden’s efforts in Congress In the White House’s proposed fiscal year 2022 budget, Biden urged Congress to end a number of subsidies, including tax deductions, that benefit the industry. He put these in his proposed budget because tax law cannot be rewritten by executive order, only by an act of Congress. 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 One of the items Biden’s budget targeted was the foreign oil and gas exemption. This allows companies to shield themselves from taxation for the refining and transport of fossil fuels generated overseas. Backers of ending this exemption say that denying this tax break would save $85 billion in lost revenue over 10 years. Another subsidy is a tax deduction for "intangible drilling costs." This century-old provision allows independent fossil-fuel companies to immediately deduct the costs associated with exploration and development from drilling a new well. This is estimated to cost taxpayers $13 billion over 10 years. A third tax break is known as "percentage depletion." It allows independent fossil-fuel companies to deduct 15% of their gross income from production. This break costs an estimated $13 billion over 10 years. Biden’s proposed budget would also reinstate expired Superfund excise taxes on crude oil, petroleum products and untaxed crude oil, potentially generating $38 billion in federal revenue over 10 years. Other proposed cuts in the Biden budget addressed tax breaks for "enhanced oil recovery" and for "oil and gas produced from marginal wells." However, proposals like these to curb fossil-fuel subsidies have not advanced in Congress, even to the point of formal consideration by committees. A Senate bill sponsored by Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., has attracted only seven co-sponsors. A House bill sponsored by Rep. Ilhan Omar, D-Minn., has 41 co-sponsors. And a House bill sponsored by Rep. Ro Khanna, D-Calif., has 11 co-sponsors. In the Build Back Better Act, Biden and his allies proposed more than $100 billion in cuts over 10 years, Bergen said. But that bill has languished in the Senate. "Congress tried to eliminate fossil fuel subsidies this session but oil and gas industry allies blocked progress," Bergen said. "We are hoping that Congress will move forward with those in the next iteration of legislation." Our ruling O’Reilly said, "As soon as Biden took office, he eliminated all subsidies for fossil fuels." Biden did sign an executive order just days after taking office that required federal agencies to get rid of fossil fuel subsidies they had unilateral control over. However, a large majority of subsidies can only be undone with the assent of Congress, and while Biden and congressional Democrats have urged Congress to do that, they have not been successful yet. The statement contains an element of truth but ignores critical facts that would give a different impression, so we rate it Mostly Fals

Jan. 6 defendants “are being held in prison without being charged. Kari Lake, a TV journalist turned Republican candidate for Arizona governor, is running with Donald Trump’s endorsement on a platform of rehashing falsehoods about the 2020 presidential election. Lake disputes that President Joe Biden received 81 million votes even though the results were certified and accepted by Congress. Lake has spoken favorably of "decertification" of the vote in Arizona, a process that does not exist. She predicted a review of ballots in Maricopa County would show Trump as "the real winner of Arizona," but that review, orchestrated by state Senate Republicans, confirmed the official results that Biden won. Falsehoods about the 2020 presidential election culminated in the Jan. 6, 2021, violent attack on the U.S. Capitol. Lake downplayed the cases of the defendants in an interview with 60 Minutes Australia. Lake was asked if she thinks the defendants should be pardoned, an idea floated by Trump. Lake said she would have no say in that as a candidate for governor, then added, "What I don’t like is that people are being held in prison without being charged. That’s un-American." Lake posted a longer version of the interview on Rumble. "We don’t take kindly on Americans being locked up for months on end without being charged. So charge them, or get off the pot," she added. We contacted Lake’s campaign to ask for her evidence and did not get a response. So has the government imprisoned people associated with Jan. 6 without showing any evidence of alleged crimes? No. Court records show charges filed against hundreds of people who assaulted or resisted police and disrupted Congress in an effort to overturn the election results in favor of Donald Trump. Lake is one of many Republicans running in Arizona’s Aug. 2 Republican primary, while the best known Democrat running is Secretary of State Katie Hobbs. Gov. Doug Ducey is term limited. More than 700 defendants have been arrested in the Jan. 6 attack Lake said defendants were being held in "prison" without being charged, but defendants are held pre-trial in jails. The majority of defendants awaiting trial have been released from jail pending the outcome of their case. The number of defendants detained pretrial is between 75 and 85 at any given time, according to the U.S. Attorney's Office. As of March 6, more than 775 defendants had been arrested in connection with the Capitol attack. The U.S. Attorney’s Office in Washington, D.C., summarized the charges in a recent update. More than 245 individuals have been charged with assaulting, resisting, or impeding police officers or employees, with over 80 of those charged with using a deadly or dangerous weapon or causing serious bodily injury to an officer. Approximately 224 individuals have pleaded guilty to federal charges, including 29 for felonies. More than 110 defendants have been sentenced. Typically the cases begin with a complaint signed by a judge that states the charges faced by the defendant. The complaint is accompanied by a statement of facts by a law enforcement officer detailing the alleged crimes. The complaint is usually followed by another type of charging document, an indictment from a grand jury, or what’s called an "information" filed by a prosecutor. Featured Fact-check Mark Finchem stated on October 9, 2022 in a rally The Electronic Registration Information Center is “a system that’s funded by George Soros.” By Amy Sherman • October 17, 2022 The complaint itself includes criminal charges, but it’s filed earlier in the court process without a grand jury agreeing on charges. Daniel Richman, a Columbia law school professor and former federal prosecutor, said it’s wrong to suggest that Jan. 6 defendants are "sitting in there not knowing what they are in for." "The complaint is a charge, (even if) it’s not a charge for certain formal purposes," Richman said. "They have a piece of paper by government officials alleging certain crimes they committed." A defendant can be held in jail on a complaint, but would be tried on the indictment filed by the grand jury, or the information filed by the prosecutor, said Bruce Green, a former federal prosecutor and law professor at Fordham University. The U.S. Attorney’s Office said that all defendants who have been detained by the court are charged in complaints or indictments with criminal offenses. There has been one defendant, Texas resident Lucas Denney, whose attorneys filed a motion for release due to lack of a formal indictment by a grand jury. Prosecutors said it was an unintentional procedural error, however. Denney’s attorneys said he intended to plead guilty rather than face additional charges. Our ruling Lake said Jan. 6 defendants "are being held in prison without being charged." Lake did not cite any particular defendants during her interview, and her campaign didn’t respond to our request for evidence. The U.S. Attorney’s Office publicly shows online the charges filed against more than 775 defendants, including violent offenses such as using deadly weapons or assaulting police officers. Many of the defendants have pleaded guilty. We found no evidence of defendants being imprisoned without being charged. We rate her claim False. PolitiFact researcher Caryn Baird contributed to this fact-check. RELATED: The 2021 Lie of the Year: Lies about the Jan. 6 Capitol attack and its significance RELATED: Tucker Carlson’s conspiracy theory about FBI and Jan. 6 continues to be wrong RELATED: All of our fact-checks about Jan. 6 Capitol attack

"Beto O'Rourke's Plan to Take 'Trans' Children from Parents. An excerpt from a longer interview with Democratic Texas gubernatorial candidate Beto O’Rourke was taken out of context and misconstrued by a conservative pundit. "Beto O'Rourke's Plan to Take 'Trans' Children from Parents," read the headline on the March 13 video. The 44-second clip was posted by The Charlie Kirk Show. The video, which was posted on Rumble, was shared on Facebook and flagged as part of Facebook’s efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about our partnership with Facebook.) But in the clip, O’Rourke was not describing his own plan — he was referring to Texas Gov. Greg Abbott’s February order to state officials to investigate parents for child abuse for providing gender-affirming care for transgender children. The video excerpt omitted that context. The footage was taken from an hour-long interview with O’Rourke on March 13 during the South by Southwest festival. At the 14:26 mark, interviewer Evan Smith — chief executive of The Texas Tribune — asked O’Rourke to "make the case against the governor." O’Rourke called Abbott a thug and listed what he considers to be the governor’s mistakes, including February 2021 statewide blackouts. Two minutes into his lengthy answer, O’Rourke also said, "He’s targeting transgender kids and turning in their parents, and if these investigations are succesful, not only is that transgender child taken from the custody of that parent, but so is every other kid in the household. That’s what this guy is doing." The clip on Facebook begins after O’Rourke has been answering the question for more than a minute and does not include the fact that he is referencing Abbott. 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 Abbot’s order to Texas state health agencies claimed that it is illegal to provide treatments such as gender reassignment surgery and puberty-blocking drugs for transgender children. Abbott based the order on a nonbinding legal opinion from the state’s attorney general, Ken Paxton, who is running for reelection. The order "stipulated that doctors, nurses and teachers are legally now required to report parents who aid their child in receiving such care to the Texas Department of Family and Protective Services," the Washington Post reported. A Texas judge "temporarily halted the investigations until a trial can be held in July, calling Abbott's actions ‘beyond the scope of his duty and unconstitutional,’" according to The Texas Tribune. The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services also issued a statement that said denying health care based on gender identity is illegal. Though O’Rourke said that a successful investigation could lead to transgender children and their siblings being removed from their home, "most families that (Department of Family and Protective Services) investigates do not end up having their children removed from their custody or placed in foster care, which requires a judicial order," The Texas Tribune reported. Our ruling The headline on a 44-second video clip says, "Beto O'Rourke's Plan to Take 'Trans' Children from Parents." In the clip, O’Rourke was not describing his own plan. The footage was taken from an hour-long interview and omitted the fact that O’Rourke was referring to Abbott. O’Rourke was referencing Abbott’s order to state child welfare officials to investigate parents for child abuse if they provide gender-affirming care for transgender children. We rate this claim False.

"David McCormick paid for attacks on Donald Trump. The major Republican candidates for an open U.S. Senate seat in Pennsylvania have touted their support of former President Donald Trump ahead of the state’s May 17 primary election. That includes physician and talk show host Dr. Mehmet Oz and Dave McCormick, the former chief executive of the Bridgewater Associates hedge fund. An Oz TV ad painted McCormick as anti-Trump, declaring: "Wall Street insider David McCormick paid for attacks on Donald Trump." We found no evidence of that. Oz’s campaign did not respond to our requests for information to back its claim. McCormick’s political contributions When the narrator in the ad makes the attack on McCormick, a reference to "FEC Records" appears on the screen. Federal Election Commission records show that when Trump first ran for president, McCormick in 2015 gave $2,700 to the campaign of one of Trump’s competitors for the Republican nomination, former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, and $5,000 to Bush’s leadership PAC. The records indicate McCormick didn’t donate to Trump’s 2016 or 2020 campaigns. McCormick was a Treasury Department official in the administration of President George W. Bush, Jeb Bush’s brother. An Associated Press news story published March 15, five days after Oz’s campaign posted its ad on YouTube, suggested that the ad’s claim alludes to McCormick’s support of Bush. Featured Fact-check Instagram posts stated on October 25, 2022 in an Instagram post The documentary “2,000 Mules proves” Democrats “cheated on the 2020 elections.” By Jon Greenberg • October 28, 2022 "In 2015, McCormick held a fundraiser for Jeb Bush, once a contender for the 2016 GOP presidential nomination eventually won by Trump," the story said. "Oz's campaign pounced, saying in an ad, ‘Wall Street insider David McCormick paid for attacks on Donald Trump.’" McCormick eventually came into Trump’s favor. "I wasn't particularly involved with the Trump camp — I wasn't a Trump supporter," he said in March 2017. But McCormick’s wife, Dina Powell McCormick, served as Trump’s deputy national security adviser. And in November 2017, McCormick, a former Army officer, was named to the advisory Defense Policy Board by James Mattes, Trump’s defense secretary. In November 2020, Trump removed McCormick and 10 other members of the board, including former Secretaries of State Henry Kissinger and Madeleine Albright. Foreign Policy, which revealed the moves, said they appeared to be "the outgoing Trump administration’s parting shot at scions of the foreign-policy establishment." 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 who decided not to seek re-election. The other GOP candidates include conservative commentator Kathy Barnette, real estate developer Jeff Bartos and Carla Sands, Trump's ambassador to Denmark. The Democratic candidates include U.S. Rep. Conor Lamb and Lt. Gov. John Fetterman. The race is rated as a tossup and as "battleground Republican." The outcome could help determine which party controls the Senate, which is now split 50-50. Our ruling Oz said McCormick "paid for attacks" on Trump. McCormick gave money to the campaign of one of Trump’s rivals for the 2016 Republican nomination for president, but that doesn’t amount to financing attacks on Trump. Without evidence for the claim, we rate the claim Fals

A video shows “massive explosion as Ukraine destroyed 280 Russian tanks to pieces using U.S. Javelin missiles. A Facebook video that claims to show footage from Ukraine consists of repurposed video from other events — one more in an onslaught of fake videos circulating since the Russian invasion of Ukraine. The headline on the March 12 video says, "Massive explosion as Ukraine Destroyed 280 Russian tanks to pieces using US Javelin missiles." It begins with footage of a Javelin missile being fired and soaring past a landscape of snow-covered trees, then shows an explosion in the distance. 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 footage at the beginning of the video is from a U.S. National Guard video about a trainee learning to use Javelin missiles. Other footage came from a 2021 story about the Donbass region of Ukraine. The opening moments of the 8-minute Facebook video show a Javelin antitank missile being fired, then an explosion in the distance. It is a zoomed-in version of the opening footage from a video posted Jan. 3 on Facebook by the National Guard. The caption on the National Guard video says, "​​(Sgt.) Latrisha Dillon was the only woman in her Javelin training course. Now she's the first female Montana Army National Guard Soldier to be Javelin-certified." 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 Facebook video shows footage of the explosion right away, while the National Guard video first includes comments from the trainee, then shows the explosion at the 20-second mark. But the images of the explosion are identical in the two videos. At the 6:08 mark in the Facebook video, the original, zoomed-out version of the National Guard footage appears. After the opening scene of the Facebook video, at the 9-second mark, one person with a Javelin and a man holding binoculars are shown. It’s an image that was first published in an Oct. 17, 2021, story about the Donbass region of Ukraine. The rest of the Facebook video appears to be a mishmash of footage from other sources. For example, at the 2:31 mark, the image that’s used also appeared in a March 8 video about Ukraine by NBC News, at the 29-second mark. We rate the claim that a video shows a massive explosion as Ukraine destroyed Russian tanks with U.S. Javelin missiles False.

Members of Congress gave themselves a 21% pay rais Social media posts falsely claim that members of Congress will get a pay raise. "Everything sucks under Joe Biden, unless you are in Congress. In that case, you just gave yourself a 21% raise…unreal," says a March 14 post on Instagram. It was shared by Carl Higbie, a host at conservative outlet Newsmax, and was a screenshot of his 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.) Salaries for members of Congress did not increase when Congress passed a $1.5 trillion government spending bill in March 2022. The bill that passed "continues a provision to freeze the pay of members of Congress, preventing any pay increases in (fiscal year 2022)," according to a bill summary by Republican members of the Senate Appropriations Committee. "A freeze on members’ salaries has been in place since 2009." 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 Members of Congress have earned an annual salary of $174,000 since the last pay increase in 2009, according to the Congressional Research Service. In the 2022 spending bill, lawmakers in the U.S. House of Representatives received an increase in their office budgets, known as Members Representational Allowance, according to a summary of the bill by the House Appropriations Committee. The allowance is used for staff, travel, rent, utilities, communications, supplies and equipment, according to the Congressional Research Service. The $774.4 million allocated in 2022 for the Members Representational Allowance is $134 million higher than the previous year — a 21% increase. It’s the largest increase since the Members Representational Allowance was authorized in 1996. We rate the claim that members of Congress gave themselves a 21% pay raise False.

“Wladimir Klitschko has auctioned off his 1996 Atlanta Olympic Games gold medal to raise money for the children of Ukraine. The famous Klitschko brothers, former professional boxers from Ukraine, are back in the international spotlight for reasons that have nothing to do with their sport. Soon after Russia launched its invasion of Ukraine, Vitali Klitschko, now the mayor of Kyiv, and his brother Wladimir pledged to take up arms and fight for their country. They have made numerous media appearances. Their charitable foundation listed ways that people could help Ukraine. Wladimir Klitschko called the war effort the "biggest fight of my life." But on social media, one tale of Wladimir Klitschko’s devotion to the cause made an old event seem as though it had just happened. A widespread Facebook post shared during Russia’s invasion said that Wladimir Klitschko had raised $1 million for Ukrainian children by auctioning off the Olympic gold medal he won in 1996. "Wladimir Klitschko has auctioned off his 1996 Atlanta Olympic Games gold medal to raise money for the children of Ukraine," said the March 14 post, from a boxing fan page with nearly 800,000 followers. "He received around 1 million dollars. The buyer gave Klitschko the medal back instantly when he heard what Wladimir was using the money for." The gesture the post described did happen. But it took place in March 2012, more than a decade before Russia launched its current assault on Ukraine. "I did sell the medal in March (2012), and 100% of the funds, which is $1 million, went to the Klitschko Brothers Foundation," Klitscho told CNN in July 2012, four months after the auction. "We care about education and sport, that is the key in any children's life." The Klitschko Foundation said in a statement after the auction that the buyer returned the medal to the family immediately after bidding on it. Vitali, right, and Wladimir Klitschko, left, pass by Wladimir's Olympic gold medal during a charity auction for the Klitschko Brothers Foundation in Kyiv, Ukraine, on March 29, 2012. (AP) 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 brothers’ foundation did not respond to PolitiFact’s request for comment. But the fundraising that Wladimir Klitschko accomplished by selling his gold medal took place in 2012 — not in 2022, as the recent Facebook post led some commenters to believe. That out-of-context framing spread on Facebook after a boxing website’s tribute accurately highlighting Klitschko’s 2012 gesture went viral, according to PolitiFact’s analysis of CrowdTangle, a social media insights tool. On March 10, 2022, the website Boxing TV posted an image of Klitschko that described the story of his auctioned gold medal to its Facebook page. Its caption specified that the auction took place in 2012. "Unbelievable generosity from Wladimir Klitschko back in 2012 to support his country and the children of #Ukraine," the caption over the post said. A series of similar posts cropped up across Facebook in the days that followed, including the March 14, 2022, post that spread widely. But unlike the original tribute from Boxing TV, these subsequent posts did not indicate that the auction took place in 2012. 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.) Our ruling A Facebook post said, "Wladimir Klitschko has auctioned off his 1996 Atlanta Olympic Games gold medal to raise money for the children of Ukraine." Klitschko auctioned off the Olympic gold medal he earned at the 1996 games in Atlanta, as the Facebook post described. But he did so in 2012, not amid Russia’s 2022 invasion of Ukraine. The statement is partially accurate but leaves out important details or takes things out of context. We rate the claim Half Tru

“Make no mistake: The current spike in gas prices is largely the fault of Vladimir Putin. President Joe Biden recently cast blame for a spike in gas prices on Russian President Vladimir Putin. "We’ve seen the price of gas go up over $1 just since he put his troops on the border of Ukraine," Biden said in an address to the National League of Cities on March 14. "It went up $1.05. A big part of that reason is Putin began amassing troops along the border and then crossed (it). And guess what? The world took notice. The market anticipated; prices went up. And then Putin invaded." Biden continued, "Make no mistake: The current spike in gas prices is largely the fault of Vladimir Putin. It has nothing to do with the American Rescue Plan," referring to the big coronavirus and economic relief package Biden pushed through Congress and signed early in his presidency. Gasoline prices have risen most aggressively since Putin began preparing his invasion of Ukraine. "Current," however, is doing a lot of work in Biden’s remarks, which ignore a long run-up of gas-price increases prior to the escalation of military conflict in Ukraine. And while assessments differ over how much the American Rescue Plan promoted inflation generally, the legislation is widely credited with aiding the nation’s economic recovery, which in turn increased demand for gasoline and pushed prices higher. "Gasoline and crude oil prices overall have increased significantly over the past year due to a variety of factors, mainly driven by increased demand due to recovery from the COVID pandemic and associated problems with the supply chain and employment," said Hugh Daigle, an associate professor at the University of Texas-Austin’s Center for Subsurface Energy and the Environment. The United States imports some crude oil from Russia, but Russian oil has a relatively small footprint in the U.S. market. Recent data shows Russian imports accounting for about 7% of total U.S. imports; in turn, imports are roughly equal to U.S. crude oil production, making the importance of Russian oil even more modest. That said, the price of oil is determined by international factors, and because other countries are more heavily dependent on Russian oil than the U.S. is, any cutbacks in the use of Russian oil elsewhere can reduce global supplies, pushing prices higher for U.S. consumers. To put Putin’s impact on U.S. gasoline prices in context, we looked at weekly per-gallon gasoline prices from the U.S. Energy Information Administration, dating back to the low point for gas prices in May 2020. That was just a few months into the coronavirus pandemic, when commuting and travel had slowed dramatically, producing low demand and low prices for gasoline. In mid-May 2020, gas prices sat at around $1.88 a gallon. By late January 2021, when President Donald Trump left office and Biden was sworn in, a gallon of gas had risen to about $2.39 a gallon, an increase of about 50 cents. From Biden’s inauguration until early November, the price of gas continued to rise: It reached $3.39 in early November, or an increase of about another dollar. We chose November 2021 as a turning point because that’s when a continuing Russian troop buildup on Ukraine’s borders began to attract wider notice. On Nov. 3, Ukrainian officials said the number of Russian troops on its borders had reached 90,000, and on Nov. 10, the Biden administration offered public warnings about the military buildup. By early December, the buildup and potential invasion became widely known to news consumers in the U.S., documented in the New York Times and other publications. Between early November and the start of the Russian invasion in late February, U.S. gas prices rose modestly, climbing 10 cents to $3.49. The big spike came when the invasion began, with the price of gas rising by 83 cents to $4.32. !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"); 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 So Putin’s invasion clearly caused the single biggest gas price spike during this period. And gas prices did rise during the four-month-long build-up to the invasion. What Biden’s comment leaves out is that the gas price rise following Putin’s military buildup accounted for a fraction of the overall rise in gasoline prices. Looking at the entire period starting with March 2020, the low point for gas prices, only about 38% of the price increase to today came during the period when Putin was threatening or conducting war in Ukraine. The remaining 62% of the rise had already occurred before the buildup became a major story in November. And even if you only look at the rise during Biden’s tenure in office, less than half of the rise in gas prices occurred before the troop buildup became big news in November 2021. So if Putin’s war plans aren’t "largely" the cause of the increase in gas prices, what other factors played a role? The big one is the economic recovery from the pandemic. When the U.S. economy began sputtering back to life during the second half of 2020, it increased demand for oil, which in turn pushed up gas prices. "I think it’s fair to say that much of the run-up happened before Russia’s buildup became a focus, and was driven by the post-COVID recovery in global demand," said Mark Finley, a fellow at Rice University’s Center for Energy Studies. Finley added that a longstanding refusal by the OPEC oil cartel and its allies to increase production has added to the upward pressure in prices. Dean Baker, co-founder of the liberal Center for Economic and Policy Research, agreed. "Biden was definitely overstating the case" in blaming Putin as the primary driver of high gas prices, Bake said. "Clearly, the recovery was a factor in gas prices." It’s important to note that some of the early rise in gas prices after March 2020 was simply a "return to a more ‘normal’ supply-demand balance" following the extraordinary economic shutdowns of the early pandemic, said Clark Williams-Derry, an energy finance analyst at the Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis. He added that a significant part of why supply has trailed demand for the past two years is low investment in production during the pandemic, due to uncertainty about how to plan for a recovery. "Oil prices and oil markets are influenced by a complicated, multi-directional, global network of causes and effects," he said. But he added that "any analysis of oil price shifts since 2019 that doesn't put COVID front and center is flat out wrong." The White House’s response The White House acknowledged to PolitiFact that Biden did not mean to suggest that every cent of increase since May 2020, or since January 2021, was attributable to Putin, and they said that a number of factors have fed into the overall increase in gas prices. Instead, the White House focused on Biden’s use of the term "current spike," saying that the most recent rise does stem largely from Putin’s actions. In the meantime, it's important for everyone "to avoid a U.S. bias," WIlliams-Derry said. "Oil prices are set globally, so there's a tendency to blame U.S. politicians for things that they have literally no control over." Our ruling Biden said, "Make no mistake: The current spike in gas prices is largely the fault of Vladimir Putin." By current, Biden means very current. The most recent spike in gas prices has stemmed largely from Putin’s invasion of Ukraine. But gas prices were rising before the Russian troop buildup around Ukraine became front-page news. About two-thirds of the price rise since gas prices’ low point in May 2020 came before the Ukraine buildup became a major international story, an increase that experts say stemmed primarily from the economic recovery following the pandemic. The statement is accurate but needs clarification or additional information, so we rate it Mostly Tru

Joe Biden "has been secretly flying illegal immigrants into communities across the country in the middle of the night. Republicans campaigning for office are running ads that hammer President Joe Biden’s management of the U.S.-Mexico border. They claim that the administration is using planes to fly "illegal immigrants" around the country. Republican Tyler Kistner, making his second consecutive campaign for a U.S. House seat in Minnesota, made his claim about skullduggery in the dark. Biden "has been secretly flying illegal immigrants into communities across the country in the middle of the night," his ad on Facebook and Instagram claimed. Other Republicans have run social media ads making similar claims. They include Lisa Scheller, who is running for a U.S. House seat in Pennsylvania; Jake Corman, who is running for Pennsylvania governor; U.S. Rep. Randy Weber of Texas, U.S. Sen. Kevin Cramer of North Dakota, and U.S. Rep. Ashley Hinson of Iowa. Experts said the vast majority of people trying to cross the southern border into the United States are summarily turned back. Exceptions are made for unaccompanied minors, some of whom are transported by planes to be with relatives or approved sponsors — a practice also done during the Trump administration. How the process works Kistner’s campaign did not reply to our requests for information to support his claim. Two law professors and directors of immigrants’ rights clinics, Fatma Marouf at Texas A&M University School of Law and Nicole Hallett at the University of Chicago Law School, walked us through the process. Because of a public health law known as Title 42, invoked at the start of the pandemic by the Trump administration and continued under Biden, the vast majority of migrants are turned back and not given the opportunity to make their case for why they should be allowed to stay. Those encountered at the border who have been allowed to remain are, by and large, unaccompanied minors. They typically are taken first to facilities near the border and then transferred to the temporary custody of the U.S. Health and Human Services department, which eventually places the children with family or sponsors in the U.S. If family members or approved sponsors are not able to arrange transportation, the federal government pays for transportation, including flights. The charter flights are not publicized and sometimes are done in the middle of the night to protect the confidentiality of those being transported and to guard against anyone who would interfere with the flights. Republicans, including Gov. Ron DeSantis of Florida, have complained that they were not notified about the flights and U.S. House members from New York asked the Biden administration to stop such flights to their state. The Washington Post’s Fact Checker reported that sometimes the federal government tries to save money by arranging for flights that land late in the evening. Most unaccompanied minors turn themselves in to border authorities and by doing so are "actually following the rules of seeking asylum," said Marouf. ICE Air Operations is the air transportation arm of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, which is responsible for the detention and deportation of immigrants. Featured Fact-check Adam Laxalt stated on November 20, 2022 in an ad “Biden and Democrats have dismantled border security.” By Maria Ramirez Uribe • November 3, 2022 The Biden administration, like the Obama and Trump administrations, uses flights to move adult detainees from one detention facility to another in order to avoid overcrowding. If some of those flights occur at night, it’s not necessarily indicative of something nefarious or covert going on, as the ad suggests. News reports, including some in Florida and Pennsylvania, have made clear that the process is routine and occurred under the Trump administration, as well. Mexican nationals ordered for deportation from the United States travel on domestic flights from various U.S. cities to southern cities such as San Diego, California and Brownsville, Texas, and are then bused to the U.S.-Mexico border for removal at a land port of entry, ICE said in August 2020. Neither ICE nor the Health and Human Services Department responded to requests for comment for this fact-check. The White House cited one of several statements it has made in response to such claims. A reporter on Oct. 19 asked White House press secretary Jen Psaki: "Why is the administration flying thousands of migrants from the border to Florida and New York in the middle of the night?" Psaki said: "It is our legal responsibility to safely care for unaccompanied children until they swiftly — can be swiftly unified with a parent or a vetted sponsor. And that’s something we take seriously; we have a moral obligation to come to do that and deliver on that. "As a part of the unification process, our Office of Refugee Resettlement facilitates travel for children in its custody to their families or sponsors across the country. So, in recent weeks, unaccompanied children passed through the Westchester (N.Y.) airport, which I think is what you’re referring to, en route to their final destination to be unified with their parents or a vetted sponsor. "It’s no surprise that kids can be seen traveling through states, not just New York. It’s something that we’re also working to unite children with their family members or vetted sponsors in other parts of the country as well." How the race plays into House control Kistner, an ex-Marine, is running against Democratic Rep. Angie Craig, who was first elected in 2018 to the 2nd District seat, which represents part of southeast Minnesota. Craig defeated Kistner in 2020 by 48% to 46%. Campaign watchers rate their rematch as "Democratic toss up", "tilt Democratic" and toss up. Democrats have an 11-seat advantage in the House. Our ruling Kistner said Biden "has been secretly flying illegal immigrants into communities across the country in the middle of the night." The ad implies that it is a new phenomenon for the federal government to transport immigrants around the country. That’s not true. The federal government flies adult detainees in its custody from one facility to another, or from one U.S. city to another during deportation proceedings. The U.S. government in some cases also flies unaccompanied children who are being released from its custody to a family member or sponsor. Some of these flights may happen at night, but they are not covert operations. The same types of routine flights were done by the Trump administration. The ad contains only an element of truth. We rate it Mostly False. RELATED: Fact-checking Ron DeSantis’ claim that a U.S. process doesn't vet immigran

