Explanation: In a wide-ranging interview on CBS’ “60 Minutes,” President Donald Trump repeated several false and misleading claims, while putting a new twist on some of them.

Illegal immigration, NATO, North Korea, nuclear weapons, Russia investigation, trade,

In a wide-ranging interview on CBS’ “60 Minutes,” President Donald Trump repeated several false and misleading claims, while putting a new twist on some of them:The president also repeated his false claim that the administration’s “zero tolerance” policy that caused the controversial separation of families at the Southern border was “the same as the Obama law.” He again wrongly stated that the U.S. pays “almost the entire cost of NATO to protect Europe,” and he overstated the U.S. trade deficit with China. In his interview with CBS’ Lesley Stahl, the president repeated his unsubstantiated claim that China interfered in the 2016 U.S. election (“I think China meddled too”) and offered a new twist regarding Russia’s role during the presidential campaign. He falsely claimed Russia “wouldn’t be able to help me at all,” even if he had sought out the U.S. adversary for help.Trump, Oct. 14: Do you really think I’d call Russia to help me with an election? Give me a break. They wouldn’t be able to help me at all. Call Russia. It’s so ridiculous.The special counsel’s investigation into the 2016 election is ongoing. But, contrary to the president’s claim, there is evidence that Russia helped Trump’s election chances in multiple ways.In July, special counsel Robert S. Mueller III filed an indictment against 12 members of a Russian military intelligence agency known as the Main Intelligence Directorate of the General Staff, or GRU. The officers “engaged in a sustained effort to hack into the computer networks of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, the Democratic National Committee, and the presidential campaign of Hillary Clinton, and released that information on the internet under the names ‘DCLeaks’ and ‘Guccifer 2.0’, and through another entity,” a Justice Department press release said.“The object of the conspiracy was to hack into the computers of U.S. persons and entities involved in the 2016 U.S. presidential election, steal documents from those computers, and stage releases of the stolen documents to interfere with the 2016 U.S. presidential election,” the indictment said.For example, WikiLeaks, identified as “Organization 1″ in the indictment, released Clinton Campaign Chairman John Podesta’s emails on Oct. 7 less than an hour after the Washington Post reported that Trump once bragged about groping women. “In order to expand their interference in the 2016 U.S. presidential election, the Conspirators transferred many of the documents they stole from the DNC and the chairman of the Clinton Campaign to Organization 1,” the indictment said. “The Conspirators, posing as Guccifer 2.0, discussed the release of the stolen documents and the timing of those releases with Organization 1 to heighten their impact on the 2016 U.S. presidential election.”In addition to the damaging releases of hacked emails, three Russian organizations and 13 Russian nationals were indicted in February for their role in an extensive pro-Trump social media advertising campaign.The indictment alleges that the Internet Research Agency, a Russian-based online propaganda company, oversaw the pro-Trump influence campaign, which was financed by Russian oligarch Yevgeniy Prigozhin, a man described as “Putin’s cook” or “Putin’s chef,” and his two companies, Concord Management and Consulting LLC and Concord Catering. “From at least April 2016 through November 2016, Defendants and their co-conspirators, while concealing their Russian identities and ORGANIZATION affiliation through false personas, began to produce, purchase, and post advertisements on U.S. social media and other online sites expressly advocating for the election of then-candidate Trump or expressly opposing Clinton,” according to the indictment, which referred to the Internet Research Agency as the “organization.”Colin Stretch, Facebook’s general counsel, told a Senate panel last year that “approximately 126 million people may have been served content from a Page associated with” the Internet Research Agency. At the same hearing, Sean J. Edgett, Twitter’s acting general counsel, said the company identified 36,746 automated accounts, known as bots, that “generated approximately 1.4 million automated, election-related Tweets, which collectively received approximately 288 million impressions.”In addition, Internet Research Agency mobilized Trump supporters for political rallies, focusing on so-called “purple states like Colorado, Virginia & Florida,” according to the indictment, quoting from documents, such as emails and private Facebook messages, obtained during the investigation. Trump, who lost the popular vote by nearly 3 million votes, captured the Electoral College votes and the election by narrowly winning in key swing, or “purple,” states, such as Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin.In a Jan. 6, 2017, report, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence said “Russian President Vladimir Putin ordered an influence campaign in 2016″ to “undermine public faith in the US democratic process, denigrate Secretary Clinton, and harm her electability and potential presidency,” as well as “help President-elect Trump’s election chances.” The report “did not make an assessment of the impact that Russian activities had on the outcomes of the 2016 election,” because it “does not analyze US political processes or US public opinion.”As he has done in the past, Trump boasted about the relationship he has developed with North Korean leader Kim Jong Un. The president said Kim “understands denuclearization and he’s agreed to it.”That’s not quite accurate. Trump and Kim issued a joint statement in June saying that North Korea will “work toward complete denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula,” but they have yet to come to an agreement on the terms of a denuclearization plan.“He doesn’t wanna go to war, and we don’t wanna go to war, and he understands denuclearization and he’s agreed to it,” Trump said. “And you see that, he’s agreed to it. No missiles.”When Stahl pressed Trump, asking if North Korea “may actually be building more missiles,” Trump responded, “Well, nobody really knows.”Stahl: But is it true that they haven’t gotten rid of a single weapon, and they may actually be building more missiles-Trump: They want to–Stahl: With nuclear–Trump: And I will tell you that they’re closing up sites.Stahl: But–Trump: Setting it up.Stahl: Is what I said true, that they haven’t? Gotten–Trump: Well, nobody really knows. I mean, people are saying that. I’ve actually said that.Stahl: What? That they’re still building missiles, more missiles?Trump: We don’t really know, Lesley. We really don’t know. But I assume–Stahl: Suspect that?Trump: Let’s say the answer is yes, okay? In the meantime, they haven’t tested a missile. They haven’t tested a rocket. They definitely haven’t done a nuclear test because you know about them real fast. It sort of moves the earth. And we have a relationship now.The Washington Post, citing unnamed U.S. officials, reported on July 30: “Newly obtained evidence, including satellite photos taken in recent weeks, indicates that work is underway on at least one and possibly two liquid-fueled ICBMs at a large research facility in Sanumdong, on the outskirts of Pyongyang, according to the officials, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to describe classified intelligence.” That was a month and a half after the meeting between Trump and Kim Jong Un.A day after the Post article was published, Fox News confirmed the reports “that North Korea is now busy once again building more missiles.”“U.S. officials telling Fox News, this is a quote, ‘It is business as usual’ at a factory near Pyongyang that builds ICBMs capable of reaching the United States,” reported Greg Palkot, a senior foreign affairs correspondent for Fox News Channel. “Analysis of satellite photography showing, quote, ‘There is no evidence of a halt of work.’ We’re talking about the long-range liquid-fueled missiles used three times last year in test firings that could, potentially, reach the East Coast of the United States. Recent work activity visible.”Michael E. O’Hanlon, a senior fellow and director of foreign policy research at the Brookings Institution, told us, “President Trump is technically correct because we aren’t completely sure about what is built at each factory or whether construction will conclude for each missile now in the works.”“But,” he told us via email, “the circumstantial evidence is very strong that North Korea does in fact continue to build more long-range missiles (and nuclear weapons) and that should be the presumption upon which US policy is based.”Kelsey Davenport, director for nonproliferation policy at the Arms Control Association, said in an email to FactCheck.org: “North Korea did not commit to halt missile production, so it is very likely that Pyongyang is continuing to build nuclear-capable ballistic missiles. Kim Jong Un made clear in his January 2018 address that the mass production of nuclear warheads and ballistic missiles was a goal for the upcoming year. Recent satellite imagery indicating activity at missile production sites also points toward the conclusion that North Korea continues to quantitatively expand its nuclear arsenal.”During the Jan. 1, 2018, address referenced by Davenport, Kim Jong Un said, “The nuclear weapons research sector and the rocket industry should mass-produce nuclear warheads and ballistic missiles.”Joshua Pollack, a senior research associate at the James Martin Center for Nonproliferation Studies at the Middlebury Institute of International Studies at Monterey and editor of the Nonproliferation Review, told us that for the the Washington Post story, some of his CNS colleagues used commercial space imagery and confirmed that “the Sanumdong missile R&D facility is active, although they could not independently establish what activities were underway inside.”“The intelligence community clearly has better resources than CNS does, so I assume that they are in a better position to make such determinations,” Pollack added.“Separately, CNS did independently discover this year that North Korea has pressed ahead with the construction of new production facilities at a different plant, the Chemical Materials Institute, which makes missile components.” Pollack said.That’s consistent, he said, with statements Kim Jong Un made during a visit to the site in August 2017.“So by the available indications, we have concluded that missile production is underway, consistent with plans declared in Kim Jong Un’s Jan 1, 2018 speech — the same speech in which he unveiled his new diplomatic initiative,” Pollack said.The president repeated several claims we’ve written about before:On the administration’s “zero tolerance” border policy: Trump repeatedly claimed that the “zero tolerance” policy that caused the controversial separation of families at the Southern border was “the same as the Obama law. You know, Obama had the same thing.” That’s misleading. There were some family separations under previous administrations, experts told us when we examined this claim in June, but there was no blanket policy to prosecute parents and, therefore, separate them from their children. Members of the Trump administration have claimed that there’s nothing new about this, yet a new policy was announced by Attorney General Jeff Sessions in early April to refer all illegal border crossings for criminal prosecution. Since children can’t be held in adult detention facilities, the referral resulted in parents being separated from their children.The Department of Homeland Security wasn’t able to provide any figures for family separations under the Obama administration, but it said 2,342 children had been separated from their parents from early May to early June of this year. Trump signed an executive order to end the separations in late June.On NATO: Trump said the United States “shouldn’t be paying almost the entire cost of NATO to protect Europe.” It doesn’t. The U.S. pays just over 22 percent of NATO’s commonly funded budget, which includes civil, military and security investment expenses and is funded through a formula based on the gross national income of each member country.The president has repeatedly complained about indirect NATO spending — what each country spends on its own national defense. But even there, the U.S. share of total defense spending by member countries in 2017 was 67 percent, according to inflation-adjusted figures from NATO.On Christine Blasey Ford: The president was asked why, in a campaign-style rally in Mississippi, he had made fun of Christine Blasey Ford, the woman who accused then-Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh of sexually assaulting her when they were in high school. Trump said: “What I said is the person that we’re talking about didn’t know the year, the time, the place.” But that’s incorrect. Ford testified before the Senate Judiciary Committee that the alleged attack occurred in the summer of 1982 in an upstairs bedroom of a house in the Bethesda area of Maryland. What she could not provide was the exact date and address of the alleged attack.On trade with China: Trump repeated his claim that China takes “$500 billion a year out of the United States in the form of trade and others things.” As we wrote in “Trump’s Numbers,” the goods-and-services trade deficit with China was $351 billion for the most recent 12 months on record. In 2017, the U.S. trade deficit in goods with China was $376 billion, but that was partially offset by a trade surplus of $40 billion in services, such as software, legal and communications services, for a total trade balance of negative $336 billion.Correction, Oct. 18, 2018: The story was updated to reflect that CNS used commercial space imagery to confirm activity at the Sanumdong missile R&D facility for the Washington Post story, not after it ran.