“While Ukrainians bled and died, Congressman Budd excused their killer. A recent television ad for U.S. Senate candidate Pat McCrory suggested that one of his Republican opponents is sympathetic to Russia in its invasion of Ukraine. McCrory, the former governor of North Carolina, is one of several candidates hoping to replace retiring Republican Sen. Richard Burr later this year. His latest TV ad attacked U.S. Rep. Ted Budd, another Senate candidate, for his recent comments on Ukraine and Russian President Vladimir Putin. The ad alternated between video clips from Budd’s recent television interviews and McCrory’s commentary. Here’s the transcript: McCrory: "While Ukrainians bled and died …" Budd: "He’s a very intelligent actor." McCrory: "Congressman Budd excused their killer." Budd: "There are strategic reasons he’d want to protect his southern, western flank. We understand that." McCrory: "Budd’s votes have been friendly toward Russia. He voted against sanctions on Russia. These are serious times and we need serious senators. I’m Pat McCrory. I don’t compliment our enemies. I stand for truth and freedom. I approved this message. Make your stand with me." The ad cited its sources for each of the Budd clips as well as McCrory’s claim that Budd’s votes have been "friendly towards Russia." When we asked the McCrory campaign why it accused Budd of excusing Putin’s actions, McCrory spokesperson Jordan Shaw pointed to Budd’s comments on Fox that Putin has "strategic reasons for protecting" his flank and "we understand that." "Wouldn’t you describe that comment as excusing the invasion?" Shaw said. 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 PolitiFact examined the comments and McCrory’s sources and found that McCrory cherry picked Budd’s comments and overlooked the numerous times Budd condemned Putin for his actions in Ukraine. The video clips To judge whether Budd is excusing Putin’s actions in Ukraine, let’s first look at the examples offered in McCrory’s ad. Budd said Putin is "a very intelligent actor." This is from an interview with WNCN-TV. A reporter asked Budd if he agreed with comments by former President Donald Trump, who called Putin "pretty smart." Budd called Putin intelligent. But the ad leaves out parts of the interview where Budd accused Putin of being erratic and "evil": "Well, you have to look at it in two ways. One is good and bad. I would say Putin is evil. But that doesn’t mean he’s not smart. He’s a very intelligent actor, although I’d say he’s been quite erratic in his approach to the Ukraine. It was very predictable what he would do. At the same time, Putin is evil. He’s an international thug. But he is intelligent and so we have to treat him as such." Budd said "there are strategic reasons [Putin would] want to protect his southern, Western flank." This is from Budd’s Feb. 26 appearance on Fox News. In this interview, Budd attempted to explain Putin’s motives for invading Ukraine. Again, he described Putin’s actions as "evil" and said he supported Ukraine: "Putin is trying to reverse history and undo what happened in 1991. We should have known this all along. At his State of the Union in 2005, he essentially said that [Ukraine] was — he considered it to be part of a larger Russia, but he's essentially trying to build the glory of Russia. There are strategic reasons why he would want to protect his southern, Western flank because of the flatlands of Russia. We understand that. But still, I mean, this is evil. This is a sovereign nation in the Ukraine, and we stand with the Ukraine people now." McCrory’s ad also mentioned a News & Observer story that described some of Budd’s votes as "friendly towards Russia." But the same story mentioned Budd’s condemnation of Putin on Feb. 24, when he said, "We need to take stronger action against Vladimir Putin’s outrageous invasion of Ukraine, starting with cutting off Russia’s access to the global financial system." Our ruling McCrory said: "While Ukrainians bled and died, Congressman Budd excused their killer." McCrory’s ad implied that Budd was forgiving Putin’s actions or attempting to absolve him from blame. However, a review of the full context of Budd’s interviews shows that he also attempted to explain Putin’s motivations, but didn’t endorse or forgive them. Budd said Putin has "strategic reasons" for his actions, but he also called Putin "evil," "erratic" and a "thug." He said he supports Ukraine and he advocated stronger action against Putin. McCrory’s claim contains an element of truth but ignores critical facts that would give a different impression. We rate it Mostly Fals

Five Wisconsin cities received money for the 2020 election from Mark Zuckerberg, which amounted to "a wave of massive election bribery. Michael Gableman, the former state Supreme Court justice overseeing a Republican-ordered, taxpayer-funded review of Wisconsin’s long-settled 2020 election, has made many factually-challenged statements. But one in particular caught our attention during his March 7, 2022 appearance on Fox News’ "Tucker Carlson Tonight." It came in this tangle of a response to a request from Carlson to give an overview of his findings: "We had a wave of massive election bribery, in which government officials in the five Zuckerberg-sponsored cities participated, as well as what you related when you introduced your audience (to) me, which is the government sponsored elder abuse, all to wring out votes from people who frankly were victimized by the very people at the Wisconsin Elections Commission who are supposed to keep our voters safe." There’s a lot going on there – and there was a lot in the rest of the interview. But this is the claim we are pulling out: That five Wisconsin cities received money for the 2020 election from Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg, which amounted to "a wave of massive election bribery." The appearance came soon after Gableman gave an update on his review to a state Assembly committee on March 1, 2022. Although a judge found little evidence of work having been done, Gableman has been given more time by Assembly Speaker Robin Vos, R-Rochester, to complete his work – which originally was to be done in October. Is Gableman, a former member of the state’s top court, right about a "massive wave of bribery"? According to multiple court rulings: No. Indeed, he is ridiculously wrong. Grants were OK’d by courts in multiple lawsuits RELATED: 'Zuckerbucks' for 2022 elections? Republicans say thumbs down Let’s start with a little background: First, recounts and the courts have repeatedly confirmed that Democrat Joe Biden defeated Republican Donald Trump by nearly 21,000 votes in 2020 in Wisconsin. A legislative audit and study by a conservative group found no signs of significant voter fraud. Nevertheless, Vos – who has publicly stated Wisconsin’s electoral votes cannot be rescinded – named Gableman as special counsel and gave him a taxpayer-funded budget of $676,000 to complete a review. Vos and Gableman reached a new agreement March 8, 2022, that extends his work until at least April. On March 1, 2022, Gableman issued a wide-ranging report to an Assembly committee that included this claim: 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 "The Center for Tech and Civic Life’s $8,800,000 Zuckerberg Plan Grant with the Cities of Milwaukee, Madison, Racine, Kenosha and Green Bay (the Zuckerberg 5 Cities) violates Wisconsin law prohibiting election bribery." Those grants are what Gableman was referring to on the Carlson show. And that’s what Gableman’s staff pointed us to when we asked for backup to the claim. The Center for Tech and Civic Life, a national nonprofit organization, used $350 million in donations from Zuckerberg and his wife, Priscilla Chan, to issue grants aimed at helping local governments conduct safe elections during the COVID pandemic. The group told PolitiFact Wisconsin it issued nearly 2,500 grants nationwide and that every eligible office that applied received at least some money. More than half went to election offices that serve less than 25,000 registered voters. The money arrived as local election budgets were drained by spending on election workers, postage and printing for the increasing number of voters who wanted to vote by mail. All told, $10 million in grants went to more than 200 communities across Wisconsin, including many in Republican areas. So, Gableman is wrong to suggest the money went only to five. He and Republicans have trained their fire – and ire – on the $8.8 million that went to the state's five largest cities, which are home to many Democratic voters. That’s about 90 percent of the total distributed in the state. More importantly, the grants have been upheld by the courts. "As former state Supreme Court Justice, Michael Gableman should know better than anyone that these baseless claims of ‘bribery’ were heard before the election and were rejected in court multiple times," the center said in a statement to PolitiFact Wisconsin. In one of the many lawsuits, U.S. District Judge William Griesbach, who was appointed by President George W. Bush, a Republican, refused to block the grant money, saying there was nothing in state law "that can be fairly construed as prohibiting the defendant Cities from accepting funds from CTCL." Later, the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled on an appeal of that case that those who brought the lawsuit failed to identify any laws that would prohibit the grants. Gableman has argued that various communities are the recipients of the "bribe," never mind that he only focuses on five communities – and not the 195-plus more that received the same money. In his view, what Zuckerberg got for the "bribe" is the president he wanted. But it’s unclear why he would have then given the money to communities poised to deliver votes to Donald Trump, or have spent money in states where the outcome was never in doubt, instead of just swing states like Wisconsin. Our ruling Gableman said five Wisconsin cities received money for the 2020 election from Mark Zuckerberg, which amounted to "a wave of massive election bribery." But far more than five cities received the money. Gableman is ignoring ones in largely Republican areas. And courts have repeatedly upheld the grants as lawful, not bribery – much less a "massive wave" of bribery. As a former state Supreme Court justice, that’s a point Gableman should be familiar with. That makes the claim ridiculous. We rate it Pants on Fire. 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' });

A Ukrainian combat medic who died in February was seen in a video Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelensky posted of his visit to see wounded soldiers Russia’s state-controlled media outlet Russia Today cast doubt on the authenticity of Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelensky’s recent military hospital visit, suggesting without evidence that a video he posted with wounded soldiers may have been pre-recorded or staged. Zelensky posted the video of his visit on Telegram on March 13, along with photos on his official government website. Shortly after, Russia Today, Russian commentator Maria Dubovikova and other social media users falsely claimed that a woman who accompanied him was actually a combat medic who had been killed at the beginning of Russia’s invasion. "Zelensky published a video in which he allegedly visited a hospital with wounded soldiers of the Armed Forces of Ukraine today," states the translated version of a March 13 post from RT’s Russian-language Twitter account. "But the footage showed a doctor, Inna Derusova, who died on Feb. 26." "Attentive people mentioned a problem w/ today’s video of Zelenskiy visiting a hospital," Dubovikova wrote in one of two related tweets, which no longer appear on her page. "There is physician Inna Derusova in the video, but she is dead since Feb. 26." She added: "Thus the video is far from being even recent." These posts echo viral internet rumors that baselessly claim the war is staged, scripted or exaggerated with crisis actors. 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 claim at the heart of the posts is wrong. BBC disinformation journalist Shayan Sardarizadeh, the Atlantic Council’s Digital Forensic Research Lab, and fact-checking organizations from Spain and Ukraine each verified the identity of the woman in the video. PolitiFact could not confirm exactly where or when the video of Zelensky’s hospital visit was filmed. But the video does not show Derusova, a combat medic who died in a February artillery attack, and who was honored posthumously with a Hero of Ukraine title. Instead, the woman shown beside Zelensky in the video is Tetiana Ostashchenko. She is a military doctor and the commander of the medical forces for the Ukrainian Armed Forces. Spain’s Maldita.es analyzed a photo of Zelensky and Ostashchenko that was uploaded to Zelensky’s government website. Ostashchenko’s name could be seen on her uniform, the outlet reported, and facial recognition technology from Microsoft matched Ostashchenko’s face in the photo from the hospital to another photo of her — but not to another photo of Derusova. The false rumor about Zelensky’s visit spread to blog sites, pro-Trump forums, YouTube, Telegram and Instagram. They 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

Deceased Ukrainian fighter pilot Col. Oleksandr Oksanchenko was the “Ghost of Kyiv. Col. Oleksandr "Grey Wolf" Oksanchenko was a Ukrainian Air Force display pilot who was killed in combat as he flew over Kyiv on Feb. 25, the day after Russian President Vladimir Putin announced the Russian invasion into Ukraine. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky honored Oksanchenko three days later, designating him a "Hero of Ukraine" along with 11 other military service members, saying Oksanchenko "died in an air battle, distracting enemy aircraft." But claims on social media have gone a step further, declaring that Oksanchenko is the rumored "Ghost of Kyiv," the star of an unsubstantiated tale about an anonymous Ukrainian fighter pilot who allegedly took down six Russian fighter planes on the first day of the conflict. "‘Ghost of Kyiv’ dies in combat,’" read a headline that accompanied a photograph of Oksanchenko in a March 4 Facebook post. "Ukrainian stunt pilot Colonel Oleksandr 'Grey Wolf' Oksanchenko, who is known as the ‘Ghost of Kyiv’ for having downed seven Russian fighter jets, was shot down over the capital Kyiv on Friday night. … The famed Ukrainian pilot came out of retirement to defend his homeland from Russian invaders." 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 story of the Ghost of Kyiv has been celebrated online as an example of Ukraine’s fierce defiance in the face of Russian aggression, there so far has been nothing official to substantiate its details. Many of the online claims promoting the Ghost of Kyiv narrative have featured video game footage and old, unrelated photos. 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 Zelensky gave a Feb. 28 address in which he updated the public on the missile attack in Kharkiv, the defense of Kyiv and negotiations with Russia. He noted that he had signed a decree to award Oksanchenko the Hero of Ukraine title but did not mention or reference the Ghost of Kyiv. It’s uncertain how the Ghost of Kyiv tale originated, but we know that Ukraine’s military reported on Feb. 24 that at least six Russian planes and two helicopters had been downed. Crediting Ukrainian military, CNN and NBC soon reported five Russian planes and one helicopter had been shot down. Russia’s defense ministry denied the report, according to Reuters, and said that Ukraine’s air force defenses had been "suppressed." Ukraine’s official Twitter account, meanwhile, promoted the Ghost of Kyiv narrative with a video that suggested the mystery pilot could have been responsible for as many as 10 downed Russian aircraft by Feb. 26. That video, too, included footage from a video game. PolitiFact did not receive a response from Zelensky’s administration about Oksanchenko and the Ghost of Kyiv claim. Finding no conclusive information tying Oksanchenko to the Ghost of Kyiv, we rate this claim False. PolitiFact researcher Caryn Baird contributed to this repor

Classified documents from Ukraine “confirm without a shadow of a doubt” that the Ukraine government was “covertly preparing an offensive operation against Donbas, scheduled for March 2022. The Russian government continues to tell a different tale about what’s really going on in its war with Ukraine. Even before the invasion began on Feb. 24, Russian President Vladimir Putin made false claims that the Ukrainian government was full of Nazis and planned to attack Donetsk and Luhansk, sourtheastern regions of Ukraine known as the Donbas that are controlled by Moscow-backed separatists. On March 9, the Russian government and state-sponsored media shared on Twitter a document allegedly showing "classified" Ukrainian military orders to launch an offensive operation in the Donbas. "Classified documents (order by the Commander National Guard of Ukraine) acquired by @mod_russia confirm without a shadow of a doubt: the Kiev regime was covertly preparing an offensive operation against #Donbass, scheduled for March 2022," reads a tweet posted by the Russian Federation’s Ministry of Defense. The post included a Bitly link with "more details." Bitly, a URL shortening service, removed the link from its systems for being "potentially harmful." The document "has nothing to do with planning an offensive operation," the Ukrainian National Guard told StopFake.org, a Ukrainian fact-checking organization. StopFake.org is a verified signatory of the International Fact-checking Network, which promotes nonpartisan and independent fact-checking around the world and is run by PolitiFact’s owner, the Poynter Institute for Media Studies. "The plan of an offensive operation must provide for the presence of some specific goals that are not in the document," the Ukrainian National Guard said. "This is not an order to march to some position in the (Joint Forces Operation) zone, followed by deployment for an offensive. This is an order for conducting combat coordination in the Lviv region!" 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 Ukrainian fact-checkers also determined that it isn’t a classified document, because it does not have the corresponding marks. The document represents a typical order for a military training camp for the Armed Forces of Ukraine and National Guard of Ukraine in Starichi, a region in the Lyiv Oblast, according to fact-checkers. That’s in western Ukraine — on the opposite side of the country from the Donbas. While the Donbas region was mentioned in the document, it "was not either a prominent part of the document nor stated in an offensive context, both of which were alleged in the misleading Russian presentation," Christo Grozev, the executive director of Bellingcat, an online investigations organization, told PolitiFact. According to fact-checkers from Science Feedback, another IFCN signatory, the document includes instructions to set up training for battalions to fulfill tasks in the Donetsk and Luhansk areas. There’s no additional information on when, where and what kind of operations, so the document doesn’t prove the claim that "without a shadow of a doubt" Ukraine was preparing an attack on the Donbas in March 2022. Our ruling Russian officials shared a Ukrainian document on Twitter with claims that it showed secret, classified orders for a military offensive on the Donbas region in southeastern Ukraine. This is wrong. There is no proof that the document is classified, and there are no direct statements in it about an attack on the Donbas. The document makes references to a training camp on the opposite side of the country. We rate claims about a document showing a planned military offensive in the Donbas Fals

“Vice President Kamala Harris laughs at the plight of Ukraine; at idea of America offering assistance A blog article headline claims that a 15-second exchange between Vice President Kamala Harris and Poland’s President Andrzej Duda during a 48-minute news conference is evidence that Harris was callous about Ukraine and its refugees. The headline on the March 10 article reads, "Vice President Kamala Harris laughs at the plight of Ukraine; at idea of America offering assistance." It was published on The Raging Patriot blog, classified as a "questionable" source of information by Media Bias Factcheck. The article was shared on Facebook and flagged as part of Facebook’s efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about our partnership with Facebook.) Harris laughed during the March 10 news conference in Warsaw — as did Duda — but the headline mischaracterizes why she was laughing. Harris and Duda "were laughing about who would speak first amidst simultaneous translations — they were certainly not laughing about refugees," Herbie Ziskend, deputy communications director for Harris, said in a March 10 tweet. He noted that Harris also had announced funding to support Ukrainian civilians. The exchange in question came near the end of the 48-minute press conference, when an NPR reporter asked the final question. At the 40:34 mark, after the reporter stated her question, Harris and Duda looked at one another, Harris said, "Okay," and Duda laughed. Harris said, "A friend in need is a friend indeed," and laughed, then Duda began his answer. The phrase "a friend in need is a friend indeed" was used more than once during the press conference, including earlier by Duda, who said, "As Madam Vice President remarked today, ‘A friend in need is a friend indeed.’ That is why I’m really happy that today, when we are in need and when the NATO eastern flank is in need, the United States, by the decision of President Joe Biden, has deployed additional troops." After Duda’s answer to the NPR question, Harris said that the U.S. recognizes the generosity and kindness that Poland has shown to Ukrainian refugees. 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 "So the United States is absolutely prepared to do what we can and what we must, to support Poland in terms of the burden that they have taken on, that I think all of us who understand the moral obligation we should feel to help people who are fleeing harm and seeking refuge; the burden we should all be prepared to take on to support those people who are fleeing their home when they don’t want to leave," she said, according to the transcript. Harris also announced $53 million in new humanitarian funding from the U.S. government to support Ukrainian civilians. The moment of laughter that was singled out was not the first time during the press conference when the two paused and appeared to try to decide, laughingly, who should speak first. At the 35-minute mark, they also gestured and laughed as they determined who would reply first. Our ruling An article headline says, "Vice President Kamala Harris laughs at the plight of Ukraine; at idea of America offering assistance." Harris laughed during the press conference, but in reference to whether she or Duda would speak first amidst simultaneous translations. Duda also laughed. The full context makes clear they were not laughing at the situation in Ukraine or offering assistance. In her remarks that preceded and followed the laughter, Harris expressed concern about the refugees and said there is a moral obligation to help them. We rate this claim False.

Vice President Kamala Harris "was asked about gasoline prices ... and she tried to defer to President Duda, the Polish president. There was an awkward pause when Vice President Kamala Harris was asked how long Americans should expect to be paying record-high gas prices in a news conference on March 11. But the reason for the pause is not the one being portrayed by people who are sharing an edited video clip of the event to criticize the vice president. "Here’s Kamala Harris with really no answers about gasoline prices," Fox News’ Maria Bartiromo said to her guest, former Trump adviser Stephen Miller, on "Sunday Morning Futures" on March 13. "Watch how she responds, look." Bartiromo plays a clip where a reporter asks Harris how long Americans should be bracing for "historic inflation and some unprecedented gas prices." There is a pause as Harris and Romanian President Klaus Iohannis look at each other for a moment before Harris begins speaking. Miller was incredulous. "It was a heart-stopping moment. She was asked about gasoline prices and inflation in America and she tried to defer to President Duda, the Polish president," Miller said. "It is truly horrifying to think that the vice president of the United States lacks confidence so extremely on our domestic issues that she wants the president of Poland to discuss our gas prices and our inflation. And then she starts stammering about the Black Sea and reading her notes" Miller gets two things wrong in his comments. First, he mixes up the presidents of Romania and Poland. Andrzej Duda is the president of Poland, who Harris met with on March 10. A video clip of that news conference was discussed first in the "Sunday Futures" segment, and Bartiromo and Miller criticized Harris for laughing after a question about refugees. 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 the second video clip Bartiromo played for Miller, Harris was holding a joint news conference on March 11 with Iohannis. Miller, apparently thinking the clip was from the first news conference, then references the Polish president instead of the Romanian one. Secondly, Aamer Madhani of the Associated Press asked two questions, one first for Iohannis of Romania and one for Harris. The video edited out the first question about the threat Romania faces in the Black Sea from Russia and what help he was seeking from Harris. His second question, addressed to Harris, was about gas prices and inflation. The awkward pause came as Harris and Iohannis looked at each other to determine who would answer first, not because Harris was deferring to a foreign leader to answer the gas price question, as Miller falsely alleges. Harris, a transcript of the news conference shows, said the leaders discussed a range of topics, including the Black Sea, which she said Iohannis could discuss in more detail. The Fox News video then cut off the rest of her answer before Miller launched into his criticism. Harris went on to discuss the situation in Ukraine before vaguely addressing the question about inflation and gas, saying "The President did say in the State of the Union, there is a price to pay for democracy. Got to stand with your friends." Our ruling Miller said that Vice President Kamala Harris tried to defer to the Polish president when asked a question about high gas prices in the U.S. He’s wrong on both counts. Harris was speaking in a joint news conference with the president of Romania, not the Polish president. And the video clip played before Miller’s criticism edited out the first part of the question to Iohannis. The two leaders paused to determine who would answer first, not because Harris wanted him to answer about U.S. gas prices. We rate this claim Fals

Video shows man mocking police in Germany "Meanwhile in Germany…" reads the text over a video that shows a man playing the "Imperial March" from "Star Wars" as black-clad police officers walk by. The video was posted to Facebook on Dec. 14 2021, after a weekend of protests against COVID-19 policies in multiple German cities, including some demonstrations that became violent. The video continued to draw comments and be shared in March 2022. But this video wasn’t filmed in 2021, and not in Germany either. 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 People can be heard speaking French in the video, including a man who appears to be holding the camera saying "encore, encore, encore," which means "again" in French. The word "police" appears on the back of the officers’ uniforms — it’s the same word as in English. In German, the word is "polizei." A version of this footage appeared online as early as February 2019, a year before the pandemic. Fact Crescendo, a fact-checking outlet in India, pinpointed the location of the incident in Marseille, France, when it debunked a claim in 2020 that the recording showed police in the United States during protests over George Floyd’s death. We rate claims that this happened in Germany in 2021 False.

Says Leonardo DiCaprio gave Ukraine $10 million A picture of actor and activist Leonardo DiCaprio is one of many being shared on social media with the claim that he gave $10 million to Ukraine. "THANK YOU LEO!!!!" one post says with several Ukrainian flag emojis. But the evidence to support this claim is shaky, and doesn’t hold up to scrutiny. 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’s efforts to reach representatives of DiCaprio were not successful. But CNN reporter Daniel Dale tweeted on March 9 that a source close to the actor said DicCaprio didn’t donate $10 million and that he has no relatives from Ukraine. (Some posts online have said his grandmother is from there). 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 "DiCaprio stands with Ukraine and did make donations to a variety of humanitarian organizations trying to help Ukraine, the source said, but it wasn't $10 million, wasn't to Ukraine's government or military as some stories said, and wasn't connected to his grandmother," Dale tweeted. Journalist Jane Lytvynenko, senior research fellow at Harvard’s Shorenstein Center on Media, Politics and Public Policy, also pointed out some red flags with the claim. A story that has since been deleted on a blog called "Polish News" said that DiCaprio had "allocated" $10 million to support Ukraine, citing as a source the International Visegrad Fund, a donor organization based in Slovakia. But a spokesperson for the fund told publications that they weren’t aware of DiCaprio making such a donation. RELATED VIDEO Several news outlets, including the Independent, published the misinformation and have since corrected their reports. We found no original credible reporting that DiCaprio gave $10 million to Ukraine. We rate this claim False.

California has instituted a "bacon ban. Republican U.S. Senate and House members from Iowa have voiced opposition against a California proposition that went into effect earlier this year that they claim will ban bacon in the state. Rep. Ashley Hinson recently tweeted about her travels around Iowa speaking to farmers and cattlemen to push back against what she and other Iowa Republican political leaders called a "bacon ban." "Great to catch up with everyone and talk about our efforts to ensure independent cattle producers have fair market access & to push back on California’s bacon ban," Hinson tweeted. California Proposition 12, referred to as the "bacon ban" by Hinson and other politicians, requires housing breeding pigs, egg-laying chickens and veal calves in facilities of a certain square footage for animal health reasons. Facilities for breeding pigs would need to provide more than 24 square feet of usable floor space per pig. The law would ban the sale of pork, egg and veal products from companies whose facilities don’t meet those standards. The law applies to the sale of uncooked pork from animals raised in California and out of state. Proposition 12 was put on California’s ballot on Nov. 6, 2018, and passed with roughly 62% of the vote. The law amends requirements in parts of Chapter 13.8 of the state’s Health and Safety Code. It adds Proposition 2, a law that involved prevents animal cruelty that passed in 2008. Parts of the law were phased in, with the part covering requirements for pigs taking effect on Jan. 1, 2022. However, a Sacramento County judge ruled on Jan. 24 to delay enforcing the law for six months for retailers and grocers until the state enacted final regulations for the law. The regulations still apply to pork producers. The law’s overall goal is to prevent cruel treatment of animals in agriculture. Banning the sale of pork products from companies that don’t follow the regulations is a way to enforce the law. Hinson is not the only Iowan voicing opposition to the law. Sen. Joni Ernst, R-Iowa, tweeted on Feb. 25: 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 "In Plymouth County, local pork producers & I discussed a number of issues they’re facing, including the need to pass my EATS Act to prohibit states like California from effectively banning #Iowa bacon." Hinson introduced the Exposing Agricultural Trade Suppression (EATS) Act in August 2021 which would prevent state and local governments from imposing laws that regulate condition standards on the production and manufacturing of agricultural products sold or offered for sale across state lines. "California’s radical effort to ban agriculture products grown and raised in states like Iowa is not just an attack on our hardworking farmers and producers, it’s an attack on anyone who likes to eat bacon for breakfast," Hinson said when introducing the EATS Act. Reps. Mariannette Miller-Meeks and Randy Feenstra, both Republicans from Iowa, have cosponsored the act. A similar act was introduced in the Senate that Sens. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, and Ernst have cosponsored. Our ruling Hinson and other Republicans from Iowa in Congress are pushing back against California Proposition 12, which bans pork, egg and veal products from companies that don’t follow the law’s confinement area standards. The product ban, which applies to companies in California but also out of state, is a way to enforce increased space requirements for housing livestock. More exists in the law but pigs raised under the conditions set out in California law may be sold for pork products. Iowa pork would not be able to be sold in California if the housing conditions for Iowa pigs taken to market do not comply with the law’s rules. Calling what is happening in California a bacon ban is Half True

"People who have had cancer in the past, they get the COVID jab and now, they're getting cancer two to three, four months later and it's the same cancer they had except much worse. A viral Facebook video says COVID-19 vaccines are causing cancer recurrence — a claim that is not backed by evidence. "People who have had cancer in the past, they get the COVID jab and now, they're getting cancer two to three, four months later and it's the same cancer they had except much worse," says the speaker in the March 9 video. The video, which has more than 100,000 views, was flagged as part of Facebook’s efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about our partnership with Facebook.) There is no data to suggest that COVID-19 vaccines lead to cancer recurrence, said Dr. Steven Pergam, a co-leader of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network committee that developed recommendations on COVID-19 vaccination in cancer patients, in a Q&A with the National Cancer Institute. Because cancer is a common disease, and hundreds of millions of people have been vaccinated against COVID-19, some people will have cancer recurrence around the time of their vaccination, said Dr. Samuel Godfrey, research information team lead at Cancer Research UK, a nonprofit that funds cancer research. It does not mean the vaccine caused the cancer. In the Facebook video, the speaker claims that among people who are having cancer recurrences, "the cancers we’re seeing are highly resistant to treatment." But Godfrey said it’s important to understand why cancer recurs — and why, when it does, it is often harder to treat. "Cancer cells evolve very quickly," Godfrey said. "If someone has a cancer treatment, it only takes one cancer cell in a tumor to find a way to survive that therapy. That surviving cell is too small to detect, but will eventually seed a new tumor that is now resistant to the original treatment." 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 Fact-checkers have debunked many claims that attempt to link COVID-19 vaccines to cancer, including falsehoods that overall cancer cases have spiked; that soft-tissue cancers have increased; and that the U.S. military has seen exponential increases in cancer diagnoses among its members. COVID-19 mRNA vaccines work by instructing cells to make versions of a harmless spike protein found on the surface of the coronavirus, so the immune system can recognize the protein and mount an antibody response against the virus in the event of a future infection. Those instructions do not interact with your DNA or alter genes and therefore cannot cause cancer. A number of health officials have noted that one temporary side effect of vaccines is that they can cause lymph nodes to swell in the armpit or other areas near the injection site in a way that mimics an early sign of cancer. While this can be confusing, practitioners say that people receiving cancer screenings soon after vaccination should alert their health care provider about their recent vaccination. Our ruling A Facebook video says, "People who have had cancer in the past, they get the COVID jab and now, they're getting cancer two to three, four months later and it's the same cancer they had except much worse." There is no data to suggest that COVID-19 vaccines lead to cancer recurrence. Cancer is a common disease and hundreds of millions of people have been vaccinated against COVID-19, so it is expected that some people would have cancer recurrence around the time of their vaccination. It is not proof that vaccinations are the cause of the recurrence. We rate this claim False.

“We are No. 1 among all large states in having fully vaccinated teenagers. We are No. 2 in all large states for having fully vaccinated five- to 11- year-olds. Gov. Kathy Hochul cited rates of vaccination against Covid-19 to support her decision to drop the mask mandate in schools. She announced at a news conference on Feb. 27 that the state would lift the statewide mask mandate for children in school. "We are No. 1 among all large states in having fully vaccinated teenagers. We are No. 2 in all large states for having fully vaccinated 5- to 11-year olds. We're just a little bit behind Illinois, so I think we can surpass this. We'd like to be No. 1 in everything we do." We checked to see if her claims about the vaccination rates among children in New York State, relative to other large states, are accurate. We reached out to Hochul’s office, and spokesperson Bryan Lesswing said the governor’s office considered the 10 most populated states in its analysis: California, Texas, Florida, New York, Pennsylvania, Illinois, Ohio, Georgia, North Carolina and Michigan. Hochul’s administration looked at the number of vaccines administered by the states for each age group, using U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention data, and the total population in each age group to reach its conclusion. A slide deck from her presentation on the day she announced the end of the mask mandate provided a chart showing large states and rates of full vaccination among young people. We consulted data from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, which issues Covid-19 reports for each state. A report from Feb. 25 showed that 33.5% of children ages 5 to 11 and 71.2% of children ages 12 to 17 were fully vaccinated in New York State. Among large states, Illinois had a greater share of children ages 5 to 11 who were fully vaccinated, at 34.8%. Among children ages 12 to 17 in large states, New York had the largest share. An analysis of vaccination rates from the American Academy of Pediatrics, published on Feb. 23, showed the same results as Hochul presented. In the 10 largest states, New York has the second-highest rate of vaccination in children ages 5 to 11, after Illinois, when children who have had at least one dose of the vaccine are counted. Forty-one percent of children in this age group have had at least one dose in New York. The figure is 42% in Illinois. 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 Among large states, New York has the highest percentage of children ages 12 to 17 who have received at least one dose, according to the pediatricians’ group. Eighty-two percent of students in this group have received at least one dose, edging out California, which has 81%. Hochul correctly characterized New York’s vaccination rates among large states in three Covid briefings during February. But she did not do so twice in local news interviews. In two television interviews on Feb. 28, Hochul did not include "among large states" as a qualifier. Across the country, there are 10 states and the District of Columbia with higher rates of vaccination among children ages five to 11 who have had at least one dose, according to the analysis of CDC data from the American Academy of Pediatrics. The 10 states are: Connecticut, Massachusetts, Maryland, Rhode Island, Vermont, Maine, Virginia, Minnesota, Hawaii, and Illinois. For children ages 12 to 17, a larger proportion had at least one dose in six states and the District of Columbia. The states are: Connecticut, Massachusetts, Maryland, New Hampshire, Rhode Island and Vermont, according to the same analysis. Our ruling Hochul said New York State ranked No. 1 one among large states in having fully vaccinated teenagers and No. 2 among large states for having fully vaccinated 5 to 11 year olds. Data from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services confirms Hochul’s statement. Hochul qualified her claim by saying "large states" in a news conference she held to announce the lifting of mask mandates in schools. This qualification is important, as New York does not lead the country in vaccinations among children and teenagers when all 50 states are considered. We rate this claim True

"The US has made strides in reducing carbon emissions that other parts of the world have not. In 2018, 15-year-old Greta Thunberg sparked a worldwide movement to meet carbon emissions targets when she protested outside the Swedish parliament holding a sign saying "School Strike for Climate." That protest inspired students across the globe to hold similar demonstrations demanding action from their governments on climate change. The issue remains at the forefront, though measures to address climate change are stalled in Congress. Meanwhile, U.S. Rep. Glenn Grothman, R-Wisconsin, took to the floor of Congress to stake out a view that he says is rarely heard – that the United States is already doing a better job than the rest of the world at addressing the issue. In a Feb. 3, 2022 tweet that included a snippet of the floor speech, Grothman made this claim: "The US has made strides in reducing carbon emissions that other parts of the world have not. Meanwhile, @POTUS is trying to send taxpayer dollars to manufacturers overseas that do not abide by the same standards we do at home." In an email to PolitiFact Wisconsin, Grothman expanded on the comment. "I feel that many young people are being misled into thinking our country is polluting more than it ever has," Grothman said. "In reality, air and water pollution have decreased significantly in the last 40 years. I also feel that given the growth of the Chinese and Indian economies, people in the U.S. have to be conscious that changes in our laws can inadvertently push jobs to these other countries who do not have the same environmental standards we do." Both parts of Grothman’s claim caught our attention. We took a look at the overseas manufacturers claim and rated it Half True. But what about the claim on carbon emissions and progress. The U.S. vs. the world The claim is that the U.S. is ahead of "other parts of the world" in terms of the strides it has made. Admittedly, the "other parts of the world" is a bit vague, but we interpret it to mean the US is doing better than many other countries that – like it – are among the largest emitters of greenhouse gases. When asked for backup, Grothman staffers pointed to a U.S. Environmental Protection Agency report titled "Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks: 1990–2020." The report said that CO2 – carbon monoxide – emissions from fossil fuel combustion fell by 8.4% in that 30-year period. Looking at just the 15-year period of 2005 to 2020, they fell 24.7%. (In the final year covered, from 2019 to 2020, the figure was 10.7%) So, U.S. emissions have fallen, but Grothman stated that as a comparison to other parts of the world, so we need to look broader. Researchers with the Rhodium Group, an independent research firm focused on global trends, have tracked that data back decades. Their data puts China as the world’s top emitter, followed by the United States. The data groups the European Union as one, in addition to listing its individual nations such as Germany. According to the data provided, here are the world’s largest greenhouse gas emitters for the years 2010 and 2019, with total net emissions in million metric tons of CO2e (bundles of greenhouse gases): 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 2010 2019 Percent change China 11,235 14,093 +25.4% U.S. 6,241 5,724 -8.2% India 2,504 3,422 +36.6% European Union 3,868 3,334 -13.8% Brazil 2,124 1,458 -31.3% Indonesia 1,113 1,765 +58.5% Russia 1,335 1,619 +21.2% Japan 1,232 1,142 -7.3% Germany 923 771 -16.4% Canada 665 707 +6.3% So when compared to the world’s top greenhouse gas emitters, the United States has made progress, decreasing emissions 8.2% from 2010 to 2019. China and India saw the biggest increases among those countries, 25.4% and 36.6%. Of note: Brazil made the most progress for that time period among the top 5 emitters, with a decrease of 31.3%. However, by 2020-2021, as The New York Times reported Nov. 2, 2021, Brazil’s progress has stalled and the country is now seeing increasing emission levels, largely driven by a surge in deforestation. Our ruling Grothman said "The US has made strides in reducing carbon emissions that other parts of the world have not." When compared to the world’s other top greenhouse gas emitters, the United States has made progress – its emissions falling 8.2% from 2010 to 2019. While the US is not tops in terms of decreases, Grothman’s claim was a relative one. And China and India are among countries that have seen increases, not decreases. For a statement that is accurate with nothing significant missing, our rating is 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' });

U.S. imports 1% of its oil from Russia while “Exxon, Chevron, BP and Shell profits are at their highest level in over 7 years. Gas prices in the United States have been on the rise since Russia invaded Ukraine, but a Facebook post says these high prices come as major oil companies experience record profits. The Facebook post was shared on March 7 and is an image of a tweet made by Dan Price, the CEO of a Seattle-based credit card processing company that made headlines in 2015 when it raised minimum salaries for employees to $70,000. "Gas prices are rising at their fastest pace ever, and have topped $4 for the first time since 2008," Price’s March 6 tweet said. "America gets 1% of its oil from Russia, while Exxon, Chevron, BP and Shell profits are at their highest level in over 7 years." 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 is right that the U.S. is not heavily dependent on Russia for its oil, but its numbers are slightly understated. And while it was correct in its assertion that oil companies have recorded record profits, it ignored that those gains followed pandemic-era losses. Rising gas prices Gas prices had steadily been on the rise since before Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. Much of that has been due to slow economic recovery following profoundly disruptive pandemic-era supply and demand changes. But gas prices quickly shot up when war broke out between the countries on Feb. 24. Global crude oil prices jumped to more than $100 a barrel, hitting their highest levels since 2008. The American Automobile Association announced March 7, a day after Price’s tweet, that the higher oil prices caused the average price for a gallon of gas in the U.S. to reach $4.06 — a price jump of 45 cents compared to the previous week and 62 cents from the previous month. The next day, it went to $4.17 per gallon. Not accounting for inflation, it’s the highest the national average gas price since July 2008, AAA reported. Economic sanctions against Russia by the U.S., European Union and Japan have disrupted Russia’s financial system including its oil industry, as several international oil companies announced their intention to divest their stakes in Russian energy. And President Joe Biden on March 8 announced a ban on Russian oil imports, which he said is expected to push gas prices up further. 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 U.S. oil imports The U.S. receives imported oil from more than 80 countries and saw 5.88 million barrels of crude oil per day flow into the country for 2020, according to the federal Energy Information Administration. Though Russia is among the top five sources of imported oil for the U.S., data from the EIA shows the bulk of imported oil comes from Canada, and only a small fraction is from Russia. The U.S. imported around 672,000 barrels of petroleum products, including crude oil, a day from Russia in 2021, the EIA reported. That accounted for around 8% of overall oil imports received by the U.S., with about 3% being crude oil — not the 1% as stated in the social media post. Record oil company profits followed losses Oil companies did announce record breaking profits earlier this year. Exxon Mobil made $23 billion in profit for 2021. But that came after suffering $22.4 billion in losses the previous year because of the pandemic-fueled economic downturn. The New York Times reported the company's profit was the highest it had been since 2014. Chevron also experienced its most profitable year since 2014, with the company reporting in January that it made $15.6 billion in revenue for 2021, according to the Wall Street Journal. That followed a loss of $5.5 billion in 2020. BP reported it made $12.85 billion in 2021, with $4.1 billion being made in the fourth financial quarter. Reuters reported the quarterly profit was the largest the company has had since 2013. That followed a $5.7 billion loss in 2020, its first in a decade. Reuters also reported that Shell made significant profits in 2021, earning $19.29 billion for the year, up from $4.85 billion in 2020. In the final financial quarter of 2021, the company earned $6.4 billion, Shell’s highest quarterly profit since 2014. Our ruling A social media post about rising U.S. gas prices claimed "America gets 1% of its oil from Russia, while Exxon, Chevron, BP and Shell profits are at their highest level in over 7 years." It’s true that U.S. dependence on Russian oil imports has been small. About 8% of all petroleum products imported into the U.S. have come from Russia — and 3%, not 1%, are crude oil. And while oil companies have reported record profits, these records followed billions of dollars of pandemic-era losses from 2020. Some of the record breaking amounts were of quarterly profits and not annual profits. With those caveats, we rate this claim Mostly Tru

China: U.S. has biological weapons labs in Ukraine China’s government is amplifying debunked claims about non-existent U.S. biological weapons labs in Ukraine, bringing the falsehoods back into the spotlight on social media. A March 9 post on Instagram describes remarks from China’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs spokesperson Zhao Lijian, who said on March 9 that the U.S. has such biolabs in Ukraine. The post is a screenshot of Zhao at a podium with text that says, "China urges Pentagon to disclose alleged ‘biolabs’ in Ukraine ‘as soon as possible.’" The text also says, "Beijing believes the laboratories in Ukraine are just the ‘tip of an iceberg,’" and the U.S. controls 336 biological laboratories in 30 countries around the world. A caption on the post reads, "Russia found over 30 biological labs (with evidence of bioweapons) in Ukraine formed by the Pentagon in areas bordering Russia. If true, this is more than a bit concerning." 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.) Following Zhao’s remarks, U.S. government officials said unequivocally that the U.S. does not have biolabs in Ukraine. The claims distort U.S. government support of Ukraine’s public health laboratories that research infectious diseases. Zhao’s remarks were posted March 9 in a video on Twitter. According to the English translation, he said, "Presently the U.S. biological labs in Ukraine have indeed attracted much attention. According to reports, in these facilities a large quantity of dangerous viruses are stored. Russia has found during its military operations that the U.S. uses these facilities to conduct military plans. According to data released by the U.S., it has 26 labs in Ukraine." But the U.S. is "not developing biological or chemical weapons inside Ukraine. It's not happening," Pentagon press secretary John Kirby said during a March 9 press briefing. 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 And White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki said on Twitter on March 9 that Chinese officials were echoing conspiracy theories from Russia. "The United States is in full compliance with its obligations under the Chemical Weapons Convention and the Biological Weapons Convention and does not develop or possess such weapons anywhere," Psaki wrote. Andy Weber, former assistant secretary of defense for nuclear, chemical, and biological defense programs, is now a board member of the Arms Control Association Board, a nonprofit that advocates for effective arms control policies on a global scale. Weber said the U.S. Department of Defense Cooperative Threat Reduction Program has provided technical support to the Ukrainian Ministry of Health since 2005 to improve its public health laboratories, whose mission is analogous to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Work by these labs has been instrumental in stemming the spread of COVID-19. The Cooperative Threat Reduction Program began after the fall of the Soviet Union in 1991 to reduce the threat of existing weapons of mass destruction. It is also known as the Nunn-Lugar Program (named after the senators who passed the Soviet Threat Reduction Act) and is housed within the Defense Department’s Defense Threat Reduction Agency, according to the Center for Arms Control and Non-proliferation. In the wake of disinformation about these labs, the Department of Defense released a video attempting to explain their work. All the labs in the program are "owned, operated and manned by host governments to meet local needs," it said. Psaki warned March 9 that the claims by Russia and China appear to be falsely laying the groundwork to justify further violence: "Now that Russia has made these false claims, and China has seemingly endorsed this propaganda, we should all be on the lookout for Russia to possibly use chemical or biological weapons in Ukraine, or to create a false flag operation using them. It’s a clear pattern." Our ruling A spokesperson for the Chinese government said the U.S. has biolabs in Ukraine. The claim originated with the Russian government and has been previously debunked by U.S. government officials and weapons control advocates. Following Zhao’s March 9 remarks, U.S. government officials strongly refuted the claims again, saying the false narrative was being used to lay the groundwork for further violence in Ukraine

Two years ago we were “drilling our own oil for $27 a barrel.” Now, thanks to Joe Biden, we’re “paying $105 a barrel to Russia. As Russia’s invasion of Ukraine continues to upend the energy market and drive up oil prices, some have used the crisis as an opportunity to point fingers at the Biden administration, alleging that policy decisions on domestic drilling are solely to blame for the higher price tags. Take this March 6 Facebook post, for example: "2 years ago we were drilling our own oil for $27 a barrel…We’re now paying $105 a barrel to Russia." There are multiple problems with this claim. It represents a misunderstanding of how the global market operates, and the pressure it’s under today. The current price of a barrel of oil has a lot less to do with the U.S. drilling than the post suggests and a lot more to do with the impact of a global pandemic and a war between Russia and Ukraine. The numbers presented in the post are misleading, energy experts told us. 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.) ‘2 years ago we were drilling our own oil for $27 a barrel’ While it’s true that prices have gone up, the U.S. was selling its oil around $27, and losing money in the process — not drilling at that price. "Saying that we could drill at $27 a barrel is preposterous, it’s not even close," Clark Williams-Derry, an energy analyst with the Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis, told PolitiFact. "And the reason that oil prices were low — there's the thing called COVID-19. The global pandemic cratered global demand for oil and it was a financial bloodbath for the energy industry." ‘We’re now paying $105 a barrel to Russia’ The Facebook post gives the impression that buying oil from Russia is a new thing. But it’s not. The U.S. has purchased oil from Russia for decades. Energy analysts said that the $105 per barrel from Russia cited in the post probably isn’t too far off, though it’s hard to pinpoint. Prices in general were going up throughout January and February, though, so the U.S. was paying more for all oil imports, not just those from Russia. Russian crude oil accounted for about 3% of overall U.S. crude oil imports in 2021. Factors that influence gas prices Oil prices are set on a global market. Any supply disruption, anywhere, affects prices in the U.S. When the pandemic hit, global demand for gasoline dropped and cratered the price of oil. Since that initial economic wallop, demand has risen steadily as business activity has increased. Yet supply hasn’t been able to recover as quickly, due to delays in restoring drilling capacity, higher transportation costs, a tight labor market and sluggish production increases. As a result, prices of crude oil have risen consistently in recent months. The war in Ukraine, meanwhile, has added more global volatility and impacted the supply of oil from Russia, the second largest producer of crude. 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 American oil companies also watch the market closely to determine whether it's worthwhile to extract more oil, what they call "putting money in the ground." And right now, they aren’t doing that. For one, companies have to build new rigs, drill new wells, install new gear and may not see any oil or profit for several months. Add in a volatile market, and they tend to resist making big investments. While moves to expand renewable energy sources by the Biden administration have also made some companies less eager to invest, energy experts say many firms are currently focused more on their investors than on boosting supplies. "There is no evidence that Biden has increased oil prices. Instead, what is clear is that the oil industry is making a lot of money and choosing not to invest that money in new production. They don't want to," Williams-Derry said. "And the Biden administration doesn't have many easy legal tools at its disposal to nationalize the oil industry and force companies to produce more." While the Facebook post accurately shows how expensive oil is right now, it ignores several factors that are impacting the energy industry, analysts said, and can’t be attributed to President Joe Biden, or any one domestic policy. Global turmoil and uncertainty impact prices, Williams-Derry said, "and that has everything to do with COVID-19 and war and nothing to do with the actions of any one politician, other than, right now, Vladimir Putin." "Even if we produced two times what we consumed, if there is a war that raises oil prices in the E.U., the price in the U.S. will rise," Christopher Knittel, a professor of applied economics at the MIT Sloan School of Management, wrote on Twitter. Increasing domestic production can lower prices to an extent, experts say, but it’s incredibly hard to be "oil independent." Why? Because when the price of oil increases somewhere in the world, it increases here. Ramping up domestic production can lower the global price, but minimally, because that production increase gets spread around the world. Some Republicans and conservative commentators have claimed that Biden halted leasing for oil and gas and is holding back production. While Biden ordered a temporary pause on new federal leases in the first few months of his administration pending a review of federal permitting and leasing practices, a Louisiana federal judge ruled against it in June. Oil production remained unphased in the U.S., even when the order was in effect. The U.S. Energy Information Administration also reported earlier this year that domestic crude oil production is expected to top 12.4 million barrels per day by 2023, surpassing pre-pandemic levels. Meanwhile, Biden hasn’t stopped any production that occurs on private lands, nor has he shut down existing leases on federal lands. The Biden administration issued more drilling permits on public lands and water in its first year than did the Trump administration in its first year, according to federal data analyzed by the Center for Biological Diversity. Our ruling A Facebook post claims that, two years ago, the U.S. was drilling its own oil for $27 a barrel and thanks to Biden is now paying Russia $105 a barrel. The U.S. was not drilling it’s own oil for $27 — it was selling at these types of low prices at a loss due to effects from the pandemic. The U.S. has purchased oil from Russia for decades and the $105 per barrel from Russia cited in the post is probable, but prices in general were going up and the U.S. was paying more for all oil imports, not just those from Russia. Biden and his policies are not playing a meaningful role in the rising prices, experts said. The surge is due to multiple things, including rising demand amid sluggish production increases from pandemic lows, as well as the war in Ukraine. We rate this post False. RELATED: Ask PolitiFact: Why are gas prices going up? RELATED: Fact-checking Biden’s claim that there are 9,000 unused oil drilling permi

Facebook video shows “counting Biden’s votes at 2 a.m. A Facebook post that features a video viewed millions of times appears to suggest that someone is rapid fire counting ballots cast for President Joe Biden. The seven-second video shows a person’s hand gripping a machine as it zips its way down a massive stack of paper. The caption under the video states: "Counting Biden's votes at 2am 😂 I’m not much of a conspiracy theorist but I have to admit this was funny." This post was flagged as part of Facebook’s efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about our partnership with Facebook.) The video was posted by Steve West, founder of Steve’s Outdoor Adventures in Oregon. West told us that someone sent the video to him and that he posted it as a joke. West told us that he thought the equipment in the video was a belt sander. "It’s just satire — don’t take it seriously," West said. "I took it for what it was: a funny joke, a cool video. It’s for entertainment’s sake. I didn’t realize it inflamed some people and made them angry." Some commenters did see it as a joke, but plenty of others saw it as a sign of election wrongdoing. The phrase "counting Biden’s votes at 2 a.m." feeds into the falsehoods that election workers in 2020 "found" votes for Biden or in Democratic strongholds such as Detroit in the middle of the night. The fact that election workers process and count ballots late at night is not a sign of fraud. It is routine ballot tabulation. The process took longer in some jurisdictions in 2020 due to the surge in voting by mail. It also takes time for election workers to verify and process mail ballots before they are tabulated. So what is happening in the video? The video appears to show a machine removing stubs off of sheets of paper. Based on the color and size, they are not ballots; election officials and experts told us they knew of no election office that used such a machine for ballots. Featured Fact-check Instagram posts stated on October 23, 2022 in a post Arizona Secretary of State Katie Hobbs “sent 6,000 wrong ballots to Republicans.” By Gabrielle Settles • October 28, 2022 "I've never seen any power tool like that used in any stage of ballot processing," said Douglas W. Jones, an expert on voting systems and a retired computer science professor at the University of Iowa. "If I were in the ballot processing business, I wouldn't let anyone go near ballots with a machine like that!" Election officials in Alabama and Michigan, two states that use ballots with perforated stubs, said they don’t use such a machine for stub removal. In Michigan, Lansing City Clerk Chris Swope said that election workers remove the perforated stub on the ballot by hand before the ballot is fed into a tabulator. The paper in the video appears yellow, but in Michigan the ballots are white, Swope said. And absentee ballots, which are folded, are not as flat as the paper in the video. Another election expert noted the red stripe on parts of the paper, which isn’t a typical part of ballots. Jones said the strips being torn off appear to be about 8 inches long, "consistent with the bottom edge of a ballot but equally consistent with the bottom edge of just about any billing form." An election equipment vendor, Election Systems and Software, told us that the machine in the video is not something they use, and to their knowledge it has nothing to do with ballots. But it appears to be a paper stripper used to get rid of excess paper in a stack. Here is an example of a waste paper/carton stripper on YouTube. We found the same video as the one West posted in a few YouTube videos shared in February. Based on the titles that called it the "amazing magic machine" and "#satisfying," it appears users just found the machine mesmerizing. We don’t know the details about the type of paper in this video, but we know that it doesn’t show counting ballots for Biden at 2 a.m. We rate this statement False. PolitiFact staff writer Gabrielle Settles contributed research to this fact-check. RELATED: Fact-checks about elections RELATED: A claim about serial numbers on ballots is misguided

A Time magazine cover shows Vladimir Putin with Hitler’s mustache In what looks like a Time magazine cover, Russian President Vladimir Putin is seen with an image of Nazi leader Adolf Hitler’s mustache layered on his face. "The return of history," says the cover, which appears to be from Time’s Feb. 28/March 7 double issue. "How Putin shattered Europe’s dreams." The image is being shared and cheered by some on social media. "What a brilliant TIME cover and so true. This mongrel Putin has lowered himself to the shameful level of Hitler," one tweet said. "Leaked image of new Time magazine cover," said another. But this isn’t an authentic Time cover. 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 actual cover for that date shows 11-year-old Orion Jean, who the magazine declared "kid of the year." On Feb. 24, Time tweeted its cover for its March 14/March 21 issue. It says "the return of history" and "how Putin shattered Europe’s dreams," but it shows an image of a tank, not Putin with a Hitler mustache. The photo shows a Russian tank entering a region controlled by Moscow-backed rebels in eastern Ukraine that day, according to a caption in the cover story. The altered Time cover was tweeted Feb. 26 by Patrick Mulder, who describes himself as an artist and graphic designer. Mulder also tweeted another version that shows Putin with Hitler eyes, writing: "This is the second edition of a rework I made of this month’s TIME magazine cover. I felt the official choice was somewhat uninspired." On Feb. 28, he tweeted a statement on what he called his "TIME cover artwork." "It wasn’t originally intended to be a TIME cover," Mulder said. "The finished image was so powerful, I felt that it deserved to be framed in an equally powerful way." We rate claims that this is an authentic Time cover False.

Video shows Volodymr Zelensky singing “Endless Love” with his wife A video of a couple singing "Endless Love," a 1981 song by Lionel Richie and Diana Ross, is spreading online with a surprising description: that it shows Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky and his wife. "Ukraine president Zelensky and wife singing Endless Love," one Facebook post says. "Ukrainian president and his beautiful wife during happier times," says another. But the people in this video aren’t Zelensky, who was an entertainer prior to entering politics, or his wife, Olena Zelenska, the first lady of Ukraine. The couple has captured international attention as they have stood defiant and vocal in their resistance to Russia. 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 music video posts, however, 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 searched online for "Endless Love duet covers" and found the video was posted on YouTube two weeks ago by Boyce Avenue, a band from Florida known for their cover songs. The singer identified as Zelensky is actually lead vocalist Alejandro Manzano, and the woman identified as his wife is actually Connie Talbot. We rate claims that this video shows Zelensky and his wife False. CORRECTION: The spelling of Lionel Richie's name has been corrected in the headline and stor

"Donald Trump's appeasement of Putin wasn't just a personal act of treason, it's the Republican Party's official position. The progressive veterans advocacy group VoteVets made several accurate statements in an attack ad that seeks to tie former President Donald Trump and fellow Republicans to Russian President Vladimir Putin. But it followed up those statements with an exaggerated and misleading conclusion. Here are the ad’s central claims: "Remember, Donald Trump was impeached for threatening to withhold military aid from Ukraine." This is accurate. The House on Dec. 18, 2019, impeached Trump on two charges — abuse of power, in holding up security assistance and a White House meeting to put pressure on Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, and obstruction of Congress to cover up that campaign. "And remember, 52 out of 53 Republican senators voted to let Trump get away with it." This, too, is accurate. The Senate on Feb. 5, 2020, acquitted Trump of both charges. The only Republican voting to convict was Utah’s Mitt Romney, on the abuse of power charge. The ad, launched six days after Russia invaded Ukraine, then ends with an incendiary claim that lacks the same level of accuracy. It declared: "Donald Trump’s appeasement of Putin wasn’t just a personal act of treason, it’s the Republican Party’s official position." Trump’s act not treason What the ad described as Trump’s appeasement of Putin did not amount to treason, because Trump’s acts did not occur during wartime or during an armed rebellion. The U.S. Constitution mentions very few crimes specifically, but is clearly defines treason: "Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort. No person shall be convicted of treason unless on the testimony of two witnesses to the same overt act, or on confession in open court. "The Congress shall have power to declare the punishment of treason, but no attainder of treason shall work corruption of blood, or forfeiture except during the life of the person attainted." On the most basic level, treason has to occur in wartime, or during an armed rebellion against the U.S. government. While there are tensions between Putin and the United States amid Russia’s war in Ukraine, President Joe Biden has been very pointed in saying the United States would not join the conflict. Trump faced accusations of treason after he and Putin held a news conference on July 16, 2018 following a one-on-one meeting in Helsinki, Finland. Asked if he believed his own intelligence agencies or the Russian president when it came to the allegations of Russia meddling in the elections, Trump said: "President Putin says it's not Russia. I don't see any reason why it would be." Trump later claimed he misspoke, saying: "The sentence should have been, ‘I don't see any reason why I wouldn't, or, why it wouldn't be Russia.’" GOP’s softening position on arming Ukraine To back the second part of its claim, VoteVets, whose senior advisers include former National Security Council official Alexander Vindman, cited the Republican Party’s change of position on arming Ukraine. In 2016, as Trump claimed the Republican nomination for president, the GOP originally wrote a platform that was to call for providing Ukraine with weapons in addition to the substantial nonlethal aid the U.S. already provides, news outlets reported at the time. After Trump surrogates reportedly intervened, the final passage supported "providing appropriate assistance" to Ukraine, but didn't mention providing arms to the government in Kiev, the Los Angeles Times reported. PolitiFact found there was evidence that Trump’s campaign was involved in making the change. 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 VoteVets argued that appeasing Putin is the GOP’s official position because of that platform change; because Romney was the only Republican senator who voted to convict Trump; and because the Republican National Committee decided not to adopt a 2020 platform, leaving the 2016 platform in place. The 2016 platform softened language on helping Ukraine’s armed forces, but issued warnings to Russia and complained that "a weak (Obama) Administration has invited aggression": "We support maintaining and, if warranted, increasing sanctions, together with our allies, against Russia unless and until Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity are fully restored. We also support providing appropriate assistance to the armed forces of Ukraine and greater coordination with NATO defense planning…. "Repressive at home and reckless abroad, their (Kremlin officials’) policies imperil the nations which regained their self-determination upon the collapse of the Soviet Union. We will meet the return of Russian belligerence with the same resolve that led to the collapse of the Soviet Union. We will not accept any territorial change in Eastern Europe imposed by force, in Ukraine, Georgia, or elsewhere, and will use all appropriate constitutional measures to bring to justice the practitioners of aggression and assassination." In 2020, the party declined to adopt a platform at all. Instead, the Republican National Committee reiterated its "strong support" for Trump and his administration. Republicans’ positions in 2022 In 2022, Trump praised Putin, at least tactically, for his invasion of Ukraine. He said: "I went in yesterday and there was a television screen, and I said, ‘This is genius.’ Putin declares a big portion of Ukraine, Putin declares it as independent. So, Putin is now saying, ‘It’s independent,’ a large section of Ukraine. I said, ‘How smart is that?’ And he’s going to go in and be a peacekeeper.… That’s the strongest peace force I’ve ever seen. There were more army tanks than I’ve ever seen. They’re going to keep peace, all right. No, but think of it. Here’s a guy who’s very savvy… I know him very well. Very, very well." Many Republicans, however, have not embraced Trump’s remarks. Former Vice President Mike Pence told GOP donors, according to CNN: "There is no room in this party for apologists for Putin. There is only room for champions of freedom." Asked about Trump’s comments, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., said: "What President Putin did as a ruthless thug is just invade — invaded another sovereign country and killed thousands of innocent people." Senate Minority Whip John Thune, R-S.D., said about Trump’s comments: "Putin is a murderous thug and I think the world is now seeing that. That’s my view of it and I think that’s going to be most Americans’ view of it. That was before, and will be for sure after, what we’re seeing on display." Other Republican lawmakers have moved to provide arms to Ukraine in the wake of the invasion or to stop the U.S. from buying energy from Russia and other sanctions. "Trump wanted to create a different relationship with Russia, because none of the traditional barriers to cooperation, such as human rights, violating the territorial integrity of the neighbors, or kleptocracy, bothered him," said Yuval Weber, a professor at Texas A&M University's Bush School of Government and Public Service in Washington. "He was much more interested in leveraging Russia against China and shaping a less constrained international order that would allow larger powers to run roughshod over others, without the limitations of international law, institutions, or norms." Our ruling VoteVets said: "Donald Trump's appeasement of Putin wasn't just a personal act of treason, it's the Republican Party's official position." Trump’s acts regarding Ukraine that resulted in his impeachment did not rise to the level of treason. And the Republican Party does not have an official position to appease Putin. In 2016, the party removed from its platform language about arming Ukraine in its fight against Russia, but the platform contained language threatening action against any future Russian aggression. Meanwhile, as Trump has said complimentary things about Putin, other Republican leaders have heavily criticized Putin’s actions. The statement contains only an element of truth. We rate it Mostly Fals

The oil industry has "9,000 permits to drill now. They could be drilling right now, yesterday, last week, last year. President Joe Biden said that his policies have not made the U.S. less equipped to withstand the impact of the ban on Russian energy imports. He contended that the onus is on U.S. oil and gas companies that have permits to begin drilling, but haven’t started. "It’s simply not true that my administration or policies are holding back domestic energy production," Biden said March 8 in a speech announcing a U.S. ban on Russian oil imports. Biden said that companies pumped more oil in the U.S. during his first year in office than during his predecessor’s first year and that we were on track for record oil production next year. Then Biden pivoted to point the finger at the industry: "In the United States, 90% of onshore oil production takes place on land that isn’t owned by the federal government. And of the remaining 10% that occurs on federal land, the oil and gas industry has millions of acres leased," Biden said. "They have 9,000 permits to drill now. They could be drilling right now, yesterday, last week, last year. They have 9,000 to drill onshore that are already approved." Biden said that the companies are not using these permits to drill. "These are the facts. We should be honest about the facts." Is Biden sharing all the facts here? He’s right on the numbers of permits but what that means is a little more complicated than his statement suggests. The industry could move forward with the permits that it has that are currently unused and could ramp up domestic oil production to replace Russian oil, but these moves take time. The status of drilling permits during Biden’s administration The U.S. has more than 24 million acres under lease to oil and gas companies onshore — close to half are not producing. Before drilling can occur, the lease holder has to get a federal permit. At the end of 2021, there were 9,173 approved and available permits to drill on federal and Indian lands. Those permits include those issued under Biden and those still active from Trump’s administration and potentially before, said Josh Axelrod, of the National Resources Defense Council. Companies don’t have to immediately begin drilling as their leases last 10 years and can be extended beyond that. From a federal regulatory standpoint, once a permit is approved, industry can proceed. The president suggested the onus is on the industry to start drilling. But it’s not as simple as Biden made it seem, because there are some steps before companies begin production. Companies have to contract rigs to drill the wells, and build a sufficient inventory of permits before rigs are contracted, said Jennifer Pett, a spokesperson for the Independent Petroleum Association of America, a trade group that represents oil and natural gas producers. "Producers also have to put a drilling plan together, secure rights of way and work with state and private landowners," Pett said. Thousands of unused permits are not uncommon in any presidential administration. 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 Douglas Holtz-Eakin, an economist and president of the American Action Forum, a center-right think tank, said firms are trying to assess the durability of the global rebound. "They have to be sure that the costly investment (and time) that it takes to turn a lease into a producing well is worth it." Oil and gas companies can raise funds from investors by not drilling on leases with proven reserves, said Hugh Daigle, an associate professor at the University of Texas’ Hildebrand Department of Petroleum and Geosystems Engineering. There is actually an incentive for the companies not to develop these resources because for publicly traded companies, these reserves get reported and influence market valuation, Daigle said. "Sometimes there might not really even be producible oil and gas on a lease," Daigle said. "Companies sometimes hold leases as a bit of a mind game with their competitors, or even just because they didn’t properly assess the production potential prior to leasing due to lack of data or that sort of thing." In 2020, the oil bust created worker and supply shortages and caused companies to cut their budgets. Investors remain reluctant to invest in fossil fuels. Pavel Molchanov, an analyst at Raymond James, told CNN Business that "oil and gas companies do not want to drill more." "They are under pressure from the financial community to pay more dividends, to do more share buybacks instead of the proverbial 'drill, baby, drill,' which is the way they would have done things 10 years ago. Corporate strategy has fundamentally changed." Experts also suggested that drilling domestically is more costly than drilling overseas, which could further deter oil companies in the U.S. from upping production. "While the cost to extract one barrel in Saudi Arabia is somewhere around $10 or $15, in West Texas it can be as high as $70," Gernot Wagner, an associate professor of environmental studies at New York University, told PolitiFact. "So it simply wasn’t profitable to drill with oil below $70. With oil at $120 or more, drilling there is wildly profitable." How oil drilling in Biden’s first year compares to Trump Biden has a point that the U.S. produced more during his first year than Trump’s first year. During Biden’s first year in office, the U.S. produced an average of about 11 million barrels of crude oil per day compared to Trump’s 9 million barrels per day in his first year. The average barrels of crude oil produced per day spiked during Trump’s subsequent years, swelling to almost 12.3 million in 2019. The U.S. Energy Information Administration in January forecasted that U.S. oil production will average 12.4 million barrels per day during 2023, surpassing the record high for domestic crude oil production set in 2019. Our ruling Biden said the oil industry has "9,000 permits to drill now. They could be drilling right now, yesterday, last week, last year." Biden’s number is correct: There are 9,137 approved permits to drill on federal and Indian land, and the oil industry could use those permits and drill. However, once the permit is approved, drilling doesn’t start overnight. Some companies choose not to drill for corporate reasons — because they can raise funds from investors by not drilling on leases with proven reserves. Having thousands of unused drilling permits is not something that is unique to Biden’s tenure. We rate this statement Mostly Tru

"Ukrainian civilian fleeing Kyiv captures footage of downed Russian tie fighter. A viral Facebook video that says it shows a downed Russian plane is fictitious. "Ukrainian civilian fleeing Kyiv captures footage of downed Russian tie fighter," says the caption on the March 2 video, which has been viewed 1 million times. 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 footage is from a 2014 short video by a German TV network, and the aircraft is a TIE fighter from the Star Wars franchise. One version of the video posted on YouTube is captioned, "Star Wars TIE fighter crashes on a German highway." 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 video also was mistakenly used by Israel’s Channel 13 news, which said it showed a downed Russian plane. "Viewers see what appears to be the remains of an aircraft on a major highway captured by the dashboard camera of a passerby," Israel Today reported. "But if the clip is slowed down just slightly, it becomes clear that the wreckage is that of an Imperial TIE Fighter, and its crew, two Imperial stormtroopers, are waiting patiently next to it for a ride." We rate the claim that a Ukrainian civilian captured footage of a downed Russian plane False.