A form of strep infection is capable of affecting the nasal cavity and face.

Explanation: In the case of the Idaho family, iGAS was diagnosed in time, and the pictured boy was reportedly recovering well.

On 26 February 2019, an Idaho couple shared a cautionary tale on Facebook that had garnered over one million shares by the time of this reporting. The post detailed a strange mark on their son’s face and the ultimate diagnosis of a form of strep throat that infects the sinuses:  It is true that a form of strep throat is capable of infecting the nasal passage, sinuses, face, and even other organs. Clinically known as invasive Group A Streptococcal Disease, or iGAS, it occurs when the bacteria responsible for common strep throat infect other organ systems or the bloodstream, as described by the Middlesex-London Health Unit of London, Ontario, which experienced an outbreak of iGAS cases in 2017: Group A streptococcus (GAS) are common bacteria which can cause skin and throat infections, including strep throat and cellulitis … While the majority of GAS infections cause relatively mild illnesses like strep throat and impetigo, sometimes the bacteria can become invasive and can cause more serious and potentially life-threatening infections when they get into muscles, blood and other organs. Symptoms of an iGAS infection depend on the site of the infection and may include fever, chills, sore throat, dizziness, confusion, severe pain, redness or swelling around a wound or injured area. In its most severe form iGAS can result in life-threatening conditions, including necrotizing fasciitis (commonly known as a “flesh-eating disease”), myositis and myonecrosis (muscle inflammation and a “muscle eating” disease, respectively) and Streptococcal Toxic Shock Syndrome (StrepTSS), which can lead to total organ failure. Though it is extremely rare, when the latter occurs a person is at extreme risk and requires medical treatment immediately, as described by Canada’s Globe and Mail in response to the 2017 outbreak: “When strep A gets into tissue or bone — usually because a person has an open wound — it can turn deadly, and quickly. In a matter of hours, an infected person can go from having a mild fever to having flesh-eating bacteria spreading so relentlessly that the only way to stop the infection is by amputating limbs.” iGAS infections often occur in clusters and affect groups more likely to be immunocompromised, but more recent research suggests that adults and children of any age and in any medical condition can contract the disease. Nevertheless, severe iGAS infections remain quite rare, as described in the 2016 book Streptococcus Pyogenes: Basic Biology to Clinical Manifestations: [iGAS outbreaks] were first described in the United States and Europe during the mid- to late 1980s. Since then, reports of StrepTSS in adults and children have emerged worldwide. Most cases have occurred sporadically, though some clusters have been reported. The highest incidence of invasive streptococcal disease occurred in a small Minnesota community, where 26 cases/100,000 population were recorded. In addition, outbreaks have occurred in closed environments, such as nursing homes and hospitals. … Although many of the initial reports described StrepTSS in adults, children are also affected. In 2010, the incidence of invasive infection in children in Utah reached 14 cases/100,000 population. Thus, persons of all ages can be afflicted and, although some have underlying medical conditions such as diabetes and alcoholism many have no predisposing medical condition and are not immunocompromised.


Image of an anti-Semitic sign ("the real plague") was captured at a COVID-19 anti-lockdown protest in Ohio in April 2020.

Explanation: ‘The Real Plague’ Anti-Semitic Sign Spotted at Ohio Anti-Lockdown COVID-19 Pandemic Protest

On April 18 2020, a disturbing image of a purported protest sign from coronavirus anti-lockdown protests in Columbus, Ohio began circulating on Facebook, Twitter, and Reddit:Columbus, Ohio, April 18, 2020… pic.twitter.com/Q0ryJp5pOG— Wilson Dizard (@willdizard) April 19, 2020In all iterations, the image was identical. It showed a light-colored, late model minivan, in which a passenger is displaying a sign from their window. That sign depicted a blue rat, a star of David, and blue text reading “THE REAL PLAGUE.”It didn’t take long to verify the details provided in the posts. An April 19 2020 tweet from Cleveland.com carried the image, and indicated that it was taken on April 18 2020 in Columbus:An anti-Semitic sign was displayed during the protest in Columbus on Saturday. https://t.co/J6bMOFmqWd— clevelanddotcom (@clevelanddotcom) April 19, 2020An attached article reported:A photo from [April 18 2020]’s stay-at-home protest at the Statehouse is gaining traction on Twitter for its anti-Semitic message.The photograph captured two men in a minivan. One held a sign with an illustration of rodent with the Star of David on its side and the words “The Real Plague.”The protest movement against coronavirus restrictions has been a mishmash of people. Some adhere to public health officials’ guidance of distancing themselves at least 6 feet apart and wearing masks. They want to return to work. On the more extreme are others who call coronavirus a hoax.But the anti-Semitism might drown out all their messages.On April 20 2020, Columbus Jewish News reported on the protest and the sign, including an image of the same sign displayed in a different image. In that photograph, two men were outside chatting while one held the same sign:That second image also appeared in an April 18 2020 tweet by Ohio politician Rep. Casey Weinstein:Hey! A second pic of these cool dudes from today. #makethemfamous pic.twitter.com/5y8UCJuvNQ— Rep. Casey Weinstein (@RepWeinstein) April 19, 2020A circulating photograph of an anti-Semitic “THE REAL PLAGUE” sign was authentic, unaltered, and properly described. The image was captured at a COVID-19 anti-lockdown protest in Columbus, Ohio. Although a single iteration of the sign being held by a minivan’s passengers spread widely, a second photograph showed two people outside a vehicle — one of whom was holding the same sign.Comments


Chris Sununu Says drug dealers have "overdosed on purpose" to avoid prosecution.

Explanation: How did a piece of piping installed when Richard Nixon was U.S. president go without once being checked before leading to a fire that devastated the East Coast’s largest and oldest oil refinery?