“Oprah reveals her fully-natural solution that allowed her to drop 62 (pounds) in six weeks. Oprah Winfrey has famously, publicly shared her weight-loss journey for decades, but she is not hawking diet pills, despite a spate of social media claims that say she is. A March 7 post on Facebook says, "Oprah reveals her fully-natural solution," a pill that allowed her to lose 62 pounds in six weeks. The post includes an article headline that says, "Oprah swears: ‘It’s a treadmill in a pill,’" which links to a blog that does not contain information about Oprah or specific details about any weight loss product or method. 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 "completely false," a spokesperson for Winfrey said. Featured Fact-check Instagram posts stated on October 12, 2022 in an Instagram post Pfizer executive “admits” vaccine was never tested for preventing transmission. By Jeff Cercone • October 13, 2022 Winfrey has a partnership with WW, formerly known as Weight Watchers, and has owned a stake in the company since 2015. In January, Winfrey highlighted her relationship with WW in an Instagram post. The false Facebook post includes a photo of Winfrey, Dr. Mehmet Oz and acupuncturist Daniel Hsu, who appeared on Winfrey’s TV show in 2014. The image is a screenshot from that episode, which featured Winfrey’s first acupuncture session and was not about weight loss. Fact checkers recently have debunked identical claims that contain the same wording but different images and links. We rate the claim that Winfrey has revealed a pill that allowed her to lose 62 pounds in six weeks Pants on Fire!

“With the ongoing pandemic, our State Park attendance is at the highest it’s ever been. In a late January press release, New York State Sen. Rob Ortt touted the attendance figures at New York state parks during 2021. "With the ongoing pandemic, our State Park attendance is at the highest it’s ever been," Ortt said in a Jan. 22 press release. In the press release, Ortt was urging Gov. Kathy Hochul and Erik Kulleseid, commissioner of the state office of parks, recreation, and historic preservation to end a hiring freeze for park police. Ortt’s statement caught our eye because many types of travel have been reduced since the beginning of the coronavirus pandemic in March 2020. It turns out that Ortt was correct. (His office did not respond to an inquiry.) Looking at the numbers Ortt made the statement before Hochul publicly announced the state’s new park attendance figures. In a subsequent press release, Hochul said that New York state parks had hit record-high attendance levels in 2021, breaking the record set during the previous year, 2020. (The state lists attendance at state parks on its website going back to 2003.) New York state parks had more than 78.4 million visitors in 2021, an increase of just over 427,000 from the 2020 level of just over 78 million. In turn, the 2020 figure increased by about 910,000 over the 2019 level. Park attendance has increased consistently in recent years. In fact the state has not seen an annual decrease in park attendance since 2013. That said, the annual increases during the pandemic were smaller than the increases prior to the pandemic. For instance, between 2018 and 2019, the state parks’ attendance increased by over 2.9 million visitors, year over year. And between 2017 and 2018, state park attendance increased by over 2.6 million visitors. Featured Fact-check Kathy Hochul stated on October 25, 2022 in a debate The state is absorbing the cost of overtime pay for farmworkers, and farm owners do not have to pay any more. By Jill Terreri Ramos • November 5, 2022 Why, even with the pandemic, have increases continued? Measures to reduce the spread of COVID-19 are believed to have kept state park attendance increasing during the pandemic, which began in March 2020. Jason Schnittker, a professor of sociology at the University of Pennsylvania, said he believes parks allowed people to socialize while feeling safe from getting infected. "State parks are open-air, inexpensive, large and easy to social distance within, and very attractive in summer, fall, winter, and spring. At some point, the urge to get out of the house was overwhelming," Schnittker said. "I also suspect many people went to parks with someone else — as in an appropriately social distanced social event — and social support is very good for mental and physical health. It's not good to be isolated in your apartment all the time." He added that the increase in attendance provided multiple benefits. "Getting out in nature can be very relaxing, even for those who are not outdoor enthusiasts," he said. "The other dimension is exercise. Even moderate exercise, like walking or hiking, is good for your health." Our ruling Ortt said, "With the ongoing pandemic, our State Park attendance is at the highest it’s ever been." Official numbers show that New York state park attendance hit a record in 2021, after hitting a record in 2020. This record was set despite reduced travel during the pandemic, although the desire to congregate outside may have served to boost park attendance as COVID-19 was circulating. We rate this statement True

"There is no evidence Biden’s spending produced one job. Nonpartisan projections for job growth in 2021, not including that American Rescue Plan, showed higher job growth than Biden produced. Conservative commentator Ben Shapiro delved into a litany of disagreements with President Joe Biden in a YouTube video he called "The Real State of the Union." One claim that caught our eye in Shapiro’s response to Biden’s State of the Union was that Biden’s American Rescue Plan didn’t lead to a single job. In fact, Shapiro said, the United States added fewer jobs in 2021 than economists had predicted if Biden did absolutely nothing. "And Joe Biden told you that his American Rescue Plan — his massive boondoggle stimulus plan — ‘created jobs. Lots of jobs.’ He said he created 6.5 million jobs. That is another lie," Shapiro said March 1. "There is no evidence Biden’s spending produced one job. Nonpartisan projections for job growth in 2021, not including that American Rescue Plan, showed higher job growth than Biden produced." We wondered if Shapiro’s claims about U.S. jobs in Biden’s first year were really true. Did they end up lower than nonpartisan predictions? Unpacking job estimates Eric Quintanar, a writer and editor at the Daily Wire, which was founded by Shapiro, said Shapiro was referring to a February 2021 forecast from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office. The CBO estimated 6,252,000 new jobs would be added for the year. It did not factor in the $1.9 trillion American Rescue Plan, which Biden signed into law on March 11, 2021, providing millions of Americans with a third stimulus check and extending enhanced weekly federal employment benefits. (Nor did it forecast the delta and omicron variants of COVID-19 and the economic impact they would have.) When Shapiro delivered his "Real State of the Union," the Bureau of Labor Statistics totaled 6,665,000 jobs created in 2021. That includes revisions from earlier estimates for November and December. Further revisions now show 6,743,000 new jobs created in all of 2021. 6,743,000 is more than 6,252,000 — 491,000 more. (The math only changes slightly if you measure from February 2021 through January 2022). February’s jobs report showed another 678,000 jobs were created. A report from Moody’s Analytics suggested the economy is on track to recover all the jobs lost during the pandemic by the second quarter of 2022, something it said would have taken another year without Biden’s plan. Either way, Shapiro said nonpartisan projections "showed higher job growth than Biden produced." And that’s not true. "Did it create as many jobs as predicted? We don’t know yet. Predictions often fall short," said Kathleen Day, an author and lecturer at Johns Hopkins Carey Business School. "But was it a complete bust? I don’t think people would say that either." Not all roses There are still 2.1 million fewer people employed through February 2022 as there were in February 2020 before the pandemic, labor statistics show. And some economists blame Biden’s rescue plan for increased inflation. But Shapiro’s claim is based on outdated numbers. Quintanar of the Daily Wire pointed us to two articles to support Shapiro’s claim, but they were each written in January, and also used numbers before revisions were made by the Bureau of Labor Statistics. (Revisions in both directions for the prior two months have been common this year.) The articles allege that Biden projected 10 million jobs, or 4 million jobs on top of the CBO’s projections. The Washington Post Fact Checker said Biden was touting a Moody’s projection from January 2021, which forecast 7.2 million jobs total if the plan was passed. Biden misspoke once when he said the "law alone" would create 4 million jobs. Did the American Rescue Plan create jobs? Was the American Rescue Plan responsible for the higher-than-projected job numbers? Most of the experts we spoke with said Shapiro is wrong that Biden didn’t create a single job, and it’s likely that Biden’s plan had some effect on job growth. One said the plan actually cost jobs because of enhanced unemployment benefits of $300 until early September. Several experts, even some who said Shapiro is wrong, said there is no real way to measure what effect the plan had. Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody’s, told PolitiFact that Shapiro’s "statement is way off base." 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 Moody’s Analytics said in a Feb. 24 analysis, which he co-authored, that the American Rescue Plan was responsible for adding more than 4 million jobs in 2021, and he expected that the economy should recover all jobs lost during the pandemic in the second quarter of 2022. The gross domestic product, or GDP, rose 5.7% in 2021, including 6.9% in the fourth quarter. Dean Baker, an economist at the left-leaning Center for Economic and Policy Research, said there was a huge surge in consumer spending and demand due to the rescue plan’s provisions. "Given we had a huge increase in GDP in 2021 and a huge increase in jobs, saying the ARP didn't create jobs is like seeing a dead man with a bullet wound and a guy standing over him with a smoking pistol, and then saying we have no evidence the person was shot," said Baker, who called Shapiro’s claim "not serious." Day called Shapiro's claim "negative magical thinking." She said it will be a long time before we can measure the effects the stimulus plan had on job creation, but "it just doesn't make any sense that it would be zero." "I don't think there’s any definitive data, one way or another," she said. Gary Burtless, a senior fellow in Economic Studies at the Brookings Institution, also said Biden’s policies boosted job growth. "However, I do not know what percentage of the 6.5 million employment expansion was caused by the government’s fiscal and monetary policies," Burtless said. "The percentage is almost certainly greater than 1%, however, which also means that Mr. Shapiro’s statement is almost certainly false." Economist Douglas Holtz-Eakin, president of the American Action Forum, former director of the CBO and chief economic policy adviser to John McCain’s presidential campaign in 2008, agrees that there’s no way to know for sure. "The only genuine answer to that is to compare what went on in 2021 with what would have gone on if we didn’t have the American Rescue Plan," he said. "And we don’t actually see that and so you’re always comparing the actual to some presumed alternative. And we don’t know what that alternative is. And that’s just the reality of this kind of statement." Casey Mulligan, a professor of economics at the University of Chicago, who served as chief economist for the Council of Economic Advisers in the Trump administration, agrees with Shapiro, arguing that Biden’s plan actually reduced employment by adding weekly payments of $300 after more people had returned to work. "For more than a century, at least, economies recovered quickly from their recessions without massive bonuses for unemployment," Mulligan said. "So you have to expect some recovery to have happened even if Biden had done nothing." Trump’s CARES Act, signed into law in March 2020, also provided federal unemployment benefits of $600 a month in addition to what workers received from states through the end of July. The stimulus package he signed in December added an additional 11 weeks at $300 a month. Biden’s plan, signed in March, extended the $300 benefit until Sept. 6, but 26 states ended the supplement as early as June, according to CNBC. One study in August found just a small uptick in job gains among states that ended the benefits, CNBC reported. PolitiFact looked at this question back in May and determined there’s no clear evidence more generous unemployment benefits deterred people from taking jobs. Our ruling Shapiro said, "There is no evidence Biden’s spending produced one job. Nonpartisan projections for job growth in 2021, not including that American Rescue Plan, showed higher job growth than Biden produced." Most experts we spoke with disagreed with Shapiro's assertion that the economy didn’t add any jobs from the American Rescue Plan, though several said that we can’t really know for sure. But Shapiro was wrong about 2021 jobs numbers underperforming projections made before the law was passed; the economy added more jobs than anticipated. We rate the statement Mostly False. UPDATE, March 17, 2022: The Daily Wire updated its transcript of Shapiro’s speech following publication of this fact-check to note the following: "The CBO originally estimated that 6,252,000 would be produced. The Bureau of Labor Statistics has reported a 6,743,000 net change in jobs for all of 2021. This contradicts the claim that jobs growth claims were higher than what Biden produced."

"Gas is high because they shut down production in the U.S.” under the Biden administration U.S. gas prices hit a high on March 8, and President Joe Biden warned Americans they may pay even more at the pump after he banned imports of oil from Russia to punish Russian President Vladimir Putin for the invasion of Ukraine. Some on social media have long blamed Biden’s energy policies for rising gas prices — and Russia’s war on Ukraine provided more so-called fuel for the raging fire of online claims. "Everyone here knows gas is high because they shut down production in the U.S. but here is an extremely simple breakdown for people with short memories," read a March 7 Facebook post. A graphic that accompanied the post included data that appears to be credited to the consumer website GasBuddy and showed prices steadily rose after Biden became president. This post was flagged as part of Facebook’s efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about our partnership with Facebook.) That’s because the post gets several things wrong. The facts on U.S. oil production There are many factors at play in the steady climb in gas prices since Biden took office, including increased demand after pandemic lockdowns ended, inflation and, now, the war in Ukraine. But lower oil production in the U.S. isn’t one of them. America produced 11.185 million barrels of crude oil per day in 2021, compared with 11.283 million a year earlier under Trump. The amount produced in Biden’s first year exceeds the average daily amount produced under Trump from 2017 to 2018, according to data from the U.S. Energy Information Administration. Biden did issue an executive order his first month in office that paused new oil and gas lease sales on government land pending a review, but that order was struck down by a federal judge in June. RELATED VIDEO Despite claims to the contrary, oil production was unphased in the U.S. following the order. And cancellation of the Keystone Pipeline didn’t impact production levels, as many Biden critics have alleged. In addition, Biden has surpassed Trump in issuing drilling permits on public land, the Washington Post reported in January. 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 Misleading graphic in Facebook post The graphic in the Facebook post misleadingly marks Nov. 26, 2020, as the date when Biden was "installed." That’s wrong. Biden was declared winner of the Nov. 3, 2020, election on Nov. 7, 2020. And he took office on Jan. 20, 2021. Gas prices on Nov. 7, 2020, were $2.104 per gallon, according to GasBuddy, and rose to $2.408 per gallon on Jan. 20, 2021, Inauguration Day. Those figures appear to be in line with the data in the graphic, but that doesn’t mean the post’s conclusion is accurate. Patrick De Haan, an oil and gas products analyst for GasBuddy, said that users of its app and website can create graphics from its data. The one in the post was not produced by GasBuddy and De Haan took issue with the claim itself. He credited a rise in gas prices to COVID-19 pandemic economic recovery as well as the Russia-Ukraine war. A month into Biden’s presidency, PolitiFact began seeing claims that blamed Biden’s policies for increases in gas prices. But energy experts we spoke to said it was largely due to supply and demand rather than presidential policies. The coronavirus pandemic prompted a big fall in oil demand and gasoline prices, due to declines in driving and air travel. As the economy has slowly rebounded, growing demand has boosted prices at the pump. De Haan similarly said Biden’s policies are not a significant driver in the price increases, though they do have what he called "optical impacts." The national average cost for a gallon of gas in the U.S. was $4.173 as of March 8, breaking the record set in 2008, according to AAA. That’s 55 cents higher than it was a week earlier, about 72 cents higher than it was the same time in February, and about $1.40 higher than it was in March 2021, AAA numbers show. Our ruling A Facebook post claims that Biden "shut down production" in the U.S., which is why gas prices are so high. The post also falsely claims Biden was "installed" in November, with a graphic showing that the rise in gas prices began under his watch. This is misleading, as Biden was inaugurated on Jan. 20, 2021. Oil production in the U.S. in 2021 was on par with 2020 production and exceeded yearly production from 2017-18, data shows. We rate this claim False. Correction (March 14, 2022): This post was corrected to show that crude oil production in Biden’s first year was higher than in two of four years under Trump, not three. The rating is unchange

"Marco Rubio is following his party bosses, like Rick Scott, with his plan to raise taxes on Florida's working families, retirees and veterans. Florida Sen. Rick Scott created fodder for Democrats like U.S. Rep. Val Demings in a race that could help determine which party controls the Senate. Demings, a former police chief who is running against Florida’s other senator, Republican Marco Rubio, responded to Scott’s "11-point Plan to Rescue America" by tying Rubio to it. "Marco Rubio and Rick Scott are planning to hike taxes on millions of Americans, including seniors and working class Floridians," the text in her ad on Facebook and Instagram says. Below the text is a video in which a narrator says: "Marco Rubio is following his party bosses, like Rick Scott, with his plan to raise taxes on Florida's working families, retirees and veterans." The video, which Demings also posted on YouTube, even gives Rubio first billing by ending with: "Say no to the Rubio-Scott tax hike." But Rubio has not expressed support for Scott’s plan on taxes. To refer to the "Rubio-Scott tax hike" is particularly misleading. Scott: ‘All should pay’ but ‘half’ don’t Let’s start with a recap of what Scott proposed. Scott, who chairs the National Republican Senatorial Committee, introduced a plan for the GOP in which he said "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 taxes," Scott’s plan said. While Scott did not make a specific tax hike proposal, experts said they could only conclude that the verbiage he used calls for raising income taxes on millions of Americans. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., said that wasn’t happening: "We will not have as part of our agenda a bill that raises taxes on half the American people." Featured Fact-check Rebekah Jones stated on October 26, 2022 in a post on Instagram Document shows Rebekah Jones “demonstrated” a violation of Florida’s Whistleblower Act. By Sara Swann • November 1, 2022 Scott’s plan appeared to allude to the millions of people who don’t owe any federal income tax, principally because they don’t earn enough income. An Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center analysis said that in 2020, 60.6% of all taxpayers paid no federal income tax. It estimated that the percentage for 2021 would stay high — at around 57.1%. One expert said people who don’t pay income taxes include many retirees or people with disabilities who are collecting Social Security benefits and low-income working families. Rubio doesn’t back Scott’s plan To back its claim about the tax hike, Demings’ ad quoted two news articles about Scott’s plan: "a tax increase on millions of Americans" in the Miami Herald; and "largely the poor and retirees" in the Orlando Sentinel. Rubio is not mentioned in those articles. We found no evidence that Rubio has endorsed Scott’s plan. Demings’ campaign also did not cite any, but emphasized that Rubio had not offered a position on Scott’s plan. Several days after Scott’s plan was released, Rubio was asked about it and said: "I have not seen the plan. I’ve read about it, but I think it’s good that people offer ideas. I’m not sure I agree with all of them. I don’t know all of the details of the plan." Demings’ campaign cited a TV news report in which an anchor says Rubio "supports the tax hike," but there was nothing in the report showing that Rubio had stated support. Rubio’s campaign told PolitiFact: "Senator Rubio does not support raising taxes." Florida race competitive, favoring GOP Demings, the former Orlando police chief, has served in the House since 2017. Rubio has served in the Senate since 2011 and ran for president in 2016. Campaign watchers rate the race as "lean Republican," "battleground Republican" and "likely Republican." The Senate is currently split 50-50 between Democrats and Republicans. Our ruling Demings said Rubio "is following his party bosses, like Rick Scott, with his plan to raise taxes on Florida's working families, retirees and veterans." Scott released a plan that indicates support for raising income taxes on millions of Americans, but there is no evidence that Rubio backs such tax hikes. We rate the claim Fals

Video shows Russian President Vladimir Putin meeting with South Korea’s president A Facebook video that’s been viewed 2 million times falsely claims that Putin met with the president of South Korea, when the footage — which is more than two years old — shows the leader of North Korea. "Russian president Vladimir Putin meets with South Korean President," says the caption on the video, posted March 6 on Facebook. The caption also says, "Check comment to watch the full video," and links to a YouTube video dated March 6. The title on the YouTube video also says Putin met with the South Korean president. The Facebook 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 captions on both videos are wrong; the video shows an April 2019 meeting in Vladivostok, Russia, between Putin and Kim, the leader of North Korea. 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 Footage from the 2019 event is identical to the video posted on Facebook. The event was the first time Putin and Kim had met and was billed as a historic event, occurring "amid efforts by the United States to persuade the North to abandon its nuclear weapons," ABC News reported. Some people commenting on the Facebook post understood that the video showed the North Korean leader and not the South Korean president, Moon Jae-in, as the caption claimed. But other commenters did not seem to be clued in, and interpreted the recent posting as an indication that the meeting happened amid Russia’s war in Ukraine. We rate the claim that video footage shows a recent Putin meeting with the South Korean president Fals

"Here in Wisconsin, prescription drug costs grew at a pace of nearly twice as much as the average Wisconsinite's income from 2015-2019. Prescription drug costs in the United States have long been a hot-button issue for voters. On July 9, 2021, Joe Biden signed an executive order aimed at enacting "aggressive legislative reforms" that would lower prescription drug prices. He had pledged to do so on the campaign trail. In Wisconsin, State Treasurer Sarah Godlewski, a Democratic candidate for U.S. Senate, has struck a similar theme. She hopes to face U.S. Sen. Ron Johnson, a Republican, in November 2022. "The skyrocketing cost of prescription drugs plagues Wisconsinites and harms Americans in every corner of the country. As pharmaceutical companies pull in record profits, folks are skipping pills to make their prescriptions last a little longer, while others are having to choose between their groceries and their life-saving medicine," Godlewski said in a Feb. 18, 2022 campaign statement "Here in Wisconsin, prescription drug costs grew at a pace of nearly twice as much as the average Wisconsinite's income from 2015-2019." The final part of Godlewski’s claim caught our attention. Have prescription drug costs grown at a pace of nearly twice as much as the average Wisconsinite's income? Let’s take a look. Residents’ income When asked for backup to Godlewski’s claim, her campaign staff cited an AARP article title "Prescription Drug Costs are Rising Nearly Twice as Fast as Wisconsinites’ Income." AARP is a nonprofit, nonpartisan organization active on issues that affect people age 50 and over. The average annual cost of prescription drug treatment increased 26.3% between 2015 and 2019, while the annual income for Wisconsin residents only increased 13.9%," AARP reported. But a check of the U.S. Census Bureau’s American Community Survey shows that the median income for Wisconsin residents increased 15.2%, from $55,638 in 2015 to $64,168 in 2019. Why the discrepancy? 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 13.9% increase applies to residents over the age of 50, while the 15.3% increase applies to all residents. So, Godlewski was generally on target, but overshot the mark a bit in her phrasing. More on drug costs In Wisconsin, according to the 2020 "Governor’s Task Force on Reducing Prescription Drug Prices", prescription drugs were estimated to cost residents more than $1.3 billion overall in 2019. Meanwhile, an AARP graphic – "Impact of High Rx Prices to Wisconsin Residents" – looked at the increase in price for three specific medications between 2015-2020: Revlimid, a cancer treatment, went from $185,574 to $267,583, up 44% Victoza, a diabetes treatment, went from $7,936 to $11,300, up 42% Spiriva inhaler, used for asthma and COPD, went from $3,886 to $5,289, up 36% The report went on to state that retail prices for 76% of the most widely used brand name prescription drug products (198 of 260) had price increases in 2020 – and 92% of these price increases (183 of 198) were greater than the rate of general inflation in 2002, which was 1.3%. Separately, a Feb. 25, 2022 report by the Kaiser Family Foundation, a nonprofit organization focusing on national health issues, found prices increased faster than inflation for half of all drugs covered by Medicare in 2020. Our ruling Godlewski said "in Wisconsin, prescription drug costs grew at a pace of nearly twice as much as the average Wisconsinite's income from 2015-2019." The average annual cost of prescription drug treatment increased 26.3% in that time frame. The increase in income for all Wisconsin residents was actually 15.2%. The figure Godlewski was citing is for those age 50 and over, whose income increased 13.9%. For a statement that is accurate but needs clarification or additional information, our rating is Mostly True. window.gciAnalyticsUAID = 'PMJS-TEALIUM-COBRAND'; window.gciAnalyticsLoadEvents = false; window.gciAnalytics.view({ 'event-type': 'pageview', 'content-type': 'interactives', 'content-ssts-section': 'news', 'content-ssts-subsection': 'news:politics', 'content-ssts-topic': 'news:politics:politifactwisconsin', 'content-ssts-subtopic': ' news:politics:politifactwisconsin' });

Dr. Anthony Fauci has not spoken or appeared publicly for several weeks Dr. Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, became a household name in the early days of the coronavirus pandemic as he appeared at press briefings and on news networks to talk about COVID-19. But critics have suggested he’s disappeared from public life. Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis recently joked that Fauci was in "the witness protection program now." Some Facebook posts cast a similar tone. "Is he missing?" reads a March 5 Facebook post with a picture of Fauci. "I’m starting to get worried." "Dr. Anthony Fauci, was last seen several weeks ago ‘following science’ and has not been seen (or) heard from since," another post, from March 6, said, describing Fauci as "simply vanished." One person commented on that post: "According to Gov Desantis in Florida, he actually IS in the witness protection program. I saw a posting with Gov D speaking." These posts were flagged as part of Facebook’s efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about our partnership with Facebook.) While some posts are clearly just suggesting that Fauci isn’t as public-facing as he used to be when the White House was doing daily televised briefings about the pandemic, a quick Google search shows it’s not true that Fauci has not been heard of in weeks. While Russia’s war in Ukraine has dominated much news coverage, Fauci is still making appearances to talk about issues related to the pandemic. 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 RELATED VIDEO On Feb. 15 he was on MSNBC and discussed COVID-19 vaccines for children under five. He spoke at a White House press briefing on Feb. 16. On Feb. 17, he talked to Reuters about changing guidance on how to respond to the coronavirus, and a PBS NewsHour interview with Fauci also aired that day. On March 1, Fauci appeared on the 85 South Comedy Show to talk about COVID-19. He appeared at a March 2 White House press briefing. On March 4 he spoke to Gray Television’s Washington news bureau. Fauci is quoted in a March 5 Telegraph story about tuberculosis in Ukraine. He gave an interview to a Florida NBC news affiliate on March 6. Claims that Fauci stopped appearing or speaking in public are rated Fals

“As the world rallies around Ukraine, Mike Lee was one of only two senators to oppose sanctions on Putin. Then he flew to the Kremlin and discussed dropping sanctions. Lee even opposed arming Ukrainians fighting for their lives. Utah's U.S. Senate race is so unusual that some leading Democrats, believing no Democrat can defeat two-term Republican Sen. Mike Lee, are urging support for independent candidate Evan McMullin. McMullin, a former Republican who made news by raising more campaign money than Lee in the latest reporting period, attacked Lee with a TV ad over Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. The McMullin-narrated ad, which also ran on Facebook, opens by showing an undated NBC News headline that says: "Russia launches invasion of Ukraine." Mixing the present tense and the past tense, McMullin said: "As the world rallies around Ukraine, Mike Lee was one of only two senators to oppose sanctions on Putin. Then he flew to the Kremlin and discussed dropping sanctions. Lee even opposed arming Ukrainians fighting for their lives." Russia’s invasion is less than two weeks old, while Lee’s actions cited in the ad occurred years ago. Moreover, the ad mischaracterizes some of Lee’s actions. After participating in a March 5 video call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, Lee said Zelensky is "concerned not only about his own people, but he’s concerned about his neighbors, he’s concerned even about the Russians. Now, this is something that really differentiates him from Vladimir Putin. Vladimir Putin has never once indicated any degree of sympathy for the people of Ukraine or for perhaps anyone other than himself." In a statement to PolitiFact, Lee’s campaign said Lee "stands with the people suffering from Putin’s aggression in Ukraine. He condemns this senseless, unprovoked violence and he is committed to keeping Americans safe." ‘As the world rallies around Ukraine, Mike Lee was one of only two senators to oppose sanctions on Putin’ The context is the February 2022 invasion, but the ad alludes to a vote Lee took five years ago. To back up the ad, McMullin’s campaign cited a 2017 vote by Lee and Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., against imposing financial sanctions on Russia for meddling in the 2016 U.S. presidential election. The measure also condemned Russia's interventions in Ukraine and Syria, and allowed Congress to block the president from unilaterally lifting existing sanctions against Russia. The amendment became law. Lee said at the time: "The Russian sanctions amendment included funding for programs and support of policies that I believe are not effective at addressing problems in the U.S.-Russia relationship and have promoted progressive policies unrelated to countering Russia at the expense of American taxpayers." ‘Then he flew to the Kremlin and discussed dropping sanctions’ This refers to a trip Lee made more than three years before the invasion. The ad cites news reports about Lee’s September 2019 trip to Moscow to meet with Konstantin Kosachev, head of the Russian Federation Council’s Foreign Affairs Committee. Lee told an NPR reporter in Moscow during the visit that he wanted to maintain an open dialogue with Russia and said about U.S. sanctions against Russia: "We need to assess from time to time how they're doing, what impact they're having." The Russian state-affiliated news agency Tass reported at the time that Lee discussed removing sanctions, leading the Salt Lake Tribune to run this headline: "Report: Sen. Mike Lee discussed loosening sanctions against Russia during Moscow visit." Lee’s office said at the time that he and the Russian official discussed "trade, security and religious liberty issues." After returning from Moscow, Lee told the Deseret News that the official "didn’t waste much (time) in getting to some of the grievances that he’s got. He complained almost right off the bat about Russian sanctions." 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 In a statement to PolitiFact in response to McMullin’s ad, Lee’s campaign said the Russian official advocated for a reduction in sanctions, and that Lee "summarily dismissed this request and stated significant improvements in Russian policy, diplomacy and behavior would be required before a reduction in sanctions would be considered." Lee’s campaign also pointed out that in January 2022, Lee voted for a Russia sanctions bill in connection with Russia's Nord Stream 2 pipeline that failed in the Senate. ‘Opposed arming Ukrainians’ McMullin’s campaign cited seven no votes Lee cast — in 2014, 2015, 2017, 2018, 2019 (two votes) and 2020 to back this part of the claim. The campaign said that each measure contained financial aid for Ukraine. But none of the votes was a specific vote for or against aid to Ukraine. Rather, each measure contained numerous expenditures for a variety of purposes. For example, Lee’s 2020 vote was on a consolidated appropriations act that appropriated much more than foreign assistance; it included money for the U.S. departments of agriculture, commerce, justice, defense, energy and more. Voting no on an omnibus bill does not indicate opposition to each expenditure in the bill. Over the years, Lee has struck different tones on Ukraine. In August 2014, six months after Russian troops took control of Ukraine’s Crimea region, Lee advocated for increased production of U.S. oil and natural gas, paired with sanctions. Putin "would never have dared do what he did if we were aggressively producing and exporting oil and natural gas. He would never have gotten away with it," Lee said. "So, yeah, economic sanctions, we have to go there," but paired with the increased energy production. In September 2019, after it was revealed that then-President Donald Trump, while withholding millions in aid to Ukraine, urged Zelensky on a call to investigate political rival Joe Biden, Lee downplayed the call. Lee said he didn’t think the call was "a problem" and argued it "certainly doesn’t serve as the basis for impeaching and removing" Trump. The Utah race 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. Some leading Utah Democrats are urging Democrats to support McMullin, believing a Democrat can’t win statewide in the heavily Republican state. 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 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 said: "As the world rallies around Ukraine, Mike Lee was one of only two senators to oppose sanctions on Putin. Then he flew to the Kremlin and discussed dropping sanctions. Lee even opposed arming Ukrainians fighting for their lives." The context is Russia’s February 2022 invasion of Ukraine, but Lee’s actions cited in the ad occurred years earlier, and the ad mischaracterizes some of those actions. Lee did vote in 2017 against sanctioning Russia. In 2019, he had talks with a Russian official in Moscow, but Lee suggested the discussion of dropping sanctions was fairly minimal. Seven votes cast by Lee dating back to 2014 were on spending bills with numerous provisions and are not evidence that Lee opposed specific provisions in the bills to provide aid to Ukraine. McMullin’s statement contains only an element of truth. We rate it Mostly False. RELATED: Fact-checking whether Biden’s Russia sanctions over Ukraine didn’t start for 30 days, had loophol

Ukraine issued a press release about Joe Bide In the wake of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, a 2020 video of a Ukrainian lawmaker leveling unsubstantiated allegations against Biden is being presented as new in social media posts. The video, posted March 1 on Facebook, had a caption that said, "Ukraine Press Release About Joe Biden." The video featured Andrii Derkach, a member of Ukraine’s parliament, talking in front of a backdrop that says Interfax, the name of a Russian news agency. The video’s caption was later updated to add, "I am not sure when this was released. Either way it warrants prayer because someone has been caught red handed." 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 caption gives the misleading impression that Ukraine recently released information about Biden. In reality, the footage was from a press conference held in May 2020 — and it was orchestrated not by Ukraine, but by Derkach, who U.S. officials have described as an active Russian agent, the Associated Press reported. Derkach was sanctioned by both the U.S. and Ukraine after being accused of interfering in the 2020 U.S. presidential election. During the 2020 press conference, Derkach revealed audio recordings of 2015 phone conversations between then-Vice President Biden and then-Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko. An Interfax story claimed the recordings revealed "the receipt of "$1 billion in exchange for maintaining Burisma schemes and international corruption." 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 Derkach was advancing a claim, also pushed by former President Donald Trump and his supporters, that Biden tried to protect Burisma, a Ukrainian natural gas company where his son, Hunter Biden, served on the board of directors. The unfounded allegation was that Biden withheld funding to Ukraine until the country’s top prosecutor, Viktor Shokin, was fired, because Shokin had launched a criminal investigation into Burisma. "(T)he corruption theories have been discredited because Shokin did not have an active investigation into Hunter Biden’s work and because Joe Biden, in seeking Shokin’s firing, was representing the official position of the Obama administration, Western allies and many in Ukraine who perceived the prosecutor as soft on corruption," the AP reported. And the audio recordings released by Derkach "shed relatively little new light on Biden’s actions in Ukraine," the Washington Post reported. The AP concurred, noting that the recordings "largely confirm Biden’s account of his dealings in Ukraine." Our ruling The caption on a Facebook video says, "Ukraine Press Release About Joe Biden," and includes video footage of a press conference featuring Derkach. The caption implies that Ukraine recently released information about Biden. But the video featured in the post is from a press conference held in May 2020 and orchestrated by Derkach, who has been described by U.S. officials as an active Russian agent. During the press conference, Derkach revealed audio tapes that he said served as evidence of Biden’s misuse of American taxpayer money. But the recordings corroborated Biden’s own account of his dealings in Ukraine. We rate this claim False

Gas cost $9 a gallon in California in early March 2022 California gas prices recently hit a record high, and some social media users are sharing photos of gas station signs to express their disbelief and disgust. But one image that’s been viewed widely on Facebook appears to show gas prices reaching about $9 a gallon. In the image, it looks like unleaded gas is about $9, unleaded plus is about $9.01, unleaded premium is about $9.02 and diesel is about $9.03 for customers paying with cash. Using a debit or credit card, those prices jump to about $9.06, $9.07, $9.08 and $9.09, respectively. This post was flagged as part of Facebook’s efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about our partnership with Facebook.) We identified the gas station where the picture was taken by a number that appears on the Dutch Bros coffee stand in the background: 1130. There’s a Dutch Bros at 1130 E March Lane in Stockton, California, and an ARCO gas station is next door. Using the street view feature of Google Maps, we were able to identify other similarities between that location and the picture in the Facebook post, such as the placement of palm trees around the store, a sign affixed to one of the trees, and the proximity of the gas station sign to a lamp post. We tried multiple numbers we found listed for the ARCO station but none worked, and we were unsuccessful in trying to reach someone at ARCO Southwest, which includes Stockton. So we called other ARCOs in the city, and didn’t find any prices close to $9. 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 At the ARCO on Trinity Parkway, about 9 miles from the location on March Lane, unleaded cost $4.95 if paying with cash and $5.05 with a card, an employee there said. At the Golden State Highway location, about 10 miles from the March Lane station, an employee gasped realizing that gas there cost $5.15 a gallon. According to AAA, the national average of gas prices on March 7 was $4.065. In California, it was higher: $5.343. That’s a new record for the highest recorded average price in California, according to AAA. Average diesel prices also hit a new record on March 7 with costs averaging $5.692 a gallon. In the Stockton-Lodi region, according to AAA, the average for regular gas is $5.24, and $5.75 for diesel. GasBuddy reflects similar prices in Stockton. RELATED VIDEO We found plenty of articles about soaring gas prices in California but no reports of prices soaring as high as $9 a gallon. The Los Angeles Times reported on March 6 that the average California gas prices are now over $5 a gallon, noting that "a few stations" in Los Angeles County have surpassed $6 a gallon. We’ve previously reported on photos of gas station signs that appear to be selling gas for nearly $10. But the stations weren’t actually selling gas for that much. It’s common for stations to advertise fake, high prices on their signs when they’re either closed or out of gas to discourage drivers from stopping. We rate the March 4 claim that gas was being sold for $9 in California False.

CDC Director Dr. Rochelle Walensky said she gets COVID-19 reports from CNN It would be troubling if the director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention relied on the media for updates on the COVID-19 pandemic. That’s what one social media post alleged after a recent interview of CDC Director Dr. Rochelle Walensky. A March 5 Facebook post read, "It’s always a good look when the medical director of the nation’s largest infectious disease organization that has 2,000 employees dedicated to managing (COVID-19) says she gets reports from CNN!" The post linked to a YouTube video, that again makes the 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.) The interview the post refers to took place March 3 in St. Louis at the Washington University School of Medicine, Walensky’s alma mater. "I can tell you where I was when the CNN feed came that it was 95% effective, the vaccine," Walensky said, responding to a question about what public health officials could have done better during the pandemic. "So many of us wanted to be helpful. So many of us wanted to say, ‘OK, this is our ticket out, right?’ ‘Now we’re done.’ So I think we had perhaps too little caution and too much optimism for some good things that came our way." 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 Walensky’s press secretary, Jason McDonald, confirmed to PolitiFact that she was referring to the initial news from Pfizer and BioNTech that studies showed their COVID-19 vaccine to be 95% effective, which the companies announced to the world on Nov. 18, 2020. On that date, Walensky was not working for the CDC, so it makes sense that she heard the news about the vaccine from CNN or other news outlets, just like the rest of us. Walensky served as chief of the Division of Infectious Diseases at Massachusetts General Hospital and as a professor of medicine at Harvard Medical School when then-President-elect Joe Biden nominated her to lead the CDC. She officially started the director job on Jan. 20, 2021. Our ruling A Facebook post alleges that the CDC director said she gets her updates about COVID-19 from CNN. The claim is misleading because Walensky was referring to the initial news that Pfizer-BioNTech’s COVID-19 vaccine proved 95% effective after a phase 3 study. That news came on Nov. 18, 2020, two months before she started the CDC job. Now, as CDC director, she has access to information from those who report to her. We rate claims that say otherwise Fals

“The former Miss Universe-Ukraine, Anastasiia Lenna, turned in her high heels for some combat boots to fight for her country. Stories of Ukrainian citizens taking up arms to defend their country have flooded the internet since Russia’s invasion. And while many of these accounts are legitimate, posts about a Ukrainian beauty queen taking up arms are not. A photo of Anastasiia Lenna, who was crowned Miss Grand Ukraine in 2015, wearing protective eyewear and holding a gun has gone viral alongside claims that she joined the military to help fight Russians. "Can we take a moment to acknowledge the fact that the former Miss Universe-Ukraine, Anastasiia Lenna, turned in her high heels for some combat boots to fight for her country…Real life super hero," one Feb. 27 Facebook post reads. "Here is Miss Ukraine, Anastasiia Lenna. I’m sure Melania would’ve done the same. Be best," American comedian Kathy Griffin wrote on the platform on Feb. 26. The photo featured in the posts does show Lenna, but it doesn’t show her taking up arms against Russia. The image is staged and Lenna is holding an airsoft gun. Airsoft guns often resemble firearms but shoot nonlethal, plastic pellets. 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.) Featured Fact-check Tucker Carlson stated on October 27, 2022 in a TV segment The United States is "about to run out of diesel fuel ... by the Monday of Thanksgiving week." By Andy Nguyen • November 7, 2022 The confusion started after Lenna shared the image on her Instagram page on Feb. 22 with the hashtags #standwithukraine and #handsoffukraine. Although Lenna never said she joined the Ukrainian military, she did re-share posts from others commending her for "putting down her crown and sash to defend her country." Lenna later clarified in a follow-up Instagram post on Feb. 28 that she did not join the military. She said the image was meant to inspire people. View this post on Instagram A post shared by Miss Ukraine🇺🇦Anastasiia Lenna (@anastasiia.lenna) Lenna has shared several images of herself playing airsoft on her Instagram page with hashtags like #airsoftgirls and #airsoftqueens. Our ruling A Facebook post claims it shows a Ukrainian beauty queen fighting against the Russians invading Ukraine. That’s not the case. Lenna did not join the Ukrainian military. She posted a photo in which she’s posing with an airsoft gun. She said the photo was meant to inspire people. We rate this post Fals

"In my first year in office, Aurora homicides went down by 40%. Aurora Mayor Richard Irvin promotes a "tough-on-crime" mantra as part of his campaign for Illinois governor. Since Irvin jumped into the GOP primary earlier this year, Democratic Gov. J.B. Pritzker and lawmakers have criticized Irvin for touting a crime-busting reputation while ignoring his 15 years of work as a defense attorney. In a Feb. 20 tweet, Irvin said, "In my first year in office, Aurora homicides went down by 40%. While crime is exploding under anti-police politicians, I have suppressed crime in Aurora. Send me to Springfield and I’ll do the same thing across all Illinois." In my first year in office, Aurora homicides went down by 40%. While crime is exploding under anti-police politicians, I have suppressed crime in Aurora. Send me to Springfield and I’ll do the same thing across all Illinois.— Richard Irvin For Governor (@RichardIrvin4IL) February 20, 2022 We decided to check out whether Irvin’s claims at reducing homicides in one year stand up to his assertion he "suppressed crime" since taking office in May 2017. Irvin, who has been mayor for five years, chose to compare the two years that reflect the largest downturn in homicides. Overall, however, homicides have fluctuated under his tenure. According to the Aurora Police Department, six homicides were committed in Aurora in 2017 and four in 2018. Eleni Demertzis, an Irvin spokesperson, said their team analyzed data from 2016 — the last full year before Irvin assumed office — and 2018 — the first full year after. In 2016, seven homicides occurred in the city of about 200,000 people. By data, she referred to a total of 11 homicides over two years. "The number comes out to 43%, which we rounded down to 40%," Demertzis said, attributing the mayor’s "strong leadership" to a downturn in crime. She said he increased police budgets and added more officers. Demertzis pointed to a 2021 study by WalletHub that rated Aurora as the sixth largest safe city in America. But experts say it is both misleading and disingenuous to ascribe crime trends involving such low numbers, specifically homicide rates. Ted Gest, founding partner of John Jay College’s Center on Media, Crime and Justice, said it would be difficult for any mayor to claim credit or take the blame for changes in crime rates in any period because data often fluctuates. 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 "It is sort of ridiculous for a mayor to say they lowered homicides by 40%," said Gest. "In this case, when the numbers are obviously very small, single digit numbers, why not just use the actual numbers?" Using Irvin’s math, the homicide rate during his second year in office jumped by 200%, from 4 in 2018 to 12 in 2019. Gest, who oversees daily news digest Crime and Justice News and authored Crime and Politics, a book about America’s explosion in crime rates, said it is unreliable to compare homicide rates from year-to-year especially with small numbers like Aurora’s. Any one event that results in multiple homicides can create a drastic change in the homicide rate. Take the 12 homicides that occurred in Aurora in 2019. Five of the 12 total murders were connected to a single event — a shooting at the Henry Pratt Company. Using exact numbers is especially important when considering other factors that impact crime trends. It can also be helpful to consider national crime, and in some cases, international crime, according to Wesley Skogan, a Northwestern University professor emeritus and member of the research faculty of the Institute for Policy Research. For example, Skogan pointed to the 11 homicides that happened in Aurora in 2020 and said the high number was "perfectly in accord" with a national crime spike when the U.S. murder rate rose by 30% between 2019 and 2020. Skogan echoed Gest and added that it is helpful to look at crimes that have a significant impact rather than measuring success based on small numbers. "It would be more useful if civic leaders would focus on several crime categories which affect great numbers of residents in their community," Skogan said. Unless Irvin could point to some very specific change and connect that to something specific that he did, it would be tricky to prove whether his actions helped reduce the number of homicides, Gest said. Our ruling Irvin claimed that he reduced the number of homicides by 40% during his first year as Aurora mayor. There is only an element of truth in this claim: Homicides in Aurora dropped from six to four during Irvin’s first year as mayor. Experts say using percentages to describe the small fluctuations in the city’s homicide stats is misleading, and there is no proven connection to Irvin’s policies. We rate this claim Mostly False. MOSTLY FALSE – The statement contains an element of truth but ignores critical facts that would give a different impression.

Says Vladimir Putin said the West is controlled by Satanic pedophiles In a video that’s been edited to look like Russian President Vladimir Putin is dancing on a flight of stairs, a question appears, asking "How can you support Putin?" The answers follow in quick succession in the form of what look like news headlines that appear on the screen, including this one: "Putin: The West is controlled by Satanic pedophiles." This post was flagged as part of Facebook’s efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about our partnership with Facebook.) We reached out to Angela Stent, senior adviser for the Center for Eurasian, Russian & East European Studies at Georgetown University who’s written multiple books about Russia and its president including "Putin’s World: Russia Against the West and with the Rest." Stent told us that she hadn’t "seen or read" the statement attributed to Putin. We also couldn’t find evidence to support that Putin said the West is controlled by Satanic pedophiles. The claim that Putin said it isn’t new but it is getting fresh attention since Russia recently invaded Ukraine. In July 2021, Reuters investigated the claim that Putin said the West is controlled by Satanic pedophiles and couldn’t find any public record of the president saying that after reviewing his speeches, which were published on the Kremlin’s site. (The site was not working as PolitiFact was checking this post.) In a 2013 speech, Reuters reported, Putin mentioned both Satan and pedophilia, but in different contexts than they’re presented in this Facebook video. "We can see how many of the Euro-Atlantic countries are actually rejecting their roots, including the Christian values that constitute the basis of Western civilization," Putin said, according to an English translation of the speech. "They are denying moral principles and all traditional identities: national, cultural, religious and even sexual. They are implementing policies that equate large families with same-sex partnerships, belief in God with the belief in Satan." 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 Other headlines that appear in the Facebook video — "Putin: America is Godless, has turned away from Christian values" from Breitbart, and "Vladimir Putin: The New World Order worships Satan" from a Russian blog — also refer to this portion of Putin’s speech. Stent told Reuters at the time that the Kremlin considers Russia the only truly Christian country, and thinks that the West is no longer Christian because of its interest in LGBTQ rights. Putin also said during this speech that "the excesses of political correctness have reached the point where people are seriously talking about registering political parties whose aim is to promote pedophilia." Reuters reported he was likely referring to a Dutch association that once advocated for pedophilia to be accepted. The headline that Putin said the West is controlled by Satanic pedophiles was posted on a blog five years ago and also relies on this 2013 speech, but presents it as if Putin made the comments during former President Donald Trump’s tenure. The blog, like the headlines in the Faceook video, sound themes familiar among those who follow QAnon, a movement that claims without evidence that there is a global cabal of child sex traffickers that Trump is trying to thwart. The rest of the headlines that appear in the video vary in accuracy. "Putin calls Bill and Hillary Clinton ‘the same Satan’" was published in PJ Media in 2016 after Putin quoted a Russian proverb while talking about former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s desire to be president like her husband, former President Bill Clinton. "As we say, husband and wife are the same Satan," Putin said. "Putin: All U.S. presidents are puppets — ‘dark men in suits rule America’" appeared on blog posts in 2017 that paraphrased comments Putin made to the French publication Le Figaro. According to an English Translation of Putin’s remarks that appeared on the Kremlin’s website, he did not mention puppets but said: "I have already spoken to three U.S. presidents. They come and go, but politics stay the same at all times. Do you know why? Because of the powerful bureaucracy. When a person is elected, they may have some ideas. Then people with briefcases arrive, well dressed, wearing dark suits, just like mine, except for the red tie, since they wear black or dark blue ones. These people start explaining how things are done. And instantly, everything changes. This is what happens with every administration." "‘I’m going to defeat the Illuminati with my bare hands’ | Putin 2016," appeared atop a 2016 blog post that reported "Putin is said to have uttered these bold words." We couldn’t find a credible source to corroborate it. What we do know: claims that he said the West is controlled by Satanic pedophiles are False.

Photo shows a Russian tank Ukrainians are selling on eBay An image being shared on social media makes it look as though Ukrainians are logging onto eBay to sell Russian tanks they seized. "Used Russian T-72 tank — Fully functional," reads what looks like an eBay listing for a tank. It’s condition is listed as "used" and it’s priced at $400,000. 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 A reverse image search shows that the photo of the tank pictured with the eBay listing has actually been online for more than a decade. We also found no such "used Russian T-72 tank" on eBay, though there are plenty of tank toys for sale. Searching more broadly for Russian tanks on eBay we found more toys and one listing that initially appeared to be advertising an actual tank, but clicking on the link revealed that what was actually for sale was a picture of a tank and a Ukrainian flag. We rate this post False.

Federal border officials are allowing undocumented immigrants who are “known criminals who possess an arrest warrant to fly on U.S. aircraft (which) threatens our homeland security. U.S. Sen. Ron Johnson is among Republicans taking aim at the Biden administration’s handling of immigration at the nation’s Southern border. In a Feb. 4, 2022 news release about a policy that allows immigrants to use immigration warrants as a form of identification, Johnson included this statement: "The Biden administration’s disregard for the rule of law knows no bounds. Since the president took office a year ago, we have seen at least 2.4 million people enter this country illegally. For DHS and TSA to allow known criminals who possess an arrest warrant to fly on U.S. aircraft threatens our homeland security." The numbers are eye-popping. In the 2021 fiscal year, which ran from October 2020 through September 2021, U.S. Customs and Border Control reported 1.73 million encounters at the southern border, according to agency data, with apprehensions greatly increasing in the latter months. So far in fiscal year 2022, there have been more than 518,000 encounters at the border, not including data from January or February. But what caught our attention is the second part of Johnson’s claim – that immigrants are being permitted to use "arrest warrants" as a form of identification in order to board flights within the U.S., in place of a state-issued I.D. or passport. Is Johnson right? Civil forms issued by ICE can be used as identification When asked for backup, Johnson’s office shared a document written by David Pekoske, the administrator of the TSA, which handles traveler screening for those boarding planes. In the document, accepted forms of identification are listed, including various U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) forms, Department of Homeland Security forms and others. The list includes: ICE Form I-200 – Warrant for Arrest of Alien. Case closed? Not exactly. It’s considerably more complicated than that. Let’s start with Johnson’s phrase "arrest warrant," and how it is commonly understood – a document, typically signed by a judge, that authorizes police to arrest someone related to a specific criminal offense. From that vantage point, it’s almost nonsensical to think the target of such an arrest would be carrying such a document, much less using it as identification. In fact, the target presumably wouldn’t even know that a warrant was issued for their arrest. So, just what does the document in question represent? Featured Fact-check Adam Laxalt stated on November 20, 2022 in an ad “Biden and Democrats have dismantled border security.” By Maria Ramirez Uribe • November 3, 2022 Civil – not criminal – violations are issued by ICE when a person enters the U.S. without the approval of an immigration officer or overstays a work or travel visa. It is illegal to do so, according to the American Immigration Council, with the first offense amounting to a misdemeanor punishable by a fine or up to six months in prison. The second offense, or illegal re-entry, is a felony punishable by up to two years in prison, but higher penalties can apply depending on the situation. The I-200 is used in a variety of contexts, according to David Bier, a research fellow with the libertarian Cato Institute. For an asylum seeker crossing into the U.S., he said, ICE would issue the form after Border Patrol has transferred the person to an ICE detention facility. But because it isn’t possible for ICE to detain everyone referred by Border Control, the agency does release individuals, but only after they are deemed not a threat to the community and not a flight risk, Bier said. "The Form I-200 is often the only personal identification available to a person released by ICE, either because they entered without any ID or, as commonly, because ICE or Customs and Border Patrol has confiscated their passports and released them without any other identification," Bier said in an email to PolitiFact Wisconsin. Bier said the only alternative to allowing people to use the Form I-200 would be to strand thousands of people in the city they are released in, far away from family or friends. "Besides being inhumane, no state or city would support such a policy," he said. "The I-200 is issued only after an investigation into the person's identity and would only be possessed by someone released by ICE if they had their fingerprints collected and background check conducted, so it works fine as identification." What’s more, according to the TSA, civil violation documents are not viewed by themselves as indicating someone is a threat to public safety or national security. Indeed, they have been allowed as a form of identification since 2019, a change that took place under President Donald Trump. Their use is important, because the document can confirm the identity of an individual, which the agency can then use to see if the person is on a no-fly list or does pose a known threat to public safety or national security. Let’s also take a look at Johnson’s use of the phrase "known criminal" – according to the Department of Homeland Security, known criminals are persons who have a prior criminal conviction. Just because a person is identifying themselves using an ICE form doesn’t mean they have been convicted of a crime. Finally, the document provided by Johnson’s staff itself notes that immigration status, without other issues, is not a factor in the TSA screening process. So, based on an admittedly misleading title, the senator is misusing – or at least misunderstanding – what the document is. Our ruling Johnson claimed that TSA was allowing undocumented immigrants who are "known criminals who possess an arrest warrant to fly on U.S. aircraft (which) threatens our homeland security." While immigrants can use civil immigration violation documents to prove their identity in order to board planes, those documents are not criminal arrest warrants, as the claim suggests. Indeed, there is no reason to think the target of a criminal arrest warrant would be given a copy of such a warrant, much less carry it with him or herself. What’s more, under the process officials have already established an individual’s identity and determined they are not a threat or a flight risk. That said, a memo from the TSA administrator includes a document labeled "Warrant for Arrest of Alien" on a list of acceptable paperwork. So, there is at least an element of truth to the matter. That fits our definition of Mostly Fals

The war in Ukraine is “scripted and staged. Russia’s military invasion of Ukraine has brought on an onslaught of attacks, injuries and deaths for more than a week. But according to one claim on Facebook, the war is fake. The Feb. 25 post showed a photo of the Joker from the Batman film, "The Dark Knight'," with text overlaid that read, "Them: Let’s pray for Ukraine! Me: It’s all scripted and staged." The accompanying text post read, "Russia and Ukraine is a coverup!" and linked to a nine-minute YouTube video that falsely claimed the war is a coverup to distract from COVID-19, which it says was also planned and staged. 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 off, COVID-19 is real. PolitiFact named claims to the contrary its 2020 Lie of the Year. Statistical data, hospitals, medical workers, news reports and more show that the pandemic is authentic, and has caused millions to get sick or die. As for war in Ukraine, daily evidence proves that there is indeed a war. During the early morning of Feb. 24, after months of increased Russian military presence near the Ukrainian border, President Vladimir Putin announced the invasion into Ukraine in a televised speech, calling it a "special military operation." Putin said that the reason for the invasion was to protect people from "abuse and genocide from the Kyiv regime" — we rated that False. He also said that the attack was a preemptive measure against the growing alliance of NATO countries in Europe and its expansion closer to the Russian border. Within less than 20 minutes of Putin’s announcement, missile strikes hit locations near the Ukrainian capital of Kyiv, which was soon attacked afterward. CNN reported that strikes quickly spread across the country, and Ukrainian airports were prime targets for attacks. That same day, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky ordered martial law across the country, a temporary substitution of military rule over civilian authority. Following Russian missile strikes on Feb. 24, 2022, a destroyed car, damaged radar and equipment are shown at a Ukrainian military facility outside Mariupol, Ukraine. (AP Photo) Before the Russian invasion, numerous Ukrainian civilians volunteered to become fighters and took part in military training. Now, they’re on the frontline. NPR, The New York Times and other news sources have extensively covered the situation in Ukraine, where journalists and citizens have transmitted images depicting the war effort. This picture, my God. https://t.co/8m2EDk8cBb pic.twitter.com/YW8dZ2fI04 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 — Emily Ramshaw (@eramshaw) February 26, 2022 The exact number of civilians killed is unknown, but as of March 2, Ukraine’s State Emergency Service estimated more than 2,000 Ukrainians dead, according to CNN. On March 4, the United Nations gave a lower count of 331 people killed, including 19 children, and 675 who were injured. But "the real toll is likely to be much higher," Liz Throssell, U.N. spokesperson, said. The U.N. reported that most civilian deaths in the first eight days of conflict were "caused by the use of explosive weapons with a wide impact area, including shelling from heavy artillery and multi-launch rocket systems, and missile and air strikes." Russia has also reported casualties. The Russian Defense Ministry announced that 498 Russian troops have died and 1,597 more have been injured, NPR reported. With the impact of the war on civilians being publicly reported, and both sides reporting troops’ deaths and injuries, the claim that any of this is being staged proves to be baseless. Even more evidence that the conflict is real: the swift response from other countries. NATO has stated they will not engage in the war, but have taken other means of action against Russia. The United States, the European Union and the United Kingdom have joined together in implementing harsh economic sanctions against the Russian economy. During his State of the Union Address on March 1, President Joe Biden announced that, in addition to cutting off Russia's largest banks from the international banking system, the U.S. "will join our allies in closing off American air space to all Russian flights – further isolating Russia – and adding an additional squeeze on their economy." The value of the ruble, Russia’s currency, has fallen to less than one U.S. cent. Rising prices on some products like electronics and appliances have caused citizens to stock up, and NPR reports that arrests of anti-war protesters in Russia are racking up. They cite a Russian human rights group called OVD-Info, who’ve counted more than 8,000 arrests. Wealthy elites, who also face sanctions, have criticized Putin’s invasion of Ukraine. Scott Radnitz, an associate professor of Russian and Eurasian studies at the University of Washington, viewed the Facebook post and video, and said that the claim hinges on a world domination conspiracy theory — but there is no evidence presented for why or how the war is being staged. "There is little to refute directly, other than to note that thousands or millions of people would have to be in on any conspiracy to fake a war, and like the 9/11 attacks (which some people also deny) there is substantial video footage of attacks on Ukrainian cities, Russian invading forces, and throngs of refugees," Radnitz said. Nevertheless, he added, "a true believer will persist in denying all that evidence, something that is easier to do when the conflict is geographically distant and they do not personally know anyone directly affected by it." With a war raging, the world responding and both sides of the conflict experiencing its effects, the claim that the Russian invasion of Ukraine is "scripted and staged" holds no merit. We rate it Pants on Fir