New Hampshire, Drugs, Legal Issues, Crime, Chris Sununu,

That’s a question safety experts and activists are putting to regulators after the devastating fire at the Philadelphia Energy Solutions (PES) refinery in June, worried more disasters are waiting to happen in an industry reliant on old equipment. Last year, U.S. refiners processed nearly 17 million barrels of crude oil every day, the most in the country’s history as it cashes in on a boom in shale oil. But many have decades-old infrastructure, risking outages that could cost the industry billions. The PES refinery is one of nearly 30 in the United States that are more than a century old, while a Reuters review of over 100 operating U.S. refineries that process more than 10,000 barrels of crude oil a day showed they are on average 80 years old. [GRAPHIC: Aging U.S. refineries: tmsnrt.rs/33guhA8]  Refineries frequently update their systems and replace old parts, but the PES fire, along with incidents in Washington state and California earlier this decade, stemmed from equipment installed in the 1970s that had been allowed to run to failure, according to U.S. Chemical Safety Board (CSB) reports. The suspected cause of the PES explosion has raised fears about future incidents because of the leeway given to refiners for inspecting parts, and because some older equipment is exempt from more stringent standards for newly installed parts. “A lot of these refineries around the U.S. are quite old now,” said former CSB managing director Daniel Horowitz, who left the agency last year. “That doesn’t mean that every single piece of equipment dates back to the founding, but they are old and eventually all sorts of components can fail.”  The June 21 Philadelphia blaze was linked to corroded piping that had not been checked since it was installed in 1973, according to the CSB’s initial findings. The fire is still under investigation by the CSB and other public agencies. It caused a fuel leak and explosions that sent toxic hydrofluoric acid (HF) into the air and hurled debris the size of a tractor-trailer across a nearby river, the CSB’s report said. Shortly after the fire, PES filed for bankruptcy protection. Failing, decades-old equipment also sparked a 2010 Tesoro refinery explosion in Anacortes, Washington, that killed seven people, and a Chevron refinery blast in Richmond, California, two years later, according to past CSB reports. In all three cases, the failed equipment contained metal components or designs that were no longer up to industry standards, but their use did not necessarily violate regulations. Regulators offer exemptions for older components, and do not require all pieces of plant machinery to be checked. “That’s a huge problem in this sector, that a lot of codes allow grandfathered equipment to be used even if later standards would have prohibited it,” said Horowitz. The CSB report spurred a letter from top law enforcement official in 13 states, including Pennsylvania, to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), arguing against a proposed rollback of regulations aimed at preventing accidents involving chemicals such as HF. Regulators overseeing U.S. oil refinery safety, primarily the U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) and the EPA, and code-setting industry groups allow some refinery components to keep being used even if they don’t meet newer standards. The EPA and OSHA were not available for comment. The ruptured PES pipe contained levels of nickel and copper that were permitted when installed, but not under recommendations made two decades later by the American Society for Testing and Materials, now called ASTM International, that still stand, according to the CSB. That pipe elbow corroded at a faster rate than other pieces of the system. Oil industry group the American Petroleum Institute (API) has about 175 recommended codes that act as the refinery industry’s standards. The API inspection standards for HF alkylation units used in about one-third of U.S. refineries do not call for every piping component to be inspected. API spokesman Scott Lauermann said that its standard for HF units was recognized as the safest way to operate those units, having been recommended by the CSB. PES said it monitored other parts of the piping system according to industry standards, including an examination of a metal elbow near the one that ruptured, and the testing did not show high levels of corrosion. “PES would not have expected the piping to corrode at different rates because the elbows were installed at the same time and the construction specifications indicated that they were the same materials of construction,” PES vice president of strategy and business development Mark Brandon said via email. The CSB findings added to existing concerns by workers about maintenance at the PES refinery, which was already struggling financially, and in January cut back the scope of a planned large-scale maintenance project days before it was scheduled to begin. PES business agents and managers told union officials and major contractors the work would require between 1,500 and 1,800 contract workers, but that was slashed to just 300 contractors, according to five sources familiar with the plan, while pipes and other materials delivered to the plant were never used. Maintaining and inspecting equipment at refineries is required by the OSHA and EPA, but those agencies don’t tell refineries how or when to inspect. Those details are filled in by industry standards that may not have the enforcement of law. The CSB found that prior to the California and Washington fires, as well as the BP Texas City blast in 2005 that killed 15, internal and external instructions for keeping plants operating safely were either ignored or not followed correctly. That regulatory approach makes rules difficult to enforce and allows problems at refineries to go undiscovered, said Jeff Ruch of environmental advocacy group Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility. In the aftermath of the Washington explosion, a judge dismissed $2.4 million in fines against Tesoro because the state could not prove the refinery failed to comply with enforceable rules for inspection and maintenance of equipment. “In terms of, are we making sure in some sort of holistic way that these refineries are safe, there’s nothing there,” said Ruch. “There’s sort of a vacuum.”


The Obama administration left Trump with a “stockpile with a cupboard that was bare.”

Explanation: The director of the national stockpile described it as an $8 billion enterprise in November. While the stockpile had a lot of goods, it didn’t have all the needed supplies for the nationwide 2020 pandemic. Reports show that N95 masks were depleted as a result of H1N1 in 2009, and experts warned they should be replenished. Budget figures going back to 2009 show overall funding for the stockpile dropped to its lowest in 2013, to about $477 million. Allocations have grown steadily since then to a 2020 budget of $705 million.

Federal Budget, Natural Disasters, Coronavirus, Donald Trump,

President Donald Trump has repeatedly claimed that the Obama administration left him with an empty national stockpile for emergencies. "But they also gave us empty cupboards. The cupboard was bare. You’ve heard the expression, ‘the cupboard was bare.’ So we took over a stockpile with a cupboard that was bare," he said in an April 6 White House briefing. In previous briefings Trump described the stockpile as "empty." Trump is exaggerating. While the COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted shortcomings in the nation’s stockpile of emergency supplies and equipment, Trump did not inherit bare inventory. It was full of supplies, but not enough to handle this particular pandemic. Most notably, the stockpile was short of N95 masks, the supply of which was depleted following the 2009 H1N1 outbreak during President Barack Obama’s tenure. It expanded to respond to terrorism attacks, hurricanes, the H1N1 flu and ebola. While the locations of the stockpiles’ warehouses are secret, some reporters have been allowed inside, including journalists from the Washington Post in 2018. The Post wrote that there were "hundreds of thousands of shrink-wrapped boxes of medicines" and that if the medical countermeasures were laid flat they would cover more than 31 football fields. But Dara Alpert Lieberman, director of government relations for the nonprofit Trust for America’s Health, said that as large as the stockpile is, it’s always been lacking. "The Strategic National Stockpile has never been funded at adequate levels to invest in new medical countermeasures, replenish expiring products, and purchase other needed medical supplies," she said. A 2017 Health and Human Services report showed $324.5 million in replenishment contracts, more than half of that money for anthrax response and only $7 million earmarked for influenza. In November, the director of the stockpile described it as an $8 billion enterprise. "Even if the needed products are not currently held in house, stockpile experts have purchasing power to get what is needed to protect Americans," wrote Greg Burel, who retired in January. But two months later, it became clear that the stockpile didn’t have all the supplies needed for the current pandemic. One thing the stockpile clearly doesn’t have enough of is face masks. News reports found that the N95 face masks were not substantially replenished after H1N1 in 2009, the first year of the Obama administration. The Obama administration distributed 85 million N95 masks, 12.5 million regimens of antiviral drugs and 19.6 million pieces of personal protective equipment (PPE) for H1N1, also called swine flu. "The 2009 H1N1 response was the largest known response of a national stock of drugs and medical material, and it was successful," Burel wrote in 2019. But experts warned after H1N1 that the supply of masks should have been replenished. Burel told Vice News in March that federal officials were left with "horrible decisions" about how to triage spending after H1N1. "We had to trade off those funds that we had, and we chose to invest in those lifesaving drugs that would not be available from any other source, in the quantity needed, and in time," he said. "I definitely want to see my health care workers protected; that's very important. But if I'm thinking, 'Do I buy this many masks to protect this many workers, or do I buy this many medicines to keep people safe that we can't get elsewhere?' There's no easy answer here." Burel told CBS News in March that the stockpile was "very stressed." "We didn't receive funds to replace those masks, protective gear and the antivirals that we used for H1N1," he said. ProPublica found that the budget battles during Obama’s tenure after the Republicans won the 2010 election hurt the stockpile’s budget. In early 2011, Obama’s administration released a budget request for $655 million for the stockpile, an increase of $59 million including to acquire new products. But Congress ultimately allocated $534 million for the 2012 fiscal year, a 10% cut from the prior year, ProPublica found. Across-the-board cuts hit the CDC, which managed the stockpile at the time. In its budget request for 2013, for example, the administration called for a cut of about $48 million to the stockpile. The stockpile "is a key resource in maintaining public health preparedness and response; however, the current fiscal climate necessitates scaling back," the request stated. Budget figures going back to 2009 show overall funding for the stockpile dropped to its lowest in 2013, to about $477 million. Allocations have grown steadily since then to a 2020 budget of $705 million. Despite the Obama-era cuts, Ellen Carlin, a professor at Georgetown University’s Center for Global Health Science and Security, said it’s an exaggeration to state that the "cupboard was bare." Appropriations to the stockpile during Obama’s presidency, when adjusting for inflation, went up a little, down a little, and then ended up about where they started. "But those numbers don’t just reflect Obama’s requests. They also reflect congressional appropriations — under Congresses that at times were partially controlled by Republicans," she said. It’s difficult to determine what budget cuts meant for PPE since federal officials closely hold the details of the inventory, she said. While the Trump administration points the finger at Obama, Democrats have pointed the finger back at Trump, who also could have taken steps to replenish the stockpile before the current pandemic. But because of the shared executive branch-legislative branch responsibility, Carlin said, "almost everything about COVID-19 reflects a bipartisan failure across two branches of government." The Associated Press reviewed federal purchasing contracts and found "federal agencies largely waited until mid-March (of this year) to begin placing bulk orders of N95 respirator masks, mechanical ventilators and other equipment needed by front-line health care workers." While HHS said early in the pandemic that the stockpile had 13 million masks, that was only a fraction of what hospitals needed, the AP found. Masks are not the only items that federal officials sought to obtain more of for the stockpile in past years. The New York Times reported on efforts that began 13 years ago — before the Obama administration —  to buy more ventilators. That effort stalled when the company that the federal government secured to design new ventilators didn’t come through, leaving the government to start over with a new company in 2014. Trump said the Obama administration left him with a "stockpile with a cupboard that was bare." In one specific way, he has a point: N95 masks were depleted after the H1N1 outbreak in 2009, and experts warned years ago that the supply should have been replenished. However, Trump made a sweeping generalization and exaggerated when he described the stockpile as a bare cupboard. The former director of the stockpile, just a couple of months before COVID-19 cases appeared in the U.S., described it as an $8 billion enterprise, with extensive holdings of many needed items.