Wearing masks is “COVID theater” and “not doing anything. On March 2, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis walked into a press conference at the University of South Florida and saw seven high school students standing behind a podium, each of them wearing face masks. "You don't have to wear those masks," DeSantis told the students. "I mean, please take them off." Some of them laughed, but the governor wasn't joking. "Honestly, this is not doing anything. We've got to stop with this COVID theater." "So if you want to wear it, fine, but this is ridiculous," DeSantis said before turning toward the lectern and letting out an audible sigh. Behind the viral exchange, recorded on video by NBC affiliate WFLA, was a false notion promoted by the Republican governor — though upheld by a slew of his statewide policies — that mask-wearing is an ineffective symbol of paranoia. Throughout the pandemic, DeSantis has taken positions contrary to public health guidance from experts. In July, he issued an executive order barring schools from requiring face masks, saying that mask guidance from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention lacked a "well-grounded scientific justification." We rated that claim False. But the eyebrow-raising scene of a governor scolding students for wearing masks posed a broader question: Are there still legitimate reasons people might choose to wear face masks in public? We decided to find out. Does the CDC’s latest guidance prove DeSantis right? When we asked DeSantis about the incident, his press secretary, Christina Pushaw, said the governor wanted to ensure that people were informed about the "lack of evidence for masks." "Following Florida, the CDC has even stopped recommending mask wearing for most Americans, and even the most liberal states have dropped mask mandates for schools," Pushaw said. "After two years of mixed messages and social engineering from health authorities and media, the governor wants to make sure everyone is aware of the facts and data." Contrary to what Pushaw suggested, the CDC based its decision on its view that the nation is in a "stronger place" in the pandemic because of the widespread availability of testing, vaccines, and other tools to prevent COVID-19. The relaxed mask recommendations for a large share of the U.S. were released in February. Still, Dr. Greta Massetti, a senior epidemiologist for the CDC, said in a press conference announcing the recommendations that masking in low transmission areas was not unreasonable. "We should all keep in mind that some people may choose to wear a mask at any time based on personal preference," Massetti said. "And importantly, people who wear high-quality masks are well protected, even if others around you are not masking." A recent study published by the CDC found that wearing face masks notably reduced the likelihood of testing positive for COVID. Well-fitting masks block virus-sized particles in laboratory conditions, according to the study. Respirator masks proved to be the most effective, reducing the risk of contracting the virus by about 83%. Surgical masks came in second, with an efficacy of 66%. 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 "Masks have been a significant piece of personal protective equipment for both health care workers potentially exposed to pathogens and laboratorians," said Jill Roberts, associate professor at the University of South Florida’s College of Public Health. Who should still wear a mask? The latest mask recommendations from the CDC urge people in areas of high community transmission to wear face masks when in public. A significant number of cities and counties across the U.S. have high COVID transmission rates. Florida’s Hillsborough County — where DeSantis held the conference — currently has a high transmission rate and, per the CDC guidelines, people should wear masks. However, in accordance with DeSantis’ executive order, Hillsborough County Public Schools does not require its students to wear face masks. But it doesn’t discourage mask-wearing, either. "It is a student and parent’s choice to protect their health in a way they feel most appropriate," a spokesperson for the school district told PolitiFact. The CDC urges immunocompromised people — such as people with cerebral palsy, diabetes, or heart disease — to continue wearing masks when in public. Immunocompromised people comprise 2.7% of adults in the U.S., or about 7 million, according to the CDC. "Immunocompromised individuals do not have the luxury of assuming that an infection will not be serious," Roberts told PolitiFact. "Therefore, it is important that they are able to take steps to prevent disease, including wearing masks." In high-risk congregate settings, like schools, immunocompromised people are recommended to take further precautions. After the emergence of the omicron variant, COVID-19 cases and hospitalization among children spiked. Immunocompromised children were disproportionately affected. Children with intellectual and developmental disabilities are twice as likely to get COVID-19 than their peers and have a higher mortality rate, the American Academy of Pediatrics found. For some of these children, difficulty with verbal communication can lead to the underreporting of COVID symptoms — further exacerbating their vulnerability. "For immunocompromised kids, it is not 'ridiculous' to wear masks," said Matthew Dietz, litigation director at the Disability Independence Group. "But this ridiculously minor precaution protects their lives." Children with disabilities may require close contact with teaching assistants on the bus or in classrooms. In such instances, masking can help mitigate the risk of infection while still providing the child with the assistance they need. Our ruling DeSantis told students that wearing masks "is not doing anything. We've got to stop with this COVID theater." Health authorities say that wearing a mask, even in a low-risk situation, can be effective at preventing transmission of COVID-19 and other respiratory illnesses. In high-risk areas, like where DeSantis was speaking, public health authorities strongly recommend wearing a mask. People who are immunocompromised are particularly at risk; masking at all times would be a recommended protective measure for this group. DeSantis’ statement is not accurate. We rate it False

Image shows Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky “has joined the front lines with his troops. As Ukrainian President Zelensky has refused to leave his country during the Russian invasion, social media posts claim an image shows him fighting alongside the military. A Feb. 27 video on Facebook shows a photo of Zelensky wearing military fatigues with a text overlay that says, "Volodymyr Zelenskyy, the Ukrainian president who has joint (sic) the front lines with his troops." 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 photo included in the post of him wearing fatigues is from 2021, when he visited Ukrainian forces near the frontline with Russian-backed separatists in the Donbass region. Since Russia began to advance into Ukraine on Feb. 24, Zelensky, 45, has stayed in Ukraine, frequently posting videos of himself on the streets of Kyiv while urging Ukrainians to resist the invasion. In a March 2 column that ran in the New York Times, one of his top aides described the experience of taking shelter with Zelensky in a Kyiv bunker. And on March 3, Zelensky wore a military T-shirt as he hosted his first press conference since the invasion began, according to journalists who covered it. Fact-checkers, meanwhile, have debunked claims that viral images of Zelensky in uniform are current, noting that they are from 2021. The image used in this Facebook post was published by Reuters in April 2021. The Reuters caption said Zelensky was visiting "positions of armed forces near the frontline with Russian-backed separatists in Donbass region, Ukraine April 9, 2021." It is credited as a handout photo from the Ukrainian Presidential Press Service. 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 22-second video includes more claims about what it describes as Ukraine’s "greatest soldiers" so far: "Vitaly Skakun blew himself up with a bridge to stop the Russian advance. The 13 soldiers who were killed on Snake Island after telling a Russian warship to ‘go f--- yourself.’ The ghost of Kyiv, he shot down six Russian fighter jets in under 24 hours making him the only ace pilot of the war." The account of Skakun appears to be largely accurate; media reports indicate he died while detonating a bridge to slow the Russian invasion. The stories alternately give his name as Vitaly Skakun Volodymyrovych and Vitaliy Volodymyrovych Skakun. Thirteen soldiers on Snake Island in the Black Sea were initially believed to have died after a Russian warship attack. But they were later confirmed by both Russia and Ukraine to be alive and in Russian custody. Russia claims that the soldiers surrendered, while Ukraine maintains that they were taken captive. Finally, it is unclear if the so-called "Ghost of Kyiv" pilot actually exists. Aviation experts have said it is doubtful a single fighter pilot could down six planes in a day, PolitiFact reported. Our ruling A Facebook video says an image of Zelensky in military fatigues shows him on the frontline with his troops. Zelensky has filmed himself numerous times and said he is defending the capital of Kyiv from advancing Russian troops. But this photo is from 2021. We rate this claim False

Joe Biden's sanctions on Russia “are riddled with loopholes and don't even start for 30 days. They have carve outs for the energy and financial sectors. In ads for their 2022 campaigns, some Republicans are attacking President Joe Biden’s sanctions on Russia as too slow and too weak. One ad is in the race for an open Senate seat in Ohio, which could help determine which party controls the Senate. "Biden's sanctions are riddled with loopholes and don't even start for 30 days," investment banker Mike Gibbons said in his ad on Facebook and Instagram. "They have carve outs for the energy and financial sectors." The claim is a mixed bag: Some of the sanctions took immediate effect, some were phased in over 30 days. The energy sector was largely spared, but banks were targeted directly. What the ad cites Russia invaded Ukraine Feb. 24, but the United States began imposing sanctions two days earlier, in response to Russia’s deployment of troops into two pro-Russian regions of eastern Ukraine. The Feb. 22 sanctions focused on two major Russian state-owned financial institutions, imposed restrictions on Russian sovereign debt and sanctioned five "Kremlin-connected elites," according to the U.S. Treasury Department. The Feb. 24 sanctions, according to a Treasury Department news release, targeted "all of Russia’s largest financial institutions and the ability of state-owned and private entities to raise capital — and further bars Russia from the global financial system." Gibbons’ ad cited that news release. In all, between Feb. 22 and March 3, the U.S. imposed 148 sanctions on Russia, according to a running list produced by CORRECTIV, a nonprofit investigative newsroom in Germany. The timing In announcing the Feb. 24 sanctions, Biden said some effects were immediate, but he also alluded to 30 days in terms of assessing their effects. "We’ve cut off Russia’s largest bank — a bank that holds more than one-third of Russia’s banking assets by itself — cut it off from the U.S. financial system," Biden said. He added: "The sanctions we imposed exceed anything that’s ever been done. The sanctions we imposed have generated two-thirds of the world joining us. They are profound sanctions. Let’s have a conversation in another month or so to see if they’re working." Navin Bapat, a professor of peace and war in political science at the University of North Carolina, said the Feb. 24 sanctions provided for a period of 30 days to allow U.S. financial institutions to wind down their transactions. But the Feb. 22 sanctions took effect more quickly. They prohibited U.S. institutions from participating in purchasing rubles or any other assets from Russian financial institutions after March 1, Bapat said. 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 Gibbons’ campaign cited clauses in the sanctions that allow exceptions for certain financial transactions, including some related to the energy industry. The carve outs The Biden administration, facing the possibility that energy sanctions could lead to higher gas prices in the United States and energy prices abroad, has acknowledged that the energy sector was not a major target. Daleep Singh, a deputy national security advisor and deputy director of the National Economic Council, said at a news conference on the Feb. 24 sanctions: "To be clear: Our sanctions are not designed to cause any disruption to the current flow of energy from Russia to the world. We’ve carved out energy payments on a time-bound basis to allow for an orderly transition of these flows away from sanctioned institutions, and we’ve provided other licenses to provide for an orderly winddown of business." Republican and Democratic lawmakers have moved to stop the U.S. from importing oil from Russia. Alan Cole, a former economist with Congress’ Joint Economic Committee and former adviser to U.S. Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, wrote in an article cited by Gibbons’ campaign that while the sanctions are "an impressive effort overall, the sanctions also have a glaring weakness: They largely spare Russia’s all-important energy sector, the backbone of its entire economy, and its agricultural center — the country is a major wheat exporter." Russia expert Harley Balzer, an emeritus professor of government and international affairs at Georgetown University, told PolitiFact that Biden "is endeavoring to balance punishing Russia and preventing serious damage in Europe from rising energy prices and threatened supplies." "The financial sanctions are causing havoc on the Russian stock market, causing the market cap of major Russian firms to drop more than 90% on foreign exchanges and clobbering the ruble," he added. "Freezing the Russian Central Bank assets abroad reduced their reserves from $600 billion to $300 billion. They are spending $5 billion to $10 billion per day to keep the ruble from depreciating even more. Cronies' assets are being confiscated at an increasing pace. All of that has far more immediate impact than the oil and gas sanctions." Other Republicans have run ads similar to Gibbons’. Rep. Ted Budd, who is running for the U.S. Senate in North Carolina, and Georgia U.S. House candidate Alan Sims both said the sanctions were "too little, too late"; Jeffrey Sossa-Paquette, who is running for a U.S. House in Massachusetts, said the sanctions "leave out gas and oil." Crowded primary contest The Ohio Senate seat Gibbons wants is open 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 Gibbons, the Republican candidates include Ohio state Sen. Matt Dolan; former Ohio state treasurer Josh Mandel; former Ohio Republican Party chair Jane Timken; and "Hillbilly Elegy" author J.D. Vance. The leading Democratic candidate is U.S. Rep. Tim Ryan. Overall, the Ohio race is rated variously by campaign watchers as "lean Republican," as "likely Republican" and "solid Republican." Our ruling Gibbons said Biden's sanctions on Russia "are riddled with loopholes and don't even start for 30 days. They have carve outs for the energy and financial sectors." Some of the sanctions made a quick impact and some were phased in over 30 days. The energy sector was largely spared, but banks were targeted directly. We rate the claim Half Tru

A 2022 CNN report said, “Russia deploys two nuke bombers in US backyard, Venezuela. Social media users have resurfaced a years-old CNN clip about Russia’s encroachment on the United States as though it reflected a new development in the Ukraine invasion. The short clip, which received millions of views across Facebook and other platforms, shows a 2018 segment from "The Situation Room with Wolf Blitzer," an evening news program. In the segment, CNN correspondent Brian Todd reported that Russian President Vladimir Putin had deployed two bomber planes called blackjacks to Venezuela for a military exercise over the Caribbean. "Putin making military moves in America’s backyard," the on-screen chyron read. The segment aired on Dec. 11, 2018, not in relation to the ongoing conflict involving Russia and Ukraine, according to a capture available on the Internet Archive. The segment is on CNN’s website, as well as on the network’s YouTube channel. But in the days since Russia launched its invasion of Ukraine, the same segment has been shared out of context on Facebook, Instagram and other platforms, as though it just ran. "Russia deploys two nuke bombers in US backyard, Venezuela," said one Feb. 28, 2022, Facebook post, which drew nearly 2 million views to the video and was shared more than 15,000 times. 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 A Feb. 28, 2022, Facebook post sharing the outdated CNN clip was widely circulated. 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 those posts Fals

“NEW: Biden Admin. instructs Americans to social distance and wear masks in the event of a Nuclear Fallout. On Feb. 27, as Russian forces continued a wide-ranging assault on Ukraine, President Vladimir Putin put Russia’s nuclear forces on high alert. That development renewed concerns that Russia might turn its nuclear arsenal on the United States. On Feb. 28, President Joe Biden said that Americans shouldn’t be concerned about nuclear warfare, but his reassurances didn’t stop some from looking up the government’s recommendations for surviving a nuclear attack. Some people turned up something unexpected: a recommendation to wear a mask even in nuclear fallout. "You can’t make this stuff up…" said one March 1 Facebook post from Lance Wallnau, a podcast host. His post included an image that read: "NEW: Biden Admin. instructs Americans to social distance and wear masks in the event of a Nuclear Fallout." The words were followed by a partially truncated website URL and screenshots that explained what to do after a nuclear explosion. 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.) Donald Trump Jr. and politics and sports commentator Clay Travis shared it, too. "Our government wants us to make sure we socially distance in the event of nuclear war because obviously you’re worried about dying of Covid and not nuclear fallout. These are not serious people they are imbeciles," Trump wrote. The screenshots of Federal Emergency Management Agency guidelines are real. But they were not updated recently amid Putin’s threats of nuclear war. FEMA says the changes happened during the Trump administration, in the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic. 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 Although the website URL in the post was cut short, it appeared to point to ready.gov/nuclear-explosion, a page run by FEMA that provides instructions on ways to minimize radiation exposure following a nuclear explosion. Ready.gov was designed to educate Americans on preparation and response for various emergencies — both natural and man-made. And yes, the guidelines on the "Nuclear Explosion" page include recommendations to slow or stop the spread of COVID-19. The "Get inside" section of the guidelines, for example, instructs people to go to the basement or the middle of a building, avoiding the outer walls or roof. It adds: "Try to maintain a distance of at least six feet between yourself and people who are not part of your household. If possible, wear a mask if you’re sheltering with people who are not a part of your household." But Jaclyn Rothenberg, a FEMA spokesperson, said the pandemic safety language was added before Russia’s use of force in Ukraine. "COVID protocols were originally added in 2020," Rothenberg said. She said some pages are now being updated to reflect the CDC’s latest guidelines, which recommend wearing a mask indoors only in counties where the community-level risk of COVID-19 is considered high. The "Nuclear Explosion" page was last updated on Feb. 25, 2022, to remove a broken link, Rothenberg said. "No new language was added to or taken off of that particular page," she said. Links were updated throughout the Ready.gov site. Using previously archived versions of the site, PolitiFact confirmed that the site’s guidelines have incorporated COVID-19 protocols since at least November 2020, even before Biden’s inauguration. Guidance incorporating COVID-19 safety measures appeared on the site throughout 2021 and remained there as of March 1. Our ruling Social media posts said in a "new" update, the Biden administration instructed Americans to "social distance and wear masks in the event of a Nuclear Fallout." The COVID-19 recommendations that appear on FEMA’s nuclear explosion web page predate the Biden administration. Archived web pages show they have been in place since at least November 2020. We rate this claim Mostly Fals

"During the first 3 months of FY2022 Customs& Border Protection recorded 518k encounters w illegal immigrants at S border That’s up 137% from same point in FY2021. U.S. immigrations officials are reporting an increase in immigration encounters across the country’s southern border with Mexico, leading Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, to say the Biden Administration needs to enforce immigration laws. Grassley tweeted on Feb. 5: "The Biden Border Crisis is still here During the first 3 months of FY2022 Customs& Border Protection recorded 518k encounters w illegal immigrants at S border That’s up 137% from same point in FY2021. Biden Admin ought 2get serious about enforcing our immigration laws" During a press call with The Daily Iowan and other Iowa reporters on Feb. 9, Grassley said he wants to vote on a bill that allocates funds for finishing the border wall, something the Democrat-majority Senate has no plans of introducing. "We have already, over a period of decades, passed plenty of laws, saying it’s illegal to come into this country without our permission," Grassley said. Grassley said it’s up to the executive branch to enforce immigration laws and that, while not solely Biden’s fault, the increase in encounters was the highest of Biden’s 13-month-old administration. Grassley’s numbers were correct, and they have continued to grow since he made the tweet. Through January, there have been 672,838 encounters. The number was 296,450 during those four months the previous fiscal year and the increase from then dropped, statistically, to 127% for the first four months. Federal fiscal years start Oct. 1, so the previous fiscal year’s numbers include three-and-a-half months of the Trump Administration. But a Feb. 18, 2022, Customs and Border Patrol update on the January 2022 numbers said the total number of encounters overstates the number of unique individuals trying to cross the border. A large number of expulsions during the coronavirus pandemic have contributed to a higher number of migrants making multiple border crossing attempts, the update stated. For example, the report stated, one of every four of the 153,941 encounters in January was with someone repeating an attempt to migrate into the United States. The five-year repeat average was one of every seven from fiscal 2014 to fiscal 2019, the report said. According to the Department of Homeland Security, expulsions have increased at the border because Customs and Border Protection started requiring non-U.S. citizens looking to enter the country to show proof of vaccination. The restriction applied to people with essential and non-essential reasons. Customs and Border Protection defines an encounter as anyone who is apprehended or expelled under the agency’s Title 8 or Title 42 provisions. Title 8 apprehensions refer to people who seek legal entry, due to refugee status or other personal reasons, but cannot be considered admissible by lack of proper paperwork or a breach in quota. Title 42 expulsions refer to individuals who try to enter the U.S. illegally and are expelled to the country of their last transit or their home country. 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 We won’t know the official deportation numbers for fiscal 2022 for a while because the most recently available numbers are from 2020. According to Pew Research Center, the number of border crossings in fiscal 2021 was the highest in 21 years. Pew reported that the more-than 200,000 crossings in July 2021 was the highest monthly total in two decades. This increase came after COVID-19 forced the southern borders to close and slow immigration down. The previous monthly record was 220,063 in March 2000. The 2000 fiscal year total for encounters was 1,643,679. Biden issued an executive order on Jan. 20, 2021, that overturned former president Donald Trump’s immigration policies. Grassley said his order meant that Biden was offering an open border policy. The executive order says differently. When he issued his executive order, Biden said immigrants strengthen America’s communities and economy. Enforcing immigration policy, the executive order said, is complex and requires setting priorities to best serve the national interest. "The policy of my Administration is to protect national and border security, address the humanitarian challenges at the southern border, and ensure public health and safety. We must also adhere to due process of law as we safeguard the dignity and well-being of all families and communities," the executive order said. The Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 restructured American immigration policy. With this law, each of the subsequent 13 presidents, from Eisenhower to Biden, has enacted executive action for immigration policy. Immigration numbers skyrocketed in 1970, during the Nixon Administration, after quota numbers were increased through the Immigration and Nationality Act. Encounters rose from 9.6 million to 14 million in 10 years. The previous decade saw a decrease of about 100,000. Our ruling Grassley called the Biden Administration out for not being strict enough on immigration policy. He based his criticism on encounters that have risen 137% from fiscal 2021 to fiscal 2022. Grassley did not mention how multiple repeated attempts by individuals blamed on COVID restrictions have caused a rise in numbers. This provides context. But, Customs and Border Protection numbers line up with what Grassley said. We rate the statement to be Mostly Tru

Ukrainians altered this street sign to tell Russian troops to go “f---” themselves As the Russian military mounted its invasion, the Ukrainian government instructed residents to alter and remove road signs in order to confuse Russian soldiers. Photos on social media show signs that are blacked out or painted over. Other images supposedly showing this effort are not so genuine. Example: A photo shared on Facebook that shows a blue road sign pointing to three locations north, west and east — in colorful language. "From a friend following closely…Gotta love the moxie," one post on Facebook featuring the sign reads. "Ukraine’s Interior ministry asked residents to take down street signs in order to confuse oncoming Russian troops. The state road-signs agency went one step further. (Roughly: all directions are to ‘go f--- yourselves’)." "Top: ‘Go f yourself’ Middle: ‘Once more go f yourself’ Bottom: ‘Russia is that way, get f’d.’" Featured Fact-check Tucker Carlson stated on October 27, 2022 in a TV segment The United States is "about to run out of diesel fuel ... by the Monday of Thanksgiving week." By Andy Nguyen • November 7, 2022 The Russian translation of the words is close, reading: "Go f--- yourself," "Go f--- yourself again," and "Go f--- yourself back to Russia." This isn’t a real photo, however. The lettering in an authentic photo of the sign — one released by a Ukrainian government agency — was digitally altered. 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.) On Feb. 26, Ukravtodor, the agency in charge of Ukraine’s national road system, announced on Facebook plans to remove road signs in an attempt to throw off Russian troops. The announcement includes the image of the altered road sign. "Let's help them go straight to hell," the agency wrote in the post. "Ukravtodor urges all road organizations, territorial communities, local government authorities to immediately start dismantling nearby road signs." The agency told PolitiFact in an email that its Facebook post is legitimate, but the sign was photoshopped to encourage people. We rate posts that say this is a real sign in Ukraine False

Photos show Ukrainian citizens destroying two Russian tanks with Molotov cocktails in Kyiv Social media users continue to share videos and images of Russia’s invasion into Ukraine for audiences around the world. But not all of the photos show the current invasion. "Ukrainian citizens d€str0y 2 Russian tanks with molotov cocktails (Petrol, Gasoline) in Kiev," read one Feb. 26 Facebook post that included four flame-filled photos. "They are using the guerrilla war tactics to counter Russian army in their capital." The Facebook user also shared the hashtag "#RussiaUkraineWar," again claiming that the photos depicted the ongoing Russian invasion. The photos feature visually dramatic scenes filled with fire, billowing smoke and silhouettes of people engaged in a fight. 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.) Reports show that some Ukrainians have been making Molotov cocktails to use against the Russian forces threatening major cities. On Feb. 25, the Ukrainian Defense Ministry instructed residents in Kyiv to make Molotov cocktails, which are improvised incendiary devices often made with glass bottles, flammable liquid and some type of cloth fuse that can be set on fire. Using reverse image searches on Google, Bing and Yandex, PolitiFact found that each of the Facebook photos were taken during protests in Kyiv in January 2014. At the time, there were mass protests in Ukraine, fueled by opposition to then-President Viktor Yanukovych’s decision to turn away from a free trade agreement with Europe and instead pursue closer cooperation with Russia. In late January 2014, the once-peaceful protests against Yanukovych’s government erupted into fiery battles in the streets, as "thousands of demonstrators hurled rocks and firebombs to set police vehicles ablaze," according to the Associated Press. The photos shared in the Facebook post were taken during those battles with police. The photo of a man pointing at the sky against a backdrop of flames and smoke was taken on Jan. 22, 2014, according to the European Pressphoto Agency. 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 "A protester gesticulates during clashes with riot police at an anti-government protest in downtown Kiev, Ukraine," the caption said. A reverse image search for two people who appeared to be throwing something into the flames traced the photo back to an Irish Times article from 2014. From there, we found the original photo on Getty Images. "Ukrainian anti-government protesters throw Molotov cocktails during clashes with riot police in central Kiev early on Jan. 25, 2014," said the corresponding caption. "Protesters and Ukrainian police were locked in a tense standoff in Kiev after a night of sporadic clashes that erupted despite a truce and offer of concessions by President Viktor Yanukovych." The third photo featured in the post, which features a person throwing something in the direction of burning tires, also traced back to Getty Images. "An anti-government protester throws a Molotov cocktail during clashes with police on Hrushevskoho Street near Dynamo stadium on Jan. 25, 2014 in Kiev, Ukraine," read the caption. "After two months of primarily peaceful anti-government protests in the city center, new laws meant to end the protest movement have sparked violent clashes in recent days." The final photo of a person preparing to fire a slingshot first appeared in Russian journalist Ilya Varlamov’s LiveJournal blog post, in which he wrote about his experience during the 2014 protests. Varlamov did not share specific details about the photo, but he noted that the photos shared were all taken in Kyiv on Jan. 22 or 23, 2014. Facebook users have also shared videos of the 2014 unrest and falsely claimed they show Ukrainians destroying a Russian tank during the current conflict. Our ruling A Facebook post claimed four fiery photos showed Ukrainian citizens destroying two Russian tanks with Molotov cocktails in Kyiv. The photos actually date back to 2014 anti-government protests in Ukraine. Claims that the photos depict the current fighting are False. RELATED: Photo of children sending off Ukrainian troops is from 2016, not 2022 RELATED: Photos of Ukrainians praying "in this phase of war danger" are actually from years a

“Our economy created over 6.5 million new jobs just last year, more jobs in one year than ever before in the history of the United States of America. In his State of the Union address, President Joe Biden touted the strength of the nation’s job growth in 2021. "Our economy created over 6.5 million new jobs just last year, more jobs in one year than ever before in the history of the United States of America," Biden said. He has a point, but it’s important to put these gains into context. The United States did finish 2021 with some 6.6 million more jobs than it started with the previous January. This far exceeded the previous one-year record of 4.2 million additional jobs in 1979. !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"); However, as the nation’s population has grown, so has the number of jobs. Using the annual percentage increase is a better way to make comparisons across the 80-plus years for which data is available. Using that metric, 2021 put up strong numbers but did not set an all-time record. The number of jobs in 2021 increased by about 4.4%, which was the highest percentage since 1979. Still, going back to 1940, the percentage increase seen in 2021 was exceeded 10 times. !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"); 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 It’s also important to provide some additional context. Comparison to the pre-pandemic level. The U.S. economy is still about 2.88 million jobs below the pre-pandemic peak — 149.6 million jobs in September 2021, compared with 152.5 million jobs in February 2020. The question of timing. Biden entered office during a recession (and a global pandemic), but while the economy was on the upswing. Since different presidents have been sworn in at different points in the economic cycle, Biden’s comparison to his predecessors is not really apples-to-apples. Who gets the credit? Experts always caution that a president is not all-powerful in economic matters, since many factors beyond their control, from international oil supplies to changes in technology and demographics, can shape the health of the U.S. economy. Our ruling Biden said, "Our economy created over 6.5 million new jobs just last year, more jobs in one year than ever before in the history of the United States of America." He accurately cited the raw number of jobs created and the fact that it was bigger than any previous year for which data is available. However, looking at the percentage increase — a fairer way to compare 80-plus years of data — 2021 did not set a record. Going back to 1940, the percentage increase seen in 2021 was exceeded 10 times. Also, since different presidents have been sworn in at different points in the economic cycle, Biden’s comparison to his predecessors is not really apples-to-apples. The statement is partially accurate but leaves out important details, so we rate it Half Tru

"According to Republican Rep. Jeff Shipley, teachers should not receive a pay raise if they teach American history that Republicans don’t agree with. Education has been a hot topic in the Iowa Legislature, where Republicans in charge have introduced several reforms to the way K-12 children are taught in the state’s public schools. In the House, Democrats posted on their Twitter account on Feb. 10 that Rep. Jeff Shipley, R-Birmingham, wants to withhold raises from public school teachers who teach topics the Legislature has prohibited. House Democrats wrote: "School Funding Debate Update: According to Republican Rep. Jeff Shipley, teachers should not receive a pay raise if they teach American history that Republicans don’t agree with.#ShipleysGonnaShipley" The Democratic caucus was responding to a comment Shipley made during a Feb. 10 debate on the state’s education budget. "If Critical Race Theory is important to a teacher, they just don’t get a pay raise for that year," Shipley said in that debate. The House voted 94 to 1 to approve HF 2315, which provided for the state’s funding for public schools in fiscal 2023. Shipley was the lone "no" vote. We spoke with Shipley after the Democrats wrote their February 2022 tweet and he said it does not accurately represent what he said on the House floor. He said it was a mischaracterization. "From my perspective, the problems get worse, the more money we spend," Shipley said to The Daily Iowan, PolitiFact’s Iowa partner. "I really want to examine the policy more than the funding." Some background: A 2021 state law says public school teachers cannot "teach, advocate, act upon, or promote divisive concepts" that include racial or sexual stereotyping and scapegoating that includes blaming inherent discrimination on someone’s race or sex. The bill was touted as a ban on Critical Race Theory, the concept that race is a social construct, and that racism is not just an individual’s prejudice, but something that’s embedded within legal systems and policies. Critical Race Theory was not being taught in Iowa’s public schools before the law passed. 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 Shipley supported the 2021 law, which prohibited "assigning fault, blame, or bias to a race or sex, or to members of a race or sex because of their race or sex, or claiming that, consciously or unconsciously, and by virtue of persons’ race or sex, members of any race are inherently racist or are inherently inclined to oppress others, or that members of a sex are inherently sexist or inclined to oppress others." "No one teaches that members of a race or sex are inherently racist, sexist, or oppressive," University of Iowa Gender, Women’s, and Sexuality Studies Department Chair Leslie Schwalm told The Daily Iowan at the time. "In fact, one of the things that Critical Race Theory helps us understand is that racism isn’t about individual acts of discrimination, but rather about the system." The House version of the bill was introduced by Rep. Steven Holt, R-Denison, and passed the House for a final time on May 6, 2021, of a vote of 53 to 35. All 53 in favor were Republican, Shipley being among them. "I do believe the term ‘white privilege’ is racist on its face," Shipley said while arguing in favor of the bill, HF802, last year. "What stifles communication is blatant accusations of racism." During debate on the school funding bill, Shipley rescinded an amendment he had introduced that stated that Iowa teachers would not receive a raise if they had violated state law that prohibits teaching ideas determined to be divisive concepts. Shipley told The Daily Iowan in the recent interview, "If you got into the teaching profession because you want to teach critical race theory to children, while you’re still technically at liberty to do so, don’t be surprised if lawmakers aren’t going to give you a pay raise and you got to stay at your base salary." He continued, "As a legislator voting on pay raises for these people, I want to make sure that you know if you’re getting a pay raise from the state of Iowa, that you’re at the very least making an effort to follow state law." School boards approve pay raises for teachers, not legislators, although legislators have an impact on boards’ available money when approving how much state money school districts receive. Our ruling Democrats in the Iowa House accused Shipley of saying teachers should not get pay raises if what they teach doesn’t align with what Republicans want. Shipley says they mischaracterized his House floor comments. The Democrats’ tweet leaves open the suggestion that Shipley would punish teachers for teaching anything Republicans don’t approve of, which would be a stretch of what he talked about on the House floor. But, Shipley made clear that he thinks teachers who veer into teaching that inherent racism exists or tenets of critical race theory should not get raises. We rate the tweet to be Mostly Tru

Russia unveiled a nuclear weapon, "Satan 2," that is "capable of destroying everything breathing in the world. Even before Russian President Vladimir Putin put the world on notice about his country’s nuclear capabilities, social media claims floated theories about its firepower. One Feb. 25 post on Facebook says that Russia unveiled a nuclear weapon, "Satan 2," that is "capable of destroying everything breathing in the world." The post includes photos that appear to show the actual weapon. 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 RS-28 Sarmat intercontinental ballistic missile, unveiled in 2016, is capable of destroying an area the size of Texas or France, according to a 2016 report by Sputnik, a state-backed Russian news agency. We could not find more objective reports detailing the same destructive power. "Known colloquially as ‘Satan 2,’ the missile will replace the RS-36M — which was dubbed ‘Satan’ by NATO after entering service in the 1970s," NBC News reported in 2016. 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 Robert Kelley, a former nuclear weapons expert at the U.S. Department of Energy, told NBC News in 2016 that the missile’s range and destructive power would likely be about the same as its predecessor, but "the reliability, flexibility and confidence (in the warheads' ability to hit their targets) will go way up." Kelley is now a distinguished associate fellow at the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute. The weapon has a capacity of 10 to 15 warheads, all of which can target a different location, according to Newsweek. "Individual warheads would strike distinct targets within a very limited ballistic ‘footprint,’ or many warheads from the same missile would strike the same target, increasing the likelihood of destroying that target completely," according to a 2021 report from EurAsian Times. The weapon is believed to be able to evade missile defense systems and its deployment is expected around 2022, said a March 1 Congressional Research Service report. We rate the claim that a Russian nuclear weapon dubbed Satan 2 is "capable of destroying everything breathing in the world" False.

"An 8-year-old Ukrainian girl confronts a Russian soldier telling him to go back to his country. A nearly 10-year-old photo is being misrepresented on social media as an image from present-day Ukraine. "An 8-year-old Ukrainian girl confronts a Russian soldier telling him to go back to his country," says the caption on the Feb. 27 post on Facebook. "This is courageous." The post includes photos of a young girl who appears to be confronting a man wearing military fatigues and carrying a gun. The post was flagged as part of Facebook’s efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about our partnership with Facebook.) The photo was taken in 2012 in the West Bank, when Palestinian Ahed Tamimi, who was then 10 years old, confronted an Israeli soldier. 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 Tamimi "gained fame among Palestinian activists for an incident in which she led a group of children, including her younger brother, in arguing with Israeli soldiers," The Times of Israel reported in 2018, when Tamimi had been charged in a separate encounter involving Israeli soldiers. "In a video of the [2012] incident, she can be seen repeatedly raising her balled fist at a soldier, poised to hit him, but never actually doing so." The 2012 confrontation was captured on video and in photos. The Facebook page that shared the post on Feb. 27, Holy Spirit TV, posted again on Feb. 28 to clarify that the earlier post did not contain images from Ukraine. "Footage from 2012 recorded in occupied Palestine has become viral in 2022," the Feb. 28 post says. "It took 10 years for the mainstream media to acknowledge the girl is a ‘brave’ one and the soldier is an ‘invading’ trooper, only when it could be falsely presented as a video of the Russia-Ukraine conflict." We rate the claim that a photo shows an 8-year-old Ukrainian girl confronting a Russian soldier False.

A photo of a wounded young child was captured in Ukraine in 2022 Social media users shared a "heartbreaking" image of an injured child, describing the child as a victim of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. "One of the most heartbreaking images from the Russia/Ukraine war. Putin must end this for humanity’s sake," said one Feb. 24 tweet sharing the image. "Keep praying for Ukraine," said a Facebook post shared the same day. "This is a child of God. Lord please cover your children with your shield … There is war all around us." Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky said Feb. 28 that 16 Ukrainian children have died and 24 are injured as a result of Russian attacks so far. But this particular image of a wounded child was taken in Syria in 2018. 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.) 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 Reverse image searches revealed the same photo featured in news articles about the Syrian war from 2018, as other fact-checkers also reported. The original photo was snapped by the European Pressphoto Agency's Mohammed Badra. It is dated Jan. 3, 2018. The European Pressphoto Agency’s caption reads: "A young girl is treated at a hospital after a bombing in Mesraba, Eastern al-Ghouta, Syria, 03 January 2018. At least 19 people were killed in airstrikes on the cities of Erbeen and Mesraba by forces loyal to the Syrian government." We rate miscaptioned posts that say the child is from Ukraine Fals

Video shows Ukrainian soldiers saying goodbye to loved ones amid Russia’s 2022 invasion As the world watches Russia’s invasion of Ukraine unfold, it’s easy to get caught up in the many emotional images and stories that are rapidly spreading online. Many of these scenes of the war are real. But some are unrelated to the ongoing conflict, like a viral video shared on Facebook that shows two men dressed in military gear apparently leaving for war as they embrace sobbing women. "Praying everyone comes home safe," the caption of the Feb. 25 post reads. The video isn’t a legitimate clip from this war. 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 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 footage stems from a 2017 Ukrainian film called "The War of Chimeras" directed by Anastasiia Starozhytska and Mariia Starozhytska. The movie follows the story of a young couple during the 2014 Battle of Ilovaisk, which took place near the eastern Ukrainian city of Donetsk. Reverse-image searches pulled up YouTube videos about the movie that match the clips shared on social media, including the trailer uploaded in July 2017. We rate posts claiming the 2017 movie clip depicts the 2022 invasion Fals

Joe Biden was holding a medical device in a photo he tweeted during the 2022 Winter Olympics During the 2022 Winter Olympics in Beijing, President Joe Biden tweeted a photo of himself and first lady Jill Biden, in which they both donned Team USA gear to cheer on American athletes. Let’s go, @TeamUSA! Jill and I are so proud of everything America's athletes have accomplished so far, and we look forward to seeing what you achieve in the days ahead. We’re cheering you on every step of the way. pic.twitter.com/5xxcLj3bSi— President Biden (@POTUS) February 18, 2022 That photo sparked some conspiracy theories. "There’s something odd about Joe and Jill’s Olympic photo…What’s in Joe’s hand?" said the headline of a blog post shared on Facebook. "Many suspect it’s a medical device of some sort," the blog post said, claiming that it could be a medical alert device, which is an alarm used to call for help in the event of a medical crisis. "Or perhaps it’s a walkie-talkie, though why the president would be holding one is unknown." The blog 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 White House told PolitiFact that Biden is holding a mask, not a medical device, in the photo he tweeted Feb. 18, which was also shared on Instagram. 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 Black seems to be the typical color of choice for the president’s face masks, and he can often be seen either wearing one or holding it in his hand after taking it off. President Joe Biden wearing or holding a mask. Left photo: in the State Dining Room of the White House, Jan. 7, 2022. Middle photo: Walking down from Air Force One in Lansing, Mich., Oct. 5, 2021. Right photo: in the East Room of the White House, Aug. 11, 2021. (AP Photos) This isn’t the first time we’ve come across a claim about Biden’s masks — a video was taken out of context to falsely claim he handed his own used mask to Justice Stephen Breyer during a press conference announcing Breyer’s retirement from the U.S. Supreme Court. The mask that he handed Breyer was a white one. Biden wore a black mask, which he held onto throughout the conference. The claim that Biden was holding a medical alert device masks the truth. Pants on Fire! RELATED ARTICLE: ‘Cheap fakes’: Viral videos keep clipping Biden’s words out of context RELATED VIDE

The 2020 election “was stolen from Donald J. Trump. Josh Mandel faces at least five competitors for the Republican U.S. Senate nomination in Ohio. He aims to win by being the most pro-Donald Trump candidate in the field. Mandel made his MAGA credentials the centerpiece of his speech in Florida at the Conservative Political Action Conference, an annual go-to gathering of the Republican base. "I'm the only candidate in Ohio who's willing to say this, and I want to say it to all of you very clearly," Mandel said Feb. 25. "I believe this election was stolen from Donald J.Trump." Mandel’s words drew a long cheer. Few presidential elections have been as thoroughly vetted, audited and reexamined as the one in 2020, when Democratic candidate Joe Biden beat Trump. Not a scrap of evidence has emerged to support Mandel’s assertion of a stolen election. The Associated Press published one of the most sweeping investigations into voter fraud cases around the country in December 2021, contacting more than 300 local election offices as well as state officials. The AP found fewer than 475 voter fraud cases in six battleground states: Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin. The disputed ballots represent 0.15% of Biden’s victory margin in those states, the AP found. The AP concluded that most of the cases involved lone actors — and no evidence of "rigging" or collusion. Some cases involved people who sought to cast a ballot on behalf of a dead relative. In Nevada, for example, Donald Kirk Hartle told a TV station that someone cast a ballot in his dead wife’s name, but Hartle himself later pleaded guilty. Other cases of disputed ballots were a result of administrative error or voter confusion. One Wisconsin man who was on parole for a drunk driving felony told the AP he voted after asking poll workers if it was OK. It wasn’t. Arizona officials investigated the largest number of disputed votes — 198 out of 3.4 million cast, the AP found. Only nine resulted in charges. 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 Here’s a sample of other reviews that confirmed Biden’s victory: Arizona: State Senate Republicans ordered a review of 2 million ballots in Maricopa County that ultimately upheld the finding that Biden beat Trump. Michigan: An investigation led by Michigan Republican lawmakers found no basis for claims that there was widespread fraud in the 2020 election. Wisconsin: A conservative group found no evidence of widespread fraud and nothing suspicious about turnout or the timing of the vote tally. Georgia: Trump said thousands of dead people voted, but investigators found just four absentee ballots from Georgia voters who had died, the Atlanta Journal-Constitution reported in December. All were returned by relatives. Georgia conducted multiple recounts, including one by hand. "Law enforcement has had a year to investigate and nothing has been identified that would come close to changing any outcome," Trey Grayson, a Republican and former Kentucky secretary of state, previously told PolitiFact. "It is not accurate to say that there were zero incidents of fraud. But there is no evidence showing that anything would change or that anything was rigged." Mandel also said that Trump’s 8-point margin of victory in Ohio was an undercount. He provided no evidence, and the number of questionable ballots — some of them for Trump — are less than 100 in an election with about 5.9 million votes. We reached out to the Mandel campaign and did not hear back. Our ruling Mandel said that the 2020 election was stolen from Trump. Multiple investigations in six key states that Trump lost uncovered scant cases of fraud, and nothing on the scale needed to have changed the outcome. We rate this claim Pants on Fire! RELATED: Republicans facing off in 2022 GOP primaries are running ads claiming the 2020 election was stolen

“Over-vaccination causes faster mutation of the (COVID-19) virus, which causes a super virus we may not have the ability to fight off. Wisconsin’s Republican-controlled Senate has advanced a bill that would count prior COVID-19 infection as immunity, a sure sign that the partisan fight over the state’s pandemic response will continue to churn along. The bill was passed Feb. 15, 2022 and is all but certain to be vetoed when it reaches Democratic Gov. Tony Evers’ desk. But the body’s discussion of the bill underscored the deep divide between Evers and Republican members of the Legislature about how to bring the pandemic to an end. That discussion also included misinformation about COVID-19 vaccination from Sen. Mary Felzkowski, R-Irma. "Over-vaccination causes faster mutation of the virus, which causes a super virus we may not have the ability to fight off," Felzkowski told her Senate colleagues during the floor session. She’s way off base. Let’s break it down. Vaccines don’t cause COVID to mutate faster Felzkowski’s office did not respond to a request for evidence to back up her claim. In any case, the claim is inaccurate, said Ajay Sethi, associate professor of population health sciences at the University of Wisconsin-Madison School of Medicine and Public Health. The virus will always try to mutate to guarantee its own survival and evade people’s immunity, Sethi said in an email — and it doesn’t care whether that immunity comes from a vaccine, from prior infection, or both. In other words, it’s not mutating faster because people are vaccinated. 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 Politifact National rated a similar claim False last May, when a French virologist said vaccination is creating the virus variants. In that fact-check, Dr. Sarah Fortune, chair of the immunology and infectious diseases department at Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, offered the same conclusion that Sethi did. "Either people are going to get sick and get COVID-19, and the virus tries to escape that immune selection, or people can be vaccinated and the virus is going to try to escape that immune selection," Fortune said. "Avoiding vaccination is not going to limit the evolution of the virus." In fact, vaccinations play a role in slowing mutations of the virus. Each new infection gives the virus another chance to mutate. While it’s possible for people who are vaccinated to become infected with COVID-19, research shows getting the shot makes that less likely to happen. Data from the Wisconsin Department of Health Services, for example, show that in December 2021, unvaccinated people were testing positive for the virus at a rate that was three times higher than vaccinated people. Vaccinated people who do contract the virus also have a shorter course of illness than unvaccinated people, Sethi said, reducing the time and thus the opportunity for it to spread further, which gives it a greater chance to mutate. As for Felzkowski’s claim about a "super virus," it is possible that a variant that can evade all forms of immunity could develop. But as explained above, that wouldn’t be caused by vaccinations — it would be caused by unfettered spread of the virus through the population. "If the next Variant of Concern circumvents immunity from vaccines, immunity from past infection, and monoclonal antibody treatments, it is because society allowed the virus to continue to spread, evolve and mutate into new variants," Sethi said. Our ruling Felzkowski said "over-vaccination" causes the COVID-19 virus to mutate faster, which could produce a virus that humans may not be able to fight off. But state and national experts agree that the virus is seeking to evade any form of immunity to stay alive, not just immunity from vaccines. In reality, vaccines can play a role in slowing mutation of the virus because vaccinated people are less likely to become infected and tend to recover quicker. We rate her 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' });

“Millions of hardworking Americans will no longer have to worry about unexpected medical bills. During a Feb. 10 speech about lowering health care costs, President Joe Biden made a sweeping declaration that Americans would no longer need to worry about surprise medical bills. "No more surprise billing. No more," said Biden. "Millions of hardworking Americans will no longer have to worry about unexpected medical bills." Biden was referring to a bipartisan law, the No Surprises Act, that was passed by Congress during the Trump administration in late 2020 and took effect on Jan. 1, 2022. The law is supposed to protect consumers from often-expensive out-of-network medical bills. Biden offered this example of the kinds of bills the law would prevent: "If your health care plan did not cover a particular doctor but you didn’t even know he was being consulted and you get an extra bill for $2,000-$5,000 — they can’t do that anymore." Still, Biden exaggerated when he said there would be no more surprise billing. He had a point that the new law would provide newfound protection against certain charges for millions of people, but his statement went further than what the law accomplishes. We decided to dig in and find out how far the law goes to prevent unexpected medical costs. Surprise bills and the No Surprises Act, explained The No Surprises Act primarily protects consumers against certain types of medical bills: those received by patients for care at an out-of-network facility — specifically, a hospital, a hospital outpatient department, or an ambulatory surgery center; or from an out-of-network medical provider whom patients did not get to choose. The act also protects patients from "surprise" bills from an out-of-network air ambulance transport. Out of network means the doctor doesn’t take your medical insurance or isn’t included on the list of approved providers in your insurance network. The federal government estimates that the law will apply to about 10 million surprise bills a year. They are often associated with emergency care provided when patients must go to the closest medical facility and can’t check the network status of the facility or emergency room physicians. They also may stem from nonemergency hospitalizations or surgeries at an in-network facility that involve a provider, such as an anesthesiologist or radiologist, who is out of network and bills separately. Before the law, patients could be left on the hook for charges much higher than their insurer’s in-network negotiated rate because their health plan might pay only part of the bill or deny the claim completely. Trying to get any portion of an out-of-network bill covered often required lots of paperwork and phone time with insurance providers, and consumers were sometimes still left with a big bill. However, with the No Surprises Act, consumers are shielded from these out-of-network bills. Insurance companies are required to cover the out-of-network claims, paying providers the rate they pay for the service when it is delivered by an in-network provider or facility and leaving consumers responsible for only the in-network cost sharing. Finally, the new law created an arbitration process that kicks in if the insurer and provider dispute the payment rates and takes the consumer out of the negotiation. "So if the new law works well, patients should not only save money, they could be relieved of some complicated claims-filing paperwork," said Karen Pollitz, a senior fellow for health reform and private insurance at KFF. A few caveats Although the No Surprises Act is relatively comprehensive for out-of-network bills, some notable exceptions could result in large bills for consumers, said Loren Adler, associate director of the University of Southern California-Brookings Schaeffer Initiative for Health Policy. One glaring omission is that charges associated with using a ground ambulance to get to a hospital in an emergency are not covered. A 2021 Peterson-KFF Health System Tracker analysis found that half of emergency ground-ambulance rides resulted in an out-of-network charge for those with private health insurance. Featured Fact-check Instagram posts stated on October 10, 2022 in a post “Premature babies are at a much higher risk of injury from immunizations than full-term babies.” By Andy Nguyen • October 13, 2022 It’s also important to note that politicians often use the term "surprise bills" as shorthand for out-of-network bills. Certain large medical bills that consumers receive for in-network care may be "surprising" to them, but, technically, they won’t fit under the No Surprises Act if they’re not an out-of-network bill. "There are certainly plenty of things that are surprises in the medical system," said Adler. "Such as people don’t realize they have a deductible, and that’s a surprise. Or your insurance company denies a claim, and that’s a surprise." This can be confusing to consumers who receive a bill that has nothing to do with what the No Surprises Act was designed to address. For instance, consumers can still be subject to huge fees because of hospital overcharges or insurer mistakes, as shown in many stories in the KHN Bill of the Month series. Still, the four health policy experts we consulted told us that Biden’s statement was mostly accurate. "My general reaction is that it’s broadly correct," said Benedic Ippolito, a senior fellow and health care expert at the American Enterprise Institute. "But it’s not quite true to say that there are bills that you don’t need to worry about anymore." Consumers should still beware There are a couple of other sticking points in the No Surprises Act that could mean patients still end up with a large or surprising medical bill. Currently, the interim final rule implementing the No Surprises Act leaves some medical facilities — including urgent care centers, birthing centers, hospice, addiction treatment facilities, and nursing homes — off the list of places covered by the law. One other issue: Facilities can ask patients to sign a prior written consent that waives their rights under the No Surprises Act in certain situations; this allows patients to be charged out-of-network prices for procedures. Medical providers are not allowed to ask patients to sign the form for emergency care or for services in which the patient doesn’t choose the doctor. "That’s not to say that there is absolutely zero risk," said Matthew Fiedler, a fellow with the USC-Brookings Schaeffer Initiative for Health Policy. "Probably the scenario I am most worried about is post-stabilization care following emergency care." Fiedler said that could mean an out-of-network facility would be able to charge a patient at out-of-network rates if it received the prior written consent and showed that the patient could have traveled to an in-network facility; or, perhaps, for certain services in which the patient doesn’t choose the doctor. Even in those cases, the provider would have to get patients to sign a form they may not understand in which they waive their rights and put themselves at risk of getting an out-of-network bill they weren’t expecting. "That’s not impossible, but I think it’s probably also not trivial," Fiedler said. "So, all things considered, I think we are talking about really unusual scenarios." Even so, it’s important for consumers to be aware that while the No Surprises Act will protect them from most out-of-network bills, they could still receive other types of surprising bills because the U.S. has such a complex health care system. While effective, the law is not infallible. Our ruling Biden declared that because of the No Surprises Act, which took effect in January, millions of Americans will no longer have to worry about unexpected medical bills. It’s estimated the NSA will protect against 10 million surprise bills a year. Although it’s true that consumers are now shielded from many out-of-network bills, which are often termed "surprise bills" by lawmakers, patients still could end up with other types of large and unexpected medical bills. Biden’s statement is a bit too general and sweeping and needs clarification and additional context. We rate this claim Mostly Tru

The Keystone XL pipeline "would have produced 830,000 barrels of oil per day, more than enough to offset what we import from Russia. As Russia pressed its invasion of Ukraine, President Joe Biden faced accusations at home that he had made the United States more dependent on Russian oil. The attacks came in social media posts, on television and, in at least one instance, in a paid ad from the House office of Rep. Jake LaTurner, a Kansas Republican who is seeking re-election to a second term. In the ad, which began running on Facebook and Instagram on Feb. 25, the day after the invasion, LaTurner stated: "President Biden canceled the Keystone XL Pipeline on his first day in office. This project would have produced 830,000 barrels of oil per day, more than enough to offset what we import from Russia." The ad draws a misleading relationship between Russian imports and the Keystone pipeline project. RELATED VIDEO: Keystone not quick or certain offset In May 2021, the U.S. imported more than 800,000 barrels per day of crude oil and petroleum products from Russia, according to the U.S. Energy Administration. But the latest figures show a general trend downward and that by October 2021, the figure was 595,000. 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 Keystone XL pipeline would have been able to carry up to 830,000 barrels of oil every day, the figure used in LaTurner’s ad. LaTurner’s office cited reports showing the two figures. But the pipeline would have required years of construction and likely faced legal challenges, so it couldn’t have solved today’s demand needs. Even in the future, there would be no certainty that the pipeline could produce a net increase of 800,000 barrels a day. The purpose of the pipeline was to transport oil from Canada that is currently being transported some other way. And, in any event, producers would be under no obligation to sell that oil to the U.S. Biden on Jan. 20, 2021, his first day in office, used the power of the executive branch to cancel the Keystone, which would have transported crude oil from the Canadian province of Alberta to Steele City, Neb., where it would connect with another leg stretching to Gulf Coast refineries. From there, refined petroleum products could be sold either in the U.S. or to foreign buyers. LaTurner represents Kansas’ 2nd District, which covers the Topeka area and points south. The other major candidate for the seat is Democrat Patrick Schmidt, a former U.S. Navy intelligence officer. Campaign watchers rate the race as solid or safe Republican. Our ruling LaTurner said in an ad: The Keystone XL pipeline "would have produced 830,000 barrels of oil per day, more than enough to offset what we import from Russia. President Biden's energy agenda has strengthened Putin at the expense of hard-working Kansans." The transport capacity of the Keystone XL pipeline, which Biden canceled, would have been about 830,000 barrels per day — more than the amount of oil being imported to the United States from Russia. But it’s not as simple as substituting one source for the other. The pipeline would have required years of construction and likely faced legal challenges, so it couldn’t have solved today’s demand needs. Even in the future, there would be no certainty that the pipeline could produce a net increase of 800,000 barrels a day, rather than just transporting oil from Canada that is currently being transported some other way. Nor would producers be obligated to sell that entire amount to the U.S. We rate the statement Half Tru

“We have doubled our (oil) imports from Russia in the last year. During an appearance on "Jesse Watters Primetime," Fox Business Network host Maria Bartiromo explained how brewing conflict between the U.S. and Russia could affect American consumers. Bartiromo said that U.S. dependency on Russian oil imports would cause gasoline prices to continue rising. The United States is "reliant on Russian oil. We have doubled our imports from Russia in the last year," Bartiromo said on Feb. 22. "No question why President Biden is begging OPEC and others to pump more oil." While the U.S has increased the amount of oil it imports from Russia in the past year, the raw numbers indicate that Bartiromo’s claim overstated the extent of such growth. Russia became a more significant source of oil for the U.S. after the U.S. placed economic sanctions on Venezuela in 2019. In the absence of oil from Venezuela, U.S. oil companies turned to Russia for supplies. The most recent data from the U.S. Energy Information Administration shows that the U.S. increased its oil imports from Russia by an average of 154,000 barrels per day in the first 11 months of 2021. The U.S. imports two types of oil from Russia: crude oil and refined products such as gasoline and kerosene. Last June, the U.S. imported 848,000 barrels per day of crude oil and refined petroleum products from Russia. This increase resulted in Russia edging out Mexico to become the second-largest foreign oil supplier to the U.S. in 2021, behind only Canada — which accounts for almost half of U.S. oil imports. Historically, this is a notable increase — about 28% — but it is far from double. When we asked the Fox Business Network about Bartiromo’s remarks, a spokesperson pointed to the growth in crude oil imports alone. The U.S. more than doubled its crude oil imports from Russia, to about 208,000 barrels a day in the first 11 months of 2021, from 76,000 barrels a day in 2020. But Bartiromo’s broader point was about the extent of U.S. reliance on Russian oil, which remains fairly modest. Russia accounted for only about 3% of overall U.S. crude oil imports in 2021 — a 2 percentage point increase from 2020. The bulk of the oil the U.S. imports from Russia is refined petroleum products, not crude oil. The growth in imports of refined petroleum products from Russia in the past year has not been as steep. The U.S. imported an average of 487,000 barrels per day in 2021, according to the EIA, up from 465,000 barrels a day in 2020. "It’s a big increase," said Mark Finley, fellow in energy and global oil at Rice University's Baker Institute. "But it’s still a small number, and it's irrelevant because it's a global marketplace." Russia is the third-largest oil producer in the world. The country’s invasion of Ukraine fueled concern that there would be a disruption to the global energy supply. Amid the uncertainty, the global oil benchmark initially swelled to $105 a barrel before easing down to $99.08. In the United States, the national average for a gallon of gasoline jumped to $3.61 from $3.33 a month ago, according to AAA. The long-term effects of Russia’s invasion on the global oil supply remain to be seen. "It is very difficult to say at this point what the impact will be," said Dean Baker, senior economist for the Center for Economic and Policy Research. "Whether prices go much higher will likely depend on whether Putin decides to cut the export of oil or if it gets put on the West's list of sanctioned items." Our ruling Bartiromo said the U.S. doubled its oil imports "from Russia in the last year." 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 latest data from the EIA doesn’t back her up. The U.S. increased its Russian oil imports by about 28% last year. That’s a notable increase, but it’s not double. Bartiromo has more of a point when looking at only crude oil imported from Russia in 2021, which has more than doubled. But Russia accounted for about 3% of overall U.S. crude oil imports in 2021 — a 2 percentage point increase from 2020. We rate this claim Mostly Fals

The United States buys "206,000 barrels of oil a day" from Russia but "shut down domestic oil production a year ago. A Facebook post claims the United States should restart its domestic oil production to replace the loss of crude oil it bought from Russia amid the country’s increased hostilities against Ukraine. The Feb. 19 post uses a still image from the 2008 movie "Marley & Me" featuring the actor Owen Wilson. Below the still image is a block of text mentioning the possibility of the United States going to war with Russia. "Considering how we buy 206,000 barrels of oil a day from them, if I was running this country and had shut down domestic oil production a year ago, I'd be starting that up again pretty darn quick," the text reads. "I wonder why we're not doing that." Although the post was made prior to Russia’s Feb. 24 invasion of Ukraine, it’s still an apparent reference to the increased hostilities between the two countries and the possibility of the U.S. being drawn into the conflict. 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 chance of the U.S. going to war is low as President Joe Biden announced Feb. 24 American forces "will not be engaged in the conflict with Russia in Ukraine." While the post doesn’t cite where it got the figure from, the federal Energy Information Administration reported the U.S. did receive 206,000 barrels of crude oil a day from Russia in October 2021. However, that number is fairly miniscule when placed in the larger context of U.S. oil imports. Crude oil is the largest source of energy imported into the U.S., according to the EIA. The U.S. imported around 7.86 million barrels of petroleum products, including crude oil, per day in 2020 from about 80 countries. Around 5.88 million barrels, or 75% of imported petroleum products, was crude oil, the EIA reported. Complete statistics for 2021 were not available from the EIA. The top five sources of imported petroleum in 2020 were Canada, Mexico, Russia, Saudi Arabia and Colombia, the federal agency reported. 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 Canada accounted for 52% of the imported petroleum, with 4.13 billion barrels per day coming into the U.S. from the north in 2020. Of that amount, 3.59 million was crude oil. Russia on the other hand, accounted for only 7% of the petroleum brought into the U.S. for 2020, with only 540,000 barrels per day. Of that amount, 76,000 barrels were of crude oil, according to the EIA. Historical importation data from the EIA also shows the amount of petroleum and oil the U.S. receives from Russia fluctuates and has not been a steady source like Canada. The Facebook post also claims the U.S. ended its domestic oil production a year ago, but provides no source for the information. The claim might be a misrepresentation of an executive order issued by Biden on Jan. 27, 2021, pausing any new federal oil and gas lease sales on government-owned land and waterways, "pending completion of a comprehensive review and reconsideration of Federal oil and gas permitting and leasing practices." However, a federal judge struck down the order that June, saying only Congress has the authority to pause oil and gas leasing, The Washington Post reported. Oil production remains unphased in the U.S., even when the order was in effect, and the federal government was on track this year to auction off oil and gas drilling rights on more than 1.5 million acres of public land, the Post reported. The EIA also reported earlier this year that domestic crude oil production is expected to top 12.4 million barrels per day by 2023, surpassing pre-pandemic levels. Our ruling A Facebook post said that the United States buys "206,000 barrels of oil a day" from Russia but "had shut down domestic oil production a year ago." The post gets the number of barrels right, but the U.S. has not shut down domestic production. Domestic oil production is on track to surpass pre-pandemic levels. Oil imports from Russia to the U.S. are only a small fraction of the country’s total imports. We rate this claim Mostly Fals

Sen. Ron Johnson has been “rewarding companies that outsource to China. Candidates and third-party groups have seized on China as a theme in their advertising in the runup to the 2022 primaries. In some ads, candidates vow to get tough on China; in others, candidates are painted as too cozy with the nation. A TV ad from the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee takes the latter approach in targeting Republican U.S. Sen. Ron Johnson in swing-state Wisconsin. The ad makes a variety of attacks on Johnson, including one that claims he has been "rewarding companies that outsource to China." It’s the same type of attack that Democrats failed in making during Johnson’s second Senate campaign in 2016. But the committee, which works to elect Democrats to the Senate, refers only to Johnson’s support of former President Donald Trump’s 2017 law, the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, which had many provisions. Experts said it’s not clear that the law caused U.S. companies to move jobs to China. "The bill overall does not encourage offshoring," even though "it’s often portrayed that way," said Thornton Matheson, a senior fellow at the Tax Policy Center. The law has no provision specific to China, he said, and U.S. multinational corporations still must pay foreign income taxes. Menzie Chinn, a professor of public affairs and economics at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, said, "There is debate whether the international provisions of the law actually increased offshoring. Some say absolutely it didn’t, but I think in general there’s no strong evidence one way or the other." Attack references Trump’s 2017 tax law The ad includes a footnote to a Jan. 8, 2018, New York Times news story about the 2017 law. A committee spokesperson told us Johnson’s vote for the law is the basis of this attack. Highlights of the law include: tax cuts in income tax rates for individuals; doubling the standard deduction, so that fewer taxpayers have to itemize in order to reduce their tax burden; additional child tax credits; and fewer estates being subjected to the estate tax; income tax cuts for every income group in 2019, though with the benefits flowing disproportionately to wealthier taxpayers; a reduction in the top corporate rate from 35% to 21%. The New York Times story cited in the ad did not mention China, but it said the law "could make it attractive for companies to put more assembly lines on foreign soil." That’s because one provision made income made by American companies’ overseas subsidiaries subject to U.S. taxes that are half the rate applied to their domestic income, the story said. The Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee cited data indicating that U.S. companies moved thousands of jobs to China after the tax law was adopted. Featured Fact-check Instagram posts stated on October 25, 2022 in an Instagram post The documentary “2,000 Mules proves” Democrats “cheated on the 2020 elections.” By Jon Greenberg • October 28, 2022 But Chris Edwards, director of tax policy studies at the libertarian Cato Institute, said the data don’t indicate whether the tax law was the reason for the job moves, and there is no indication how many jobs moved back to the United States because of the law. "One purpose of reducing the U.S. corporate tax rate was to encourage factories and multinational headquarters to move here. The rules before the law encouraged headquarters to move abroad. The law mainly solved that problem," he said. "Perhaps some companies shifted jobs to China, but perhaps other companies shifted jobs here from Canada or Germany," he added. "It’s complex — each multinational faces different incentives based on their particular industry, whether they are research-intensive, whether they earn a lot of foreign royalties, and many other factors." The DSCC also cited a provision of the law that allows companies to escape U.S. corporate taxes on foreign earnings if those earnings are smaller than 10% of their tangible foreign assets. But Garrett Watson, senior policy analyst of the Tax Foundation, said the tax changes to foreign income for multinational firms did not significantly change their tax burden overall. "Most of the reduction in the tax burden for U.S. multinationals came from lowering taxes on domestic income through changes like the lower corporate tax rate," he said. Johnson’s campaign said the ad "is a weak attempt to distort the pro-America, anti-Communist China record" of Johnson’s tenure in the Senate. Wisconsin race seen as competitive The Wisconsin race is rated by campaign watchers as a tossup or as leaning Republican. It’s one of the contests that could determine which party controls the Senate, now split 50-50. No major candidates are running for the GOP nomination against Johnson, a businessman who is seeking a third term, in Wisconsin’s Aug. 9 primaries. The Democratic candidates include Lt. Gov. Mandela Barnes; state Treasurer Sarah Godlewski, Tom Nelson; the county executive for Outagamie County; and Alex Lasry, an executive with the Milwaukee Bucks National Basketball Association team. Our ruling A Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee ad said Johnson has been "rewarding companies that outsource to China." The only evidence cited was Johnson’s vote for a 2017 GOP tax law that included many provisions, including a variety of tax breaks for individuals as well as some for companies with foreign operations. The law does not contain a provision specifically for China. Moreover, experts said there is no evidence the law incentivized U.S. companies to move jobs to China. We rate the statement False. RELATED: No evidence for Senate hopeful McCormick’s claim that China created COVID-19 RELATED: In race for open US Senate seat in Missouri, fact-checking a PAC attack on Eric Schmitt over China RELATED: In primary for Texas governor, a misleading claim about Greg Abbott and investing tax money in Chi