Flashing your car's high beams at a traffic signal will cause it to change from red to green more quickly.

Explanation: Naturally, a market has developed for transmitters that can effectively trigger traffic pre-emption systems, but the sale of such devices to non-authorized buyers has now been outlawed in most jurisdictions.

People love to hear and pass along bits of secret information that supposedly enable them to gain advantage by manipulating “the system” to their favor — whether the prize to be won is something as potentially significant as beating a breathalyzer test or keeping points off their driver’s licenses, or as trivial as being able to zip through traffic a little faster than other motorists. That in many cases people are passing along rumors about schemes that don’t work (and that they’ve never had occasion to try for themselves) doesn’t seem to slow their proliferation. A slightly different dynamic is at work in the claim that flashing your high beams at a traffic signal will cause it to change from red to green more quickly:  Many motorists have tried it and discovered that it seemingly performs as advertised, thereby documenting the validity of the claim. What they don’t realize, however, is that they’ve stumbled upon another example of the post hoc, ergo propter hoc fallacy. This strategy works, drivers assume, because stop signals are equipped with sensors that respond to the flashing of strobe lights mounted on emergency vehicles. These traffic pre-emption systems automatically interrupt normal traffic light cycling to allow ambulances, fire trucks, and police cars to pass through intersections more quickly and safely by providing them with a steady stream of green lights while keeping opposing traffic halted with red lights. The adventurous motorist thus tries to trick these sensors by rapidly flashing his car’s high beams as he approaches a red-lighted intersection, and voilà — the light turns from red to green. It works! Of course, in many cases the perceived results are nothing more than coincidence — the light was already about to cycle from red to green, and the flashing high beams had no effect. Also, in many places advance sensors are placed in the road well ahead of controlled intersections. When these advance sensors detect the passage of an automobile, they place a “call” to the next traffic signal; if others sensors detect no vehicles waiting at the next cross street ahead, the signal changes from red to green to allow the oncoming car to flow through the intersection smoothly. Since advance sensors are generally placed at a point about the same distance away from intersections as the point where drivers start flashing their high beams to influence upcoming signals, it can easily appear to the unknowing that such flashing does indeed cause lights to change. A problem with a cause-and-effect belief in this scenario is that many intersections aren’t equipped with strobe-detecting sensors, so motorists end up flashing their lights at traffic signals that don’t care. And even when drivers happen upon strobe-enabled signals, the sensors are set to detect lights flashing at a rate so rapid (in the neighborhood of 14 flashes per second) that a human working a manual headlight switch couldn’t possibly imitate it. Moreover, some traffic pre-emption systems are now activated not just by an on-off alternation of lights, but by a specific pattern of flashing.


The federal government is “preparing to mobilize the national guard,” “dispatch them across the US with military” and “announce a nationwide 1 week quarantine for all citizens.”

Explanation: There is no evidence that the federal government is set to announce a lockdown. White House officials have repeatedly said it’s not something they’re considering at this time. The National Guard and the military have been dispatched to some areas of the country at the request of states. The chain message misinterprets the Stafford Act, which activates FEMA and authorizes aid for state and local governments.

Facebook Fact-checks, Coronavirus, Chain message,

In the past few days, several state and local governments have taken drastic action to try to contain the spread of the 2019 coronavirus. In California, Gov. Gavin Newsom announced March 19 a statewide "shelter in place" order. On March 20, New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo ordered all nonessential businesses to keep their employees home. And Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis has ordered all restaurants to close except for takeout and delivery. One popular chain message takes these measures a step further. "Homeland security is preparing to mobilize the national guard. Preparing to dispatch them across the US with military," reads the message, which claims it was sent by the Federal Emergency Management Agency and the Department of Homeland Security. "They will also call in 1st responders. They are preparing to announce a nationwide 2 week quarantine for all citizens, All businesses closed." (Screenshot from iMessage) A reader sent us the message on March 19. Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., tweeted a screenshot of a very similar text on March 20. "Here we go again with the ‘my friend whose dad works in the government’ rumors," he said. We’ve seen several other chain messages that ly claim the federal government is set to announce a nationwide quarantine to stem the spread of COVID-19. So we checked this one out, too. The text contains kernels of truth, but its primary message is bogus. There is no evidence that the federal government is set to announce a lockdown like the ones seen in France, Italy and Spain. While the National Guard and the military have been dispatched to some areas of the country hard-hit by the coronavirus, neither the Department of Homeland Security nor FEMA have ordered them to. And the message misinterprets the Stafford Act, a federal disaster relief law that activates FEMA and sends aid to state and local governments. President Donald Trump has repeatedly said he is not considering a nationwide quarantine or curfew. He first answered a question about it during a March 16 press conference and reiterated his point in another briefing the following day. "It’s a very big step. It’s something we talk about, but we haven’t decided to do that," he said. More recently, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo mentioned misinformation about lockdowns during a March 20 press conference. "Just urge everyone as they’re seeing information — information that at one time suggested that somehow this virus emanated from the United States Army, information about lockdowns that are taking place — every American, indeed people all around the world, should ensure that where they turn to for information is a reliable source and not a bad actor trying to create and flow information that they know is wrong," he said. Large gathering spots were closed for 14 days and National Guard troops are delivering food to people at the request of the state. In California, nonessential businesses — such as bars, dine-in restaurants and gyms — are closed as part of the statewide lockdown. The state has also asked the U.S. Navy for a hospital ship and two mobile hospitals to help treat COVID-19 patients. State and local governments retain the power to quarantine Americans within their own borders. On the federal level, the Department of Homeland Security can screen and quarantine individuals reentering the U.S. from other countries. But forced quarantines are historically rare, and most infected people are allowed to self-quarantine. As for the Stafford Act, Trump invoked the law March 13, thereby authorizing aid for state and local governments grappling with the coronavirus and waiving certain regulations that impede access to health care. The Stafford Act is commonly used during hurricanes and does not necessitate a nationwide lockdown. The chain message is inaccurate. If you receive a chain message that you want us to fact-check, send a screenshot to [email protected].


A new Arkansas law allows rapists to sue their victims to stop an abortion.

Explanation: The bill passed the Republican-led Arkansas state Senate on 26 January 2017 with a 25-6 vote divided largely along party lines, and it was signed by Governor Hutchinson the next day. The law was slated to go into effect later in 2017, but a federal judge judge blocked its implementation via preliminary injunction at the end of July.

In early February 2017, various web sites began posting stories regarding a piece of legislation recently passed in the state of Arkansas. Those stories were typically published under misleading headlines such as “New Arkansas Law Allows Rapists to Sue Victims Seeking Abortion” and “Arkansas passes law allowing rapists to prevent victims who want an abortion”: A pregnant woman’s husband will be able to sue to prevent his wife from having an abortion, even in cases of rape and incest, under a new law that could come into effect as early as spring. The new law, Act 45 — the Unborn Child Protection From Dismemberment Abortion Act, will also allow husbands to sue doctors who carry out abortions for civil damages, as well as block terminations using injunctions. Parents and legal guardians would also be able to sue to prevent minors from having abortions, raising concerns for victims of sexual abuse and incest. The law in question, titled the Arkansas Unborn Child Protection from Dismemberment Abortion Act, essentially bans what lawmakers term “dismemberment abortions” (which the medical community refers to as “dilation and evacuation,” or D&E) by making the provision of such a procedure a felony crime. Although the law precludes family members or rapists from suing pregnant women, it does grant spouses, parents, or legal guardians the ability to sue physicians who perform the procedure for damages and obtain injunctions preventing those physicians from performing additional such procedures. JR Davis, spokesman for Arkansas Governor Asa Hutchinson, pointed to a section of the law that prevents damages from being awarded when a terminated pregnancy was the result of a criminal act: “Civil damages shall not be awarded to a plaintiff if the pregnancy resulted from the criminal conduct of the plaintiff.” Thus, a rapist cannot sue his victim and reap any benefits from doing so. Furthermore, the law excludes a woman “who receives or attempts to receive a dismemberment abortion” from civil liability. Davis also pointed out that the language in the law doesn’t enable a woman’s relatives to halt an abortion; rather, it allows them to seek an injunction that prevents “the abortion provider from performing or attempting to perform further dismemberment abortions …” The law, Davis said, was geared toward prosecuting physicians who perform the procedure rather than targeting pregnant women. The thrust of the law is that it makes it a felony for doctors to perform dilation and evacuation abortion procedures, except in cases where such a procedure is necessary to prevent death or physical maiming of the mother. Critics note that the law doesn’t allow an exception for patients to obtain the specified procedure even in cases of rape or incest. According to Davis, the law is “not a prohibition on abortion in the second trimester,” but rather a restriction on a specific abortion method. The ACLU, which plans to challenge the law in court, called it “blatantly unconstitutional” because it bans the most common — and advocates say the safest — method of abortion in the second trimester of pregnancy. Bettina Brownstein, ACLU Arkansas co-counsel on the matter, noted in a statement that: The law effectively bans abortions after 14 weeks by making the safest, medically approved procedure a felony. It interferes with best medical practices by substituting safe, evidence-based practices with political ideology … The law imposes an undue burden by placing a substantial obstacle in the way of a woman’s constitutional right to an abortion. It is clearly unconstitutional. According to the Associated Press, the new Arkansas law is similar to legislative actions taken by West Virginia and Mississippi, while related bans in Alabama, Kansas, Louisiana, and Oklahoma are on hold due to ongoing legal challenges.


Image of a COVID-19 anti-lockdown protester's sign calling to re-open "Pennslvania" and referencing "we the peaple" is not doctored or altered in any way.

Explanation: Misspelled ‘We the Peaple, Re-Open Pennslvania’ Sign

An April 21 2020 post on the Facebook page “CALL TO ACTIVISM” purportedly showed a COVID-19 protester in Pennsylvania, whose sign in part urged the re-opening of “Pennslvania,” as well as “we the peaple”:In just two days, the post was shared nearly 50,000 times. Along with text reading “Photo Credit: Miguel Marquez, CNN,” a caption on the image queried:Maybe we shouldn’t take medical advice from someone who can’t spell “people” or the name of their own state?In the photograph, a smiling woman with a red bandanna mask pushed down to expose her face and a red baseball cap on her head held a homemade, hand-lettered, poster board sign bearing a marker-drawn American flag and the following message:RE-OPEN PENNSLVANIAGive me liberty or give me death# We the peapleThe same image minus the yellow text appeared on Reddit’s r/facepalm on April 21 2020:How stupid can someone be? from facepalmIn a submission (“How stupid can someone be?”), the image was zoomed in on the woman and the sign. “Pennsylvania” and “People” were added to the image over the purported misspellings. Additionally, the image’s creator critiqued the flag drawn in marker on the sign:41/50 stars 8/13 stripesOn April 22 2020, the version in the Facebook post was shared to r/Fuckthealtright:The Stupid leading blind.. Trumpies, really what did we expect. from FuckthealtrightPosts like the ones above were part of a larger social media trend involving discourse about protests against non-pharmaceutical interventions for COVID-19, such as lockdowns and quarantines, and the content of (or purported misspellings on) anti-lockdown protest signs. Other notable or viral signs were widely shared not for their implicitly poor spelling, but for the sentiments they expressed:COVID-19 ‘Sacrifice the Weak’ Reopen Tennessee Protest SignOr, in another notable instance, anti-Semitic:‘The Real Plague’ Anti-Semitic Sign Spotted at Ohio Anti-Lockdown COVID-19 Pandemic ProtestBoth signs in the above posts were authentic, unaltered, and correctly dated; both appeared during the same wave of astroturfed protests that began in mid-April 2020.Initially, we were unable to locate any iterations of the image in the news, or shared anywhere other than social media sites mocking the purportedly poor spelling of the sign’s creator.However, in discourse on one of the threads, we located what appeared to be the source of the photo in an image set tweeted by Marquez. The image was not cropped, and its different layout was unlikely to have been matched by reverse image searches.Marquez tweeted three images at 9:46 AM on April 20 2020; the image of the woman with the sign was the second of the three images seen in the tweet:Protesters against stay at home orders gathering in Harrisburg PA. Feels much like a re-re-election rally. pic.twitter.com/z468r0dK4e— Miguel Marquez (@miguelmarquez) April 20, 2020In addition to the inclusion of the image with its misspellings visible as it originally appeared, Marquez provided a date and location for the depicted COVID-19 anti-lockdown protest:Protesters against stay at home orders gathering in Harrisburg PA. Feels much like a re-re-election rally.The misspelled COVID-19 anti-lockdown protest sign was authentic and unaltered, and the creator of the sign did indeed misspell both “Pennsylvania” and “people” as “Pennsylvania” and “peaple.” Marquez captured the image at an April 20 2020 protest in Harrisburg.We contacted CNN’s Miguel Marquez for more information about the image, but we have not yet received a response.Comments


An anti-seat belt law advocate was killed in automobile accident.

Explanation: "There seems to be a die-hard group of non-wearers out there who simply do not wish to buckle up no matter what the government does."

Despite the vital role automobile seat belts have played in saving thousands and thousands of lives over the last several decades, there is still a group of drivers and passengers who are determined not to wear them, for any number of reasons: because they find them too uncomfortable or confining, because they don’t believe in their efficacy, because they’ve heard that wearing seat belts might actually cost them their lives in certain types of accidents, or because they resent as an unwarranted intrusion of government into private life the plethora of laws now requiring motorists to buckle up. In this vein, we note with a sense of both sadness and irony a couple of articles recently called to our attention. The first is a 17 September 2004 editorial published in the Daily Nebraskan and entitled “Individual Rights Buckle Under Seat Belt Laws,” by Derek Kieper, a 21-year-old senior at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln, in which the writer inveighed against mandatory seat belt laws, opining that “Uncle Sam is not here to regulate every facet of life no matter the consequences,” and that “Democrats and Republicans alike should stand together to stop these laws that are incongruous with the ideals of both parties.”  In the midst of his editorial he noted:  As laws become increasingly strict for seat belts, fewer people will respond positively by buckling up in response to the laws. There seems to be a die-hard group of non-wearers out there who simply do not wish to buckle up no matter what the government does. I belong to this group. Evidently his words were far more prescient than any of us might have wanted, as an article in the 4 January 2005 Lincoln Journal Star reported that Mr. Kieper not only died in a car crash, but the tragic mishap that claimed his life was the very type of accident in which seat belts have proved so effective in saving lives by preventing passengers from being ejected from vehicles:  Derek Kieper was a smart, funny, intense young man who relished a good debate and would do anything for his friends. Kieper, a 21-year-old senior at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln, died early Tuesday morning when the Ford Explorer he was a passenger in traveled off an icy section of Interstate 80 and rolled several times in a ditch. Kieper, who was riding in the back seat of the Explorer, was ejected from the vehicle. Two others in the vehicle, including the driver, Luke Havermann of Ogallala, and the front-seat passenger, Nick Uphoff of Randolph Air Force Base in Texas, sustained non-life threatening injuries. Havermann and Uphoff, both 21, were being treated at BryanLGH Medical Center West. Derek, who was thrown from the vehicle, was not wearing a seat belt, [Capt. Joe Lefler of the Lancaster County Sheriff’s Office] said. He said Havermann and Uphoff were wearing seat belts at the time. In a similar vein, in July 2011 a helmetless motorcyclist participating in a ride to protest mandatory helmet laws was killed when he was thrown over the handlebars of his motorcycle in Onondaga, New York:  Philip A. Contos, 55, of Parish, New York, was on a ride organized by the Onondaga chapter of American Bikers Aimed Towards Education (ABATE). Contos hit his brakes, began fishtailing and lost control of his 1983 Harley Davidson. He shot over the handlebars, hit his head on the pavement and was taken to Upstate University Hospital in Syracuse, New York, where he was pronounced dead. State police say evidence at the scene plus information from the attending medical expert indicated Contos would have survived had he been wearing a helmet as required by state law.