A photo showing young children saluting troops was captured in Ukraine in 2022 A viral image of two young children watching Ukrainian troops drive by on tanks has ricocheted across the internet as the country’s forces work to resist an invasion from Russia. The children are holding hands as the tanks roll by. One, wearing a pink jacket, is seen holding a stuffed animal. The other, a toy gun slung across his shoulder, is saluting the soldiers. The photo is a real image and no doubt elicits real emotions. But it also does not depict the conflict currently playing out in Ukraine. It’s been miscaptioned online. Reverse image searches show that the original image dates back to 2016. Posts sharing the photo as though it were current have spread across Twitter, Facebook, Reddit and image sharing services like Imgur. One post came from U.S. Rep. Adam Kinzinger, R-Ill., a Republican lawmaker who serves as a lieutenant colonel in the Air National Guard. Various social media posts shared the same 2016 image as though it depicted a scene in Ukraine in 2022. 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 "This photo brought tears to my eyes," another post shared on Facebook said. "Two young Ukrainian children sending off soldiers to fight the Russians." 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 photo is watermarked to Ukrainian photographer Dmitry Muravsky. Muravsky shared the photo on Facebook in 2016, and so did Ukraine’s Ministry of Defense. Later that year, the Ministry of Defense announced that Muravsky, a volunteer photographer, had been dismissed from his position amidst accusations that he had staged photos. The photo gaining attention now has also been blown up into a memorial in the Luhansk region of Ukraine. The memorial was captured in several recent Associated Press photographs. Our ruling Social media posts claim that a viral image, which shows two young children holding hands and saluting troops, was captured in Ukraine in 2022. But the photo traces back to 2016. We rate these posts Fals

"It was revealed in court” on Feb. 23, 2022 “that Tory Lanez DNA WAS NOT found on the weapon in the Meg Thee Stallion case. A high-profile court case where one rapper stands accused of shooting another is the subject of social media speculation. A viral Feb. 23 post on Facebook says, "It was revealed in court a few moments ago that Tory Lanez DNA WAS NOT found on the weapon in the Meg Thee Stallion case." The post is a screenshot of a Feb. 23 tweet by DJ Akademiks, which has since been deleted from Twitter. The post was flagged as part of Facebook’s efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about our partnership with Facebook.) At a Feb. 23 pre-trial hearing for Lanez — charged in the 2020 shooting of Megan Thee Stallion — no one said that his DNA was not found on the weapon. A transcript from the hearing indicates that Lanez’s attorney said, "We are in the process of actually retaining an expert with respect to DNA," according to a tweet by Rolling Stone reporter Nancy Dillon. "It is our hope that we will be able to review and confirm the (Los Angeles Police Department’s) analysis, which from our standpoint was favorable." But the "precise nature" of the LAPD analysis and its results were not disclosed or described, Dillon wrote in a follow-up tweet. "There is a discovery protective order on this case, so it's not public." The Los Angeles County District Attorney’s Office told a news organization, "We believe the evidence substantially supports the charges and allegations and that evidence will be borne out in court." 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 Lanez is charged with one count of assault with a semiautomatic handgun and one count of carrying a loaded, unregistered firearm in a vehicle. In July 2020, Megan, whose real name is Megan Pete, attended a party at Kylie Jenner’s house with Lanez, and later that night, Megan was shot. Initial reports indicated conflicting information about what had unfolded. "The Los Angeles police have not named a suspect or explained her injuries in detail," the New York Times reported in late July 2020. "The police would not even confirm whether the injuries were gunshot wounds." In October 2020, Lanez was charged in connection with the shooting. Our ruling A Facebook post says, "It was revealed in court" on Feb. 23, 2022 "that Tory Lanez DNA WAS NOT found on the weapon in the Meg Thee Stallion case." At a Feb. 23 pre-trial hearing for Lanez no one said that his DNA was not found on the weapon. Lanez’s attorney said they were in the process of retaining a DNA expert, and that the LAPD had done a DNA analysis. The nature and results of that analysis were not disclosed. We rate this claim False

Video shows a Ukrainian fighter pilot shooting down a Russian plane. A 22-second video circulating on Facebook shows a plane being shot mid-air on a sunny day. The caption says it might be a Ukrainian MiG-29 fighter pilot nicknamed the "Ghost of Kyiv" shooting a Russian plane out of the sky. "Air fighting continues," reads a Feb. 25 Facebook post that shared the video. "Ukrainian mig-29 takes down russian su-35. Is this the ‘ghost of Kyiv’ which allegedly took down 6 Russian warplanes single handed?" The video is one of many Facebook posts about the so-called Ghost of Kyiv being shared amid Russia’s invasion into Ukraine. This video post was flagged as part of Facebook’s efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about our partnership with Facebook.) It remains unclear whether such a pilot even exists. But some claims, like this one, are easily disproved. The video shared on Facebook is a simulation that was created in the video game Digital Combat Simulator, a free online game. The stated goal is to "offer the most authentic and realistic simulation of military aircraft, tanks, ground vehicles and ships possible," according to the DCS World website. A person on YouTube with the username Comrade_Corb uploaded the short clip on Feb. 24. "This footage is from DCS, but is nevertheless made out of respect for ‘The Ghost of Kiev,’" the video description said. "If he is real, may God be with him; if he is fake, I pray for more like ‘him.’" The video’s title on YouTube also indicates the video is a simulation: "GHOST OF KIEV | dogfight between Ukrainian MiG29 and Russian Su27 simulated in DCS World." 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 (Screenshot from YouTube) As the YouTube user acknowledged, it remains unclear if the famed Ukrainian pilot is real. Unconfirmed reports suggested that the Ghost of Kyiv was responsible for downing six Russian planes on the first day of the invasion. Bolstering the claims, the Ukrainian Armed Forces reported that five Russian aircraft and a helicopter were shot down on Feb. 24. The Russian military denied those reports. Aviation experts have said it is doubtful a single fighter pilot could down six planes in a day. Former Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko and other officials have referenced the Ghost of Kyiv in social media posts, further fueling speculation that the fighter pilot is real. Ghost or no ghost, the video some social media users shared claiming that it showed a Ukrainian MiG-29 taking down a Russian Su-35 is not real. The clip shows a video game simulation, not the fighting in Ukraine. We rate the video False. RELATED: Don’t fall for these hoaxes about Russia’s invasion of Ukraine RELATED: These video clips do not show Russia’s attack on Ukraine. They’re simulations from video game

Actor Steven Seagal spotted among Russian special forces in Ukrain Podcast host Joe Rogan has come under fire in recent months for spreading misinformation about COVID-19 on his popular Spotify podcast "The Joe Rogan Experience." On Feb. 28, Rogan shared, then deleted, a fake story on Facebook and Instagram that said actor Steven Seagal was spotted among Russian special forces outside an airport in Kyiv after that country invaded Ukraine. "If I had to guess the plot of this (expletive) up movie we’re living through I would say we are about 14 hours from the arrival of the aliens," Rogan wrote in his since-deleted Facebook post. The post showed a screenshot of a supposed CNN tweet with a photo of the action star in military gear with a gun and several soldiers behind him. The caption said that "Intelligence agencies around the world have spotted American actor Steven Seagal among Russian special forces positioned around the outskirts of Gostemel airfield near Kyiv captured by Russian airborne troops." The post was flagged as part of Facebook’s efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. Other people shared similar images across social media. (Read more about our partnership with Facebook.) But the CNN story and tweet was fabricated, a spokesperson for the news network told PolitiFact. The image is a screenshot of Seagal in the movie, "Cartels," Newsweek fact-checkers reported. Rogan, after several fact-checkers debunked the post, took down the post and followed up with another post explaining that he took it down because "it was parody, which isn’t surprising, but honestly it wouldn’t be surprising if it was true either." 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 He shared a screenshot of a 2017 Washington Post headline, which read, "Amid Putin ‘bromance,’ Steven Seagal banned from Ukraine as national security threat." That article said that Seagal was banned for five years because he "committed socially dangerous actions ... that contradict the interests of maintaining Ukraine's security." Seagal does indeed have ties to Russia. The 69-year-old actor was born in Michigan, but was granted Russian citizenship in 2016. In June 2021 he joined "A Just Russia For Truth," a pro-Kremlin political party, CNN reported. Seagal spoke about the current conflict in Ukraine with Fox News Digital on Feb. 28, saying, without evidence, that he believes "an outside entity" is "spending huge sums of money on propaganda to provoke the two countries to be at odds with each other." In 2018, the actor was appointed as a "special representative on U.S.-Russia humanitarian ties," according to the Russian Foreign Ministry. In May 2021, Reuters reported that Seagal traveled to Venezuela as a representative of Russia to give a samurai sword to President Nicolas Maduro, who called Seagal his "brother" and said they "talked about mutual friends like the president of Russia, Vladimir Putin, because of his interest in protecting forests." In response to criticism about Rogan giving a platform to guests who shared misinformation about COVID-19, Spotify began adding a content advisory to any content about the pandemic, sending listeners to a page it said would provide facts and information from trusted sources. Spotify did not return a request for comment for this story. Our ruling Rogan shared, then deleted, a screenshot of a fake CNN story that said actor Steven Seagal was spotted among Russian special forces in Ukraine. CNN said the story was fabricated, and Rogan took down the post, saying that it was "parody" but that "it wouldn’t be surprising if it was true either." Alas, it was not true. We rate this claim Fals

"In 2020, more journalists were killed in Mexico than in any other country in the world. In a Feb. 16 meeting of the U.S. Senate Committee on Foreign Relations that had been dedicated to U.S.-Colombia relations, U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, demanded details on not just the Biden administration's stance on Colombia but on Mexico too. Cruz said he was "deeply concerned about deepening civil unrest in Mexico and the breakdown there of civil society." Cruz read off a series of dire statistics and expressed concern for politicians and journalists being killed there. Regarding journalists, Cruz said, "In 2020, more journalists were killed in Mexico than in any other country in the world." Cruz isn't alone in his concern. Secretary of State Antony Blinken tweeted similar concern on Feb. 22 for "the high number of journalists killed in Mexico this year," as five Mexican journalists were killed in the first six weeks of the year. We took a look at this statistic. Is Cruz right, and why are there so many press freedom violations in Mexico? Data on journalists killed worldwide Cruz's office pointed to articles by the Guardian and The Associated Press, which reported 2020 data from the Committee to Protect Journalists. The Committee to Protect Journalists, a New York-based independent nonprofit, tracks press freedom violations worldwide as part of its mission to defend journalists' right to inform the public. It has three decades of data on journalists and media workers killed worldwide. In 2020, 49 journalists were killed. Independent investigators for the organization work to confirm whether that journalist was targeted for their work, Natalie Southwick — the organization's Latin America and the Caribbean Program Coordinator — told PolitiFact Texas. The "unconfirmed motive" category in their data means the case has a potential link to journalism but the Committee is still investigating. There were 32 journalists whose deaths were confirmed to be tied to their jobs. Of the 49 journalists killed worldwide in 2020, nine journalists were in Mexico — more than any other country, according to the organization. Of the 32 journalists killed with a confirmed motive — such as death during a dangerous assignment or murder — Afghanistan and Mexico each saw five journalists killed. Four of these Mexican journalists were murdered and one was on a dangerous assignment. 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 Southwick said there are many reasons why a journalist might be targeted. Generally, the journalists most at risk are in smaller cities and towns who may be reporting on drug cartels or local government corruption. Increasingly, reporters covering environmental issues and immigration also are under threat. "Not necessarily journalists who work for the big outlets in Mexico City or some of the other capitals, but people in smaller cities and towns where their faces are really well known, where everyone kind of knows each other. People know their schedules. And the mayor that you're reporting on is someone who might live up the street from you," Southwick said as example. These smaller city journalists often have access to the fewest resources to protect themselves, Southwick said. Targeting smaller city journalists isn't specific to Mexico; there are similar patterns in Honduras and Brazil, for example. It can be difficult to confirm that their deaths were tied to their work because people are afraid to go on the record to share what they know about these deaths, Southwick said. The New York-based nongovernmental organization Human Rights Watch noted in its 2022 World Report that the danger posed to journalists in Mexico is on par with war zones like Syria and Afghanistan for journalists. "Authorities routinely fail to investigate crimes against journalists adequately, often preemptively ruling out their profession as a motive," Human Rights Watch reported. Cruz also said, Mexico "alone counted for almost a third of the journalists killed" based on the Guardian article's conclusion from the data. However, a member of the Committee to Protect Journalists wrote that the Guardian had compared all journalists killed in Mexico (whose deaths had both confirmed and unconfirmed motives) to the overall number of journalists who died by a confirmed motive. Only 16% of journalists' killings with a confirmed motive, and 18% of all journalists killed, were in Mexico in 2020. So Cruz was right that more journalists were slain in Mexico in 2020 than in any other country. And while the statistic Cruz cited was from 2020, press freedom is an ongoing issue for Mexican journalists. "Looking broadly at the environment for the press, by far it's the deadliest country in this hemisphere and one of the most dangerous countries in the world for the press, and that's been the case for several years running now," Southwick said. Our ruling Cruz said in a Feb. 16 Foreign Relations committee meeting while also noting the deaths of politicians, "In 2020, more journalists were killed in Mexico than in any other country in the world." Data from the Committee to Protect Journalists backed this claim. We rate this as Tru

“NATO (under direction from the United States) is violating previous agreements and expanding eastward. Two days before Russia invaded Ukraine with an assault that intelligence officials had warned was coming, conservative commentator Candace Owens insisted that the U.S. was "at fault." "NATO (under direction from the United States) is violating previous agreements and expanding eastward," Owens said in the Feb. 22 tweet, which directed her more than 3 million followers to remarks from Russian President Vladimir Putin that she said showed "what’s actually going on." Owens’ comment echoed a grievance claimed by Putin and other Russian leaders regarding the West’s negotiations with the Soviet Union after the Cold War. The subject of the grievance is whether the U.S. and its Western allies promised the Soviet Union during negotiations over the reunification of Germany that they would not allow NATO to expand its membership east of the Cold War border. The question has fueled decades of debate and disagreement over what was said around those negotiations, what was meant by it all, and whether Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev and other leaders received certain assurances regarding NATO’s expansion beyond East Germany. But even historians who argue that the Soviets were led to believe that NATO would not expand farther to the east told PolitiFact Owens’ statement is more wrong than right. No binding, legal agreement ever codified the terms that Putin’s camp — and Owens — now say were violated. "Such an agreement was never made," NATO says in a fact page on its website, one of multiple pages that addresses the Russian allegations. "NATO’s door has been open to new members since it was founded in 1949 — and that has never changed." Negotiating German reunification After the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989, a divided Germany and the four powers that had occupied it since World War II were discussing whether the country should be reunified. The treaty they signed in 1990 extended NATO into East Germany, which had been zoned to the Soviet Union. To appease the Soviets, it also granted the territory a "special military status" that ruled out the stationing of foreign NATO forces there. The agreement said nothing about NATO’s ability to expand farther east, a process that began with the admission of Poland, the Czech Republic and Hungary as members in 1999. Subsequent agreements, like the NATO-Russia Founding Act in 1997, also made no mention of a prohibition on eastward expansion. "I know of no agreement signed by the United States, Germany, Britain, France or any NATO member that foreswore NATO enlargement," said the Brookings Institution’s Steven Pifer, who was the deputy director of the State Department’s Soviet desk at the time the 1990 deal was struck. "This claim (from Owens) is factually incorrect," added John Lough, an associate fellow at Chatham House, a London-based think tank, who served from 1995 to 1998 as NATO’s first representative based in Moscow. "NATO never made a commitment to Russia not to enlarge." The source of controversy, however, is centered around statements made during the negotiations by Western leaders — particularly James Baker, the U.S. secretary of state, and German Foreign Minister Hans Dietrich Genscher. U.S. President George H. Bush signs an arms-reduction treaty as Secretary of State James Baker, left, talks with Germany's Hans Dietrich Genscher in Paris on Nov. 19, 1990. (AP) "Not shift 1 inch eastward" One key statement came during a Feb. 9, 1990, meeting between Baker and Gorbachev. After explaining why the U.S. wanted the reunited Germany to stay within the framework of NATO, Baker told Gorbachev that "if we maintain a presence in a Germany that is a part of NATO, there would be no extension of NATO's jurisdiction for forces of NATO 1 inch to the east." "I put the following question to (Gorbachev)," Baker recounted in a letter to German Chancellor Helmut Kohl. "‘Would you prefer to see a united Germany outside of NATO, independent and with no U.S. forces, or would you prefer a unified Germany to be tied to NATO, with assurances that NATO’s jurisdiction would not shift 1 inch eastward from its present position?’" U.S. Secretary of State James Baker, left, looks on while Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev gestures during their meeting at the Kremlin, on Dec. 16, 1991 in Moscow. (AP) Those comments, along with similar remarks from Baker’s European allies, like Genscher and Kohl, were part of what researchers at George Washington University’s National Security Archive called a "cascade of assurances" offered to the Soviets. But Baker and other officials involved in the events have denied that the conversation ever turned on expanding NATO to other countries. 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 comments, they say, were made in the context of the German reunification debate. Talk of NATO’s expansion to the rest of Europe never came up, in part because the Soviet Union and its associated Warsaw Pact were still intact. And in any event, those assurances were not baked into the final U.S. position and agreement around "special military status," they say. "There was a discussion about whether the unified Germany would be a member of NATO, and that was the only discussion we ever had," Baker told CNN during a 2009 interview. "There was never any discussion of anything but (East Germany)." Other figures have said that assurances were made, including Jack Matlock, the last U.S. ambassador to the Soviet Union, and Robert Gates, the deputy national security adviser at the time. Gates said the Soviets "were led to believe" NATO would not expand eastward. Gorbachev has sent mixed messages. On one occasion, he insisted that he was promised NATO would not "move 1 centimeter further east." In another interview in 2014, he said the question never came up, though he added that NATO’s eventual expansion was "a violation of the spirit of the statements and assurances made to us in 1990." He said: "The topic of ‘NATO expansion’ was not discussed at all, and it wasn’t brought up in those years. I say this with full responsibility. Not a single Eastern European country raised the issue, not even after the Warsaw Pact ceased to exist in 1991. Western leaders didn’t bring it up, either." Scholars have landed on both sides of the debate. Some, like Lough and Harvard University’s Mark Kramer, who wrote about it in 2009, have argued that the idea of a no-NATO-enlargement promise is a "myth." Other interpretations say the question is more complicated. "At one extreme, there’s a position you sometimes hear from the American side, that none of this ever came up, it’s a total myth, the Russians are psychotic," Johns Hopkins University’s Mary Sarotte, the author of a book examining the issue, told the New Yorker. "On the other end, you have the very adamant Russian position: ‘We were totally betrayed, there’s no doubt about it.’ Unsurprisingly, when you get into the evidence, the truth looks to be somewhere in between." When Russian President Boris Yeltsin protested NATO’s expansion, President Bill Clinton’s administration asked the German foreign ministry to look into the matter. The ministry reported that Yeltsin’s complaint was formally wrong, but it said it could understand "why Yeltsin thought that NATO had committed itself not to extend beyond its 1990 limits," according to the Guardian. Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev on Dec. 20, 1990 in Moscow. (AP) Why Owens’ claim is misleading, regardless To support her argument, Owens shared via Twitter an 2016 op-ed that Joshua Shifrinson wrote for the Los Angeles Times. Shifrinson, an associate professor of international relations at Boston University, wrote that while no formal agreement restricted NATO’s expansion, Baker and other diplomats had offered the Soviets verbal assurances that NATO would not enlarge to the east. In an interview with PolitiFact, Shifrinson said that he still holds the same view, and that a new document he recently discovered in the British National Archives supports that case. The record, from 1991, quotes a German official as telling British and American policymakers, "We had made it clear during the 2+4 negotiations that we would not extend NATO beyond the Elbe (a river in Germany). We could not therefore offer membership of NATO to Poland and the others." But Poland joined NATO in 1999. The reason that was allowed is the same reason why Owens’ statement about NATO "violating previous agreements" is misleading: whether or not assurances were made, the West did not tie NATO’s hands with any formal agreement. !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"); "Candace Owens’ statement is more fiction than not," Shifrinson told PolitiFact. "No. 1, NATO as an organization did not make this commitment. No. 2, it wasn’t an agreement." "There is a legitimate point to say that the U.S. offered assurances to the Soviets that NATO would do something, but that is not the same thing as saying NATO offered an agreement," Shifrinson continued. "NATO is not violating, and it never offered an agreement." None of that justifies Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, he added. Marc Trachtenberg, a professor emeritus from the University of California, Los Angeles, has summarized the research on the NATO-enlargement-promise debate. His writing also argued that U.S. officials made assurances to the Soviets that they ultimately reneged on. But in an email to PolitiFact, he also took issue with Owens’ use of the word "agreement." "What we had here were purely unilateral statements made by high U.S. and German officials," Trachtenberg said. "Strictly speaking, this does not show there was an ‘agreement’ … I think the term ‘tacit understanding’ is a better way to put it." Our ruling Owens said, "NATO (under direction from the United States) is violating previous agreements and expanding eastward." There is an ongoing historical debate over comments that Western leaders, including Baker, made during post-Cold War negotiations, and whether what they said amounted to assurances that NATO would refrain from welcoming in countries closer to modern-day Russia. But NATO as an organization made no such pledge, and the formal agreement signed at the end of those negotiations said nothing about the alliance not expanding eastward. We rate this claim Mostly Fals

Build Back Better “would be a huge payday for Chinese manufacturing” and “would fill our streets with cars made with Chinese parts. President Joe Biden was attacked in three Facebook ads that claimed his Build Back Better bill would enrich China financially through trade. The ads were run by Stand Up To China, a Tampa, Florida-based advocacy group. Taken together, the ads claimed that the legislation "would be a huge payday for Chinese manufacturing" and "would fill our streets with cars made with Chinese parts." James Andrew Lewis, a senior vice president at the centrist Center for Strategic and International Studies, said the group's claim is "playing fast and loose with words." He is a former diplomat who directs the center’s Strategic Technologies Program. "When you buy an iPhone, most of the money goes to Apple but about 6 cents on the dollar goes to Chinese companies that do assembly or make parts. So does buying an iPhone help China?" David Dollar, an expert on China’s economy at the centrist Brookings Institution, said that none of the financing in the Build Back Better Act that passed the House goes to China. It is targeted to pre-K education, child care, health care, housing and clean energy, he said. The House approved a version of the Build Back Better Act in November. No action has been taken in the Senate. The House version of the bill would spend $1.75 trillion over 10 years, according to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office. Provisions include $400 billion to fund child care and preschool, $200 billion for child tax credits and $200 billion for four weeks of paid family and medical leave. Saying that the bill would be a huge payday for Chinese manufacturing "is a wild exaggeration," said Derek Scissors, an expert on the Chinese economy at the right-leaning American Enterprise Institute. 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 "Chinese statistical authorities put the value-added of Chinese manufacturing at $4.9 trillion last year. That is probably inflated, but $4.3 trillion is a reasonable floor," he said. "Any benefits for China from Build Back Better would hardly be noticeable in comparison." About $555 billion in Build Back Better would fight climate change. More cars in the U.S. made with Chinese-made parts is possible, but far from certain, Scissors said. "If the U.S. wants to do green car production at the lowest possible cost, Chinese-subsidized parts would go into those cars," Scissors said. "Of course, since we don't yet know what Build Beck Better actually is," he said, noting no final legislation has been adopted, "we could choose not to focus on cars or we could accept higher costs for the sake of not depending on China for parts." Stand Up To China did not respond to a phone message we left. Our ruling The Stand Up To China group claimed that the Build Back Better legislation "would be a huge payday for Chinese manufacturing" and "would fill our streets with cars made with Chinese parts." Experts said there is no evidence that the bill would be a financial boon to China. Most of its spending is aimed at domestic priorities, including child care and child tax credits. We rate the statement Fals

“Republican leadership has not been clear about whether they support Rep. Ramthun’s illegal and undemocratic resolution” on the 2020 election A rift is growing among state Republicans over the handling of former President Donald Trump’s 2020 election loss in Wisconsin. State Rep. Tim Ramthun, a Republican from Campbellsport who has pushed election conspiracy theories, jumped in the governor’s race in February 2022 and is angling to revoke Wisconsin’s 10 electoral votes for President Joe Biden. (Nonpartisan attorneys for the Legislature say this is impossible, and courts, recounts, reviews and an audit have confirmed Biden won the state.) In doing so, Ramthun has made enemies of GOP leaders who have rebuffed his efforts. Ramthun’s latest defeat came Feb. 17, 2022, as an Assembly committee unanimously rejected his proposal to revoke the electoral votes. Democrats on the committee forced a vote in an effort to make Republican lawmakers take a public stand on the issue, the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel reported. A few days later, Assembly Democratic Leader Greta Neubauer of Racine said as much on Twitter. "Republican leadership has not been clear about whether they support Rep. Ramthun’s illegal and undemocratic resolution," Neubauer tweeted Feb. 21, 2022. "Now, every Wisconsinite can know where the Assembly’s leaders stand on the integrity of our elections." But both of the Assembly’s top dogs — Speaker Robin Vos of Rochester and Majority Leader Jim Steineke of Kaukauna — had already condemned Ramthun’s maneuver prior to the committee vote. Let’s break it down. Vos, Steineke and others have shot down Ramthun’s resolution Ramthun first put forth a proposal to pull back Wisconsin’s electoral votes in November 2021. Steineke, who chairs the Assembly’s rules committee, shot it down, saying there wouldn’t be action on the resolution because it didn’t follow the law. When Ramthun proposed it a second time at the end of January, Steineke again said the committee wouldn’t take it up. "Rep. Ramthun just attempted to pass an Assembly resolution to recall WI’s presidential electors. Not only is it illegal, it’s just plain unconstitutional," Steineke tweeted. "As chair of the Rules Committee, there is ZERO chance I will advance this illegal resolution. #EndofStory." Vos made waves when he disciplined Ramthun Jan. 20, 2022, stripping the lawmaker of his only staffer after he falsely accused Vos of signing a deal with attorneys for former Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton to authorize ballot drop boxes. He told reporters at the time that no one agrees with Ramthun’s claim that Wisconsin could revoke its electoral votes. 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 "There are some who believe — there’s one who believes — that we somehow have the right (to withdraw electoral votes) even though every lawyer that we have worked with in Wisconsin says we cannot undo the 2020 elections," Vos said. "You know, Rep. Ramthun has that belief. That’s his right. But I think that what we’re focusing on is not the past. We are looking at the past to learn from it." In a response to a request for backup or the claim, Neubauer’s communications director Sidney Litke acknowledged Vos has said the resolution was illegal, but argued he hadn’t answered whether he supported it. She pointed to his oversight of former state Supreme Court Justice Michael Gableman’s review of the 2020 election as evidence that Vos tries to "walk the line" between Republicans who believe election conspiracy theories and those who don’t. But Neubauer’s claim wasn’t about Vos’s broader actions on elections, it was about Ramthun’s resolution in particular. And it would be hard to argue that he’s been unclear on his support of something he told reporters won’t work. So the two lawmakers whom most people would consider leaders of the Assembly both said previously they did not agree with Ramthun’s resolution. But so did other members of Assembly leadership. The day Vos stripped Ramthun of his staffer, Assembly leaders issued a joint statement saying both Ramthun and his staffer were spreading misinformation. "With the exception of one person, credible attorneys everywhere have come up with the same legal theory: We do not have the authority to decertify the 2020 election," the statement said. Along with Steineke, six other Republican members of Assembly leadership signed on to the statement, including Speaker Pro-Tempore Tyler August of Lake Geneva, Assistant Majority Leader Kevin Peterson of Waupaca, Caucus Chairman Tyler Vorpagel of Plymouth, Caucus Vice-Chair Cindi Duchow of Delafield, Caucus Sergeant at Arms Sam Kerkman of Salem and Caucus Secretary Jesse James of Altoona. Six members of the state’s Joint Finance Committee joined them. Neubauer’s aide also pointed to a Feb. 20, 2022 appearance from Senate Majority Leader Devin LeMahieu, R-Oostburg on Capital City Sunday in which the senator said no one can know whether Biden’s win in Wisconsin was legitimate. But he too said what Ramthun is seeking is an impossibility. Our ruling Neubauer said Republican leadership hadn’t been clear about whether they supported Ramthun’s impossible quest to pull back Wisconsin’s electoral votes. While Republican leaders have largely followed the GOP line on other election issues, Vos, Steineke and others have clearly said the Ramthun’s resolution is illegal and can’t work, and every member of the Assembly leadership team signed on to a statement disagreeing with the approach. 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' });

A 2022 video shows “Ukrainian and Russian soldiers face to face. Footage of soldiers firing shots into the air as hundreds of unarmed people march toward an airbase in Belbek, Crimea, is being shared on TikTok as Russia invades Ukraine. "Ukrainian and Russian soldiers face off in big battle border," one post sharing the footage wrote. "#Ukrainian and #Ryssland Soldiers face to face," another post said. This footage was posted over 12 times on TikTok and viewed on the platform more than 20 million times as of Feb. 25. But it does not show a scene from the Russian invasion. It is seven years old. BBC News Turkey shared the footage on Youtube on March 4, 2014. 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 According to the BBC article, the video depicts pro-Russian troops who seized an airbase firing "warning shots" to prevent some 300 unarmed Ukrainian soldiers from approaching. The tense standoff occurred as Russia annexed Crimea in 2014. We rate claims that the footage depicts the current conflict between Russia and Ukraine Fals