House Speaker Dean Cannon says that freshmen lawmakers account for one-third of the 120-member House, and that two-thirds of the chamber have two years or less experience.

Explanation: Dean Cannon says a majority of the state House has two years experience or less

Term limits for Florida's state representatives and senators result in a lot of turnover in Tallahassee after an election. So after the Nov. 2, 2010, election, just how many freshmen House members will there be in 2011? Republican House Speaker Dean Cannon quantified it this way in an interview with the St. Petersburg Times, which was posted on its political blog The Buzz on Dec. 8, 2010. The paragraph starts with a paraphrase:  "Cannon pointed out that freshmen lawmakers account for one-third of the 120-member House, and that two-thirds of the chamber have two years or less experience," The Buzz wrote, and then quoted Cannon: "One of the things I'm really focused on is trying to put people where they can best get up to speed and hit the ground running once we start committee meetings in January." If Cannon's math is right, that means the majority of the incoming House would have two years of experience or less -- a high number. Those are the numbers we're checking. First, some background on term limits. A Feb. 7, 2010, article in the St. Petersburg Times and Miami Herald contains some useful background about milestones in Florida's political history, including the vote in favor of term limits in 1992:  "A string of scandals in Congress spurred a national movement known as term limits aimed at driving career politicians from office. The Florida campaign is known as 'Eight is Enough' and limits Cabinet members and legislators to eight years in office; it passed with a whopping 77 percent in favor. (Ironically, it does not apply to members of Congress). The full effect wouldn't be clear until eight years later, when the eight-year clock kicked in and the state House saw rampant turnover -- 63 of its 120 members were freshmen. Term limits are blamed today for an assortment of ills, from myopia among legislators to the exaggerated influence of special interest money, lobbyists and even the media." We should note here some benefits to term limits: fresh faces may provide new ideas and at least initially could be more in touch with constituents back home. For some national perspective on term limits we turn to the National Conference of State Legislatures that provides this background on its website:  "Proposals to limit the terms of state legislators have been the subject of public policy debate since 1990, when citizen initiatives limiting the terms of legislators were passed by voters in California, Colorado and Oklahoma. Subsequently, 18 other states adopted term limits, but in four -- Massachusetts, Oregon, Washington and Wyoming -- term limits were thrown out by the state supreme courts, and they have been repealed by the legislatures in Idaho and Utah. That leaves 15 states with term limits for legislators. See our current list of states with term limits for legislators." Now back to the new faces -- and relatively new faces -- in the 2011 Legislature. First we turned to Cannon spokeswoman Katie Betta on Dec. 20, 2010, who told us she counted 82 freshman or sophomore legislators -- 44 of those freshmen -- among the 120 state representatives. Betta directed us to the state House website to check her figures. We clicked on the page of each of the 120 members of the House. Each page has some basic biographical information -- heck, even an occasional interesting tidbit such as the recreational interest of newly elected Republican member James W. "J.W." Grant of Tampa: "Most sports and anything in the woods or on the water." The pages also state when each member was first elected to the House, including past service. Here are the totals we found that we will explain in more detail below:   Elected in 2007: 5 Elected in 2008: 33 Elected in 2009: 1 Elected in 2010: 43  That puts the total elected between 2007 and 2010 at 82, so we're at the same starting point as Betta's number. Of the 43 elected this year, three had served in the House previously: Dennis Baxley (R-Ocala), 2000-2007; Gayle Harrell (R-Stuart), 2000-2008; and Irv Slosberg (D-Boca Raton), 2000-2006. Also, two of the 43 were elected in special elections: Janet Cruz (D-Tampa) on Feb. 23 and Matt Gaetz (R-Fort Walton Beach) on April 13. (Cruz and Gaetz then won re-election to full terms this fall.) We define "freshmen" as "first-year beginners," like high school or college. If we count as freshmen all 43 members elected at any time in 2010, we get a freshmen class that represents about 36 percent of the House. If we don't count Baxley, Harrell and Slosberg as freshmen -- since they've already worked through several sessions each -- then the freshmen class represents 33 percent. But wait, how should we count Cruz, who was elected Feb. 23 just before the regular two-month session started in March? And Gaetz, who was elected April 13 when that regular session only had about two weeks to go? Should they be counted as freshmen in 2011 even though they participated in votes and had their names attached to several bills in 2010? If we omit both of them as freshmen -- as well as the three who had previously served -- that would drop the percentage to about 32 percent. (For the record, Betta says Cannon also counts Mack Bernard (D-West Palm Beach), who won a special election on Sept. 22, 2009, as a freshman, even though he was active in the 2010 session -- bringing her total to 44, or about 37 percent.) Using any of those four figures -- 32 percent, 33 percent, 36 percent or 37 percent -- we are at or very close to the one-third cited by Cannon. Now what about the other part of Cannon’s description, that two-thirds of the members have two years of experience or less? We counted 33 who were elected in 2008, one elected in 2009, and 43 in 2010. That brought our total since 2008 -- two years -- to 77 members, or 64 percent. (Again, if we don’t count the three lawmakers who served previously and easily have more than two years of experience, the percentage drops to 62 percent. Either way, that's close to two-thirds.) Betta wanted us to count five lawmakers who won special elections in 2007 as sophomores because they would be starting their second two-year terms in 2011. But those five have already worked through the legislative sessions of 2008, 2009 and 2010, and we don't see them as sophomores. So is Cannon correct? He was paraphrased as saying that one-third of the 120-member House are freshmen and two-thirds have two years or less experience. We can split hairs on the experience level of  a few of them, but not enough to change his math.


Wikileaks documents reveal Hillary Clinton was gravely injured in a plane crash during a secret mission to Iran in 2012.

Explanation: Whatdoesitmean.com actively advanced many invented Clinton conspiracy theories in mid-2016, including fabricated claims that hacker Guccifer, Democratic National Committee (DNC) staffer Seth Rich, UN official John Ashe, and the father of a physician purportedly responsible for leaking Hillary Clinton’s (falsified) health records were murdered by her shadowy operatives. The bulk of the site’s conspiracies are built upon actual events or tragedies (such as the deaths of Rich and Ashe) and layered with baseless embellishments.

Politics Ballot Box, clinton health, conspiracy theories, election 2016

Back at the end of 2012, the notorious conspiracy-mongering WhatDoesItMean.com web site published a fabricated article holding that then Secretary of State Hillary Clinton had been injured, and a “top US Navy Seal Commander killed,” when her military plane crashed while she was on a secret mission to Iran to meet with Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad:  A new Foreign Military Intelligence (GRU) report circulating in the Kremlin today is saying that United States Secretary of State Hillary Clinton was injured, and a top US Navy Seal Commander killed when their C-12 Huron military passenger and transport aircraft crash landed nearly 3 weeks ago in the Iranian city of Ahvaz near the Iraqi border. Iranian intelligence agents quoted in this GRU report confirm that the C-12 Huron aircraft is still in their possession in Ahvaz, but will only admit that the plane was “forced to land because of technical problems.” The US Navy Seal member reported killed in this bizarre incident, this report says, was indentified as Commander Job W. Price who as a leader of this highly specialized American Special Forces unit protects high-ranking diplomats traveling in Middle Eastern and Asian combat zones. As usual, this was just more of the typical WhatDoesItMean.com conspiracy nuttery, spun around the recent tragic suicide of Commander Job W. Price, the 42-year-old leader of U.S. Navy SEAL Team 4, who had killed himself with a pistol while deployed in Afghanistan a few days earlier. And, as usual, the equally notorious and unreliable (but more professional looking) conspiracy-mongering European Union Times web site reprinted WhatDoesItMean.com’s fabricated article about the secret plane crash. The European Union Times‘ version of the fake article gained enough traction that it was eventually shared by a few U.S. military personnel and U.S. Department of State staffers via e-mail, prompting some confusion and chuckles among its recipients: That likely would have been the end of this fake article’s brief lifespan, except for the fact that its having been forwarded via the Department of State’s e-mail system meant it ended up being included among the archive of 30,322 e-mails sent to and from Hillary Clinton’s private e-mail server while she was Secretary of State that were released online by WikiLeaks on 16 March 2016. Shortly after Hillary Clinton collapsed at 9/11 memorial service and spurred the renewal of rumors that she was suffering from, and concealing, a major medical ailment (purportedly of a neurological nature), several fringe political sites picked up on the confluence of the 2012 article’s having recently appeared in a State Dept. e-mail leak and ran with the notion that the original four-year-old WhatDoesItMean.com fake news piece was true, that it proved that Clinton was covering up a serious plane crash injury that had left her “unconscious and bleeding profusely,” and that all of this had been “verified” by WikiLeaks: For years we have been given the story over and over again that Hillary Clinton is fine and she is perfectly healthy. The story line gradually morphed into Hillary “fell” and suffered a concussion, which then, in turn, led to brain clots. Well, color me NOT surprised but apparently that was all a lie told by a couple that wouldn’t know the truth if it bit them! WikiLeaks has released another round of emails exposing some MAJOR bombshells surrounding Hillary. In this latest batch of emails, WikiLeaks reveals that Hillary Clinton was apparently in a C-12 Huron aircraft that was forced to make an emergency landing at Ahwaz International Airport. This airport happens to be located on the border of Iran and Iraq … [a crash landing] left Hillary “unconscious and bleeding profusely” according to the reports released by WikiLeaks. The report indicates that Hillary was on some sort of secret mission and traveling with the members of Seal team 4. One of the members of that team was reportedly killed when the aircraft crash-landed. The government had previously claimed that Commander Job W. Price died of a possible “suicide.” His death was listed as a non-combat related injury. Commander Price was a leader of this highly specialized American Special Forces unit. Their mission was to protect high-ranking diplomats traveling in Middle Eastern and Asian combat zones. US military flight logs recorded by Russian air and space forces confirm that Commander Price, and other members of US Navy Seal Team 4, left their base in Urozgan Province, Afghanistan on a flight to US Naval Support Activity Bahrain where they met up with the then-Secretary of State, Hillary, and all of them transferred to the C-12 Huron and proceeded to fly to Baghdad. As we noted at the head of this article, the fantastic “secret plane crash” tale was a complete fabrication, and it appeared on WikiLeaks only because some State Department staffers had forwarded the article among themselves via-email. The article’s supposed “bombshell” contents originated with (and were reported by no source other than) WhatDoesItMean.com, of whom RationalWiki says: Sorcha Faal is the alleged author of an ongoing series of “reports” published at WhatDoesItMean.com, whose work is of such quality that even other conspiracy nutters don’t think much of it. Each report resembles a news story in its style but usually includes a sensational headline barely related to reality and quotes authoritative high-level Russian sources (such as the Russian Federal Security Service) to support its most outrageous claims. Except for the stuff attributed to unverifiable sources, the reports don’t contain much original material. They are usually based on various news items from the mainstream media and/or whatever the clogosphere is currently hyperventilating about, with each item shoehorned into the conspiracy narrative the report is trying to establish.


Explanation: Q: Did a law go into effect Jan. 30 banning “anyone” from smoking in a car “as long as there are children in the vehicle”?A: No. There is no federal prohibition, although several state and local governments previously had enacted such bans.

Q: Did a law go into effect Jan. 30 banning “anyone” from smoking in a car “as long as there are children in the vehicle”? A: No. There is no federal prohibition, although several state and local governments previously had enacted such bans. There is no law or proposed legislation at the federal level that bans smoking in cars with children present.Facebook users recently flagged a story as potentially false that was published in February on amomama.com under the headline: “Smoking in cars with children is illegal starting January 30, 2018.” They were right to be suspicious of the story.The article claims that, since the end of January, smoking in “any private vehicle” with minors present has been punishable by a $100 fine. It says the purported law is aimed at alleviating the (very real) effects of secondhand smoke.Although the story is false, it is based on a tiny kernel of truth.A link in the story leads to a news story posted by Yahoo Lifestyle about a bill, passed Jan. 30 by Alabama’s House of Representatives, that would ban smoking in cars with individuals under the age of 19 present. Violators of that proposed state law would incur a $100 fine.That does not mean that “a ban has been applied since last month,” as the article on amomama.com says. The legislation still must be approved by the state Senate, and Republican Gov. Kay Ivey would have to sign it. Even then, the law would not take effect until the “first day of the third month” following the Alabama governor’s approval, according to language in the bill.But the article does not say that it’s referring to an Alabama bill that hasn’t been enacted. Nor does it specify whether it refers to federal, state or local law.One of the last major federal tobacco-related bills to become law was 2010’s Prevent All Cigarette Trafficking Act. It did not prohibit smoking in cars with children present.On the other hand, there are eight states, as well as Puerto Rico and Guam, that already had laws to that effect prior to 2018, according to the Public Health Law Center. In addition, a number of cities and towns have passed ordinances of their own.Outside of the United States, England banned smoking in a car with kids in October 2015. The fine in the U.K. is £50, or currently about $70.Editor’s note: FactCheck.org is one of several organizations working with Facebook to help identify and label false stories flagged by readers on the social media network.Sihlangu, Junie. “Smoking in cars with children is illegal starting January 30, 2018.” Amomama.com. Accessed 20 Feb 2018.U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. “Secondhand Smoke.” Cdc.gov. 30 June 2017, accessed 20 Feb 2018.Cason, Mike. “House passes bill to ban smoking in cars with minors.” AL.com. 30 Jan 2018.“HB 26.” Alabama House of Representatives. Filed 7 Nov 2017.Public Health Law Center. “U.S. Prohibitions on Smoking in Cars with Children.” Oct 2017.“Another US City Makes It Illegal To Smoke In Cars With Kids.” WBZ CBS Boston. 19 Oct 2017.Bowdan, Ann. “Ban prevents smoking in car while driving with children.” WLKY News. 12 May 2016.Sarkar, Monica. “No smoking if the kids are in the car, says England.” CNN. 12 Feb 2015.Holyoke, Cody. “Law forbidding smoking in cars with children present passes in Schenectady.” WRBG Albany. 12 Dec 2016.Hickey, Chuck. “Girl Scouts’ push to ban smoking in vehicles with minors passes Aurora City Council.” Fox 31 Denver. 6 Feb 2018.Holl, John. “THE WEEK; Ban Is Passed on Smokingn In Cars Occupied by Children.” New York Times. 29 Apr 2007.“The dangers of second hand smoke are very, very real!” Rocklandcountygov.com. Accessed 20 Feb 2018.Associated Press. “New City Smoking Ban in Cars Proposed.” New York Times. 17 May 2017.DaRonco, Darren. “Tempe ban on smoking with kids in the car takes effect.” Arizona Republic. 22 Jun 2015.


Stem Cell Injection May Soon Reverse Vision Loss Caused By Age-Related Macular Degeneration

Explanation: While the findings described in this news release are enticing and hopeful, they were derived from animal studies, not human clinical trials. While the release eventually explains that, it went on to make crystal ball projections of being “close to a time when we can offer adult stem cells as a promising source for personalized therapies for this and other human diseases.” Research efforts to manipulate pluripotent stem cells for use in various disorders, including retinal degeneration, are widespread and some forms of stem cell therapy using cells derived from embryonic stem cells, for instance, are already in human trials. The novel source of cells for this rat study is important, but this research does not stand alone. Even a little bit of context would have helped. Macular degeneration is a serious condition affecting millions of Americans each year. It is largely a disease of the elderly who slowly lose their central vision as cells in the back of eye die. Smoking, race and genetic predisposition can also affect the onset of this condition. The damage is irreparable but if a treatment could be possible through new research, it would provide an improvement in the quality of life for many people burdened by this condition. However, raising hopes among patients for an imminent solution based on work on lab rats is troublesome; this work could be years away from human application.

Academic medical center news release,Animal research

At no time during the release is the potential cost of a possible treatment ever mentioned. That’s understandable since the work is only being done in animal models and far-removed from eventual clinical use. But the release suggests that human use is close at hand. If the procedure were ready for clinical use in humans, it would involve costly eye surgery as well as the very costly and complicated manipulation of human skin cells so that they become stem cells. While the cost of these processes will inevitably fall, it’s likely to remain substantive. Now that we’ve established that the work was done in lab rats, did the news release quantify how successful the experimental approach was? Did it give numbers about how many animals were “treated” and how many benefited? No. The release only stated: “The stem cell injection resulted in 130 days of preserved vision in laboratory rats, which roughly equates to 16 years in humans.”  But that doesn’t give any idea of the rate of effectiveness – even in rats. And equating this – at this early stage – to what could happen in humans is, well, imaginative. The release fails to mention any potential harms from the procedure, although it appears to involve piercing of the eyeball and injecting cells inside. It would also appear that the procedure requires a small slice through the cornea to release pressure within the eye from adding the stem cells. And while the eye is well-known to be one of the fastest healing of our organs, any surgery involves potential risks. While the release does point out that the cells, as they multiply, form a kind of protective layer in the back of the eye, it does not mention — as the actual research paper does — that that layer may interfere with the supply of nutrients to cells in the eye, leading to their death. Nor does the release mention the potential problem of rejection of the foreign cells, which the research paper explains. The release gave no true sense of the huge leap there may be between findings in lab rats and experiments in people. Instead, it pushed heavily the implication that humans will soon benefit. The headline literally says, “Stem cell injection may soon reverse vision loss . . .”  A co-author is quoted saying they’re “close to a time” when this approach can be used on humans. How does one compare rat vision with human vision? In the published journal article about this work, the researchers explain that they used several tests to gauge whether the animals could detect movement and other measure of “seeing.”  But humans require vision to include clarity and detail and the tests used in this research can only provide a gross measure of those factors. Finally, in some of the early Phase I human trials with other stem cell therapies, response was neither universal nor beyond the “promising” stage of improved light recognition. There was no disease-mongering of the serious problem of macular degeneration in the news release. The release includes at the end a listing of funding sources for this research and there is no information to suggest any conflict of interest. The original research paper specifically states there are no conflicts. The news release included no discussion of alternative approaches or other research being done on age-related macular degeneration. There are ongoing early clinical trials of stem cells in the treatment of AMD using cells differently derived than the ones reported here. So there are “alternatives” to this particular type of stem cell therapy that also may show promise. There are a few reports from Japan and elsewhere suggesting that there are alternatives to “bolus injections” of stem cells that may pose risks. In addition, some current federal clinical trials have found that some vitamin and mineral supplements appear to reduce the risk of late-onset of the disease by as much as 25 percent. So this is not the only work being done in this field, as the news release might suggest to some journalists or to the general public. Even a brief mention of other research would have been important context to improve public comprehension. The release suggests, through researcher quotes and other descriptions that this treatment may be just around the corner. That is clearly an exaggeration. The researchers still need more work in animal models. Then they will require FDA approval for an investigational drug. If that comes about, then substantial clinical trials in humans will be needed. All told, that could mean years of additional wor, before the procedure might be available for people. Is that how you would define “soon” or “close to a time”? We will give the news release the benefit of the doubt on this criterion. But here’s why it’s a coin toss. The release states: “This is the first study to show preservation of vision after a single injection of adult-derived human cells into a rat model with age-related macular degeneration.” That may be. There are some ways in which these particular stem cells are novel. But other stem cell approaches have been developed and in some cases are in in early phase human trials or animal tests. However, since we have already dinged this release in the “Alternatives” criterion above for failing to give that context, we’ll give it the benefit of the doubt here. The headline’s use of “may soon reverse vision loss,” Svendsen’s quote saying they’re “close to a time” of treating humans, and the cavalier referral to the “next steps” without explaining that means many more years of study, all support a rating of unsatisfactory in this category. Anytime a news release raises hopes for treatment of a now-untreatable disease, it has to live up to those expectations. This one didn’t.


Elephants think of humans as "cute," in the same manner that humans think of kittens or puppies.

Explanation: We found that tamed African elephants preferentially and favorably interact (and initiate these interactions) with humans with whom they have a special relationship. We don’t know what elephants “think” about humans, but they appear to value certain relationships they have with certain humans. Elephants nonetheless can be extremely unpredictable in their behaviors to people.

In December 2017, college student Julia Hass had an idea that turned out to be enormously popular when she posted that elephants evidently have a natural affinity for and affection toward human beings: I just learned that elephants think humans are cute the way humans think puppies are cute (the same part of the brain lights up when they see us) so pack it in, nothing else this pure and good is happening today. Hass, who does volunteer work as the social media coordinator for the American Gerbil Society, later clarified that she is not a scientist and based it off of a Google search. On 26 December 2017, Hass told us via e-mail that her search came in response to a Tumblr post: Elephants brain react to humans the same way that humans brain react to puppies:  She told us that she realized the tweet was gaining traction when she began getting repeated phone notifications: It was exhausting and anxiety-provoking and I had to mute everything pretty fast, so after the first thousand likes, I genuinely tuned out. Later that night I started getting alerts I was trending places, and my follows, which I thought would never break 1,000 in my wildest dreams, were breaking 1,500. Which was nuts. Then my friends started sending me screencaps from meme accounts like Men’s Humor. And when I tried to tweet other things, innocuous things, hoping everything would go back to normal once people realized I was very, very boring, I was suddenly breaking 100 likes. The tweet’s spread was fueled by entertainment and content-aggregating web sites, which uncritically reposted it and reported Haas’ remark as scientific fact. Hass told us she thinks the popularity of her tweet stems from people needing positivity during a time largely characterized by animus and conflict:  I saw a lot of comments that said stuff like “at least elephants think I’m cute” or “thank you, I needed this”. I described this in an unrelated blog post as “the most pleasant going viral can be”, and I stick by that. I haven’t been harassed. No men tried to explain stuff to me in the replies, or have tried to explain stuff to me since (some kind of Christmas miracle record). No one’s hit on me in DMs, threatened me, or been weird at all. Everyone’s been quite lovely, actually. A few people have even helped me raise some money for charity, too, which is nice. It is true that humans in parts of Asia have been able to tame elephants for thousands of years; as far back as 1997, the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations described the relationship between elephants and humans as “quite strange”: While most of the domestic animals now most highly attuned to man (the dog, the cat, the water buffalo, etc.) have wild forebears which are largely untameable, many wild-caught elephants quickly and easily form intimate bonds with their keepers even though their wild temperament has never been modified through selective breeding. Some elephants form such warm and affectionate bonds with man as to deceive the observer into thinking that this animal must have been made truly domestic. Many other elephants in domesticity, however, remain unremittingly wild, hostile to man and ready to kill him at every chance. Clearly, a domesticated elephant is simply a wild animal in chains — but a wild animal frequently gentle and intelligent enough to be totally trustworthy as a baby-sitter to watch over human infants. In a study published in April 2017, a team of researchers at the University of California-Davis reported variations in the types of interactions between elephants and humans at Knysna Elephant Park in West Cape, South Africa. The team recorded the ways a seven-elephant herd treated not only their handlers, but volunteers at the park and tourists. Lynette Hart, a professor at the UC Davis school of veterinary medicine and one of the report’s authors, told us:


A national four-week quarantine will start on April 1 2020, affecting the entire population of the United States.

Explanation: Will Americans Go Into a Four-Week Quarantine on April 1 2020?

In mid-March 2020,  completely unsubstantiated but frightening rumors began circulating about a four-week-long quarantine blanketing the entire United States, purportedly to begin on April 1 2020.The rumor spread from person to person in individual posts versus moving from one centralized location, often described as information originating with “the Pentagon.” Although minor details changed in some variations, certain elements remained the same:The four-week quarantine rumor spread on Twitter, often citing an “unknown source” inside the Pentagon or another agency:Supposedly we’re going on a 4-week quarantine April 1st? Erik’s birthday is April 7 so he told me to stay with him those four weeks and I said say less 🤪🤪✌🏼 pic.twitter.com/dG5qZw2ohY— 𝔸shley💜 (@ashley13felix) March 16, 2020an unknown source from the US Pentagon said starting april 1 we’ll be going on a 4 week quarantine 😐— jass ♡’s byounggon 🙁😦😘😡 (@perfectgon) March 16, 2020Ok sooo there are rumors going around about the united states having a 4 week quarantine by April 1st. This better not be true. You have like a 97% survival rate of this and a lot of people are saying it is just like a flu on steroids a bit. So can you all calm down a bit please.— Sara (@SaraM05189363) March 16, 2020They’re planning on doing a 4 week quarantine starting April 1st like wtf 🤦🏼♀🤦🏼♀— shaeli (@sj_roye) March 14, 2020Some versions of the rumor also appeared on Reddit conspiracy subreddits, such as r/conspiracyundone:Under quarantine we will stay home as much as possible. I believe you will still be able to leave your house in most cities but there will be checkpoints where you will have to show Identification. You may even be able to go to the store if any are open but you will be encouraged to stay home. You should have extra supplies and food on hand and as we can see the public is already doing this but they think it’s because of a virus. Its not.Individually circulating iterations of the four-week quarantine rumor attributed information to a “friend of a friend (FOAF)” at Homeland Security, the Air Force, or some other agency — details that created an impression the same information was emanating from various presumably credible sources. In actuality, those attributions were just features of the same rumor, added indiscriminately to add a sense of authoritative origin:Also i am hearing from friends and seeing posts about a 4 week quarantine coming and it's a lot fo rumors about "my friends fbi friend" or "someone I know in the pentagon" and it explicitly saying to stock up. This is only causing more fear and panic buying!!! Please do not share— Trev (@readytoderez) March 17, 2020There -is- a rumour -supposedly- that the Pentagon is considering attempting a 4 week self imposed quarantine. This rumor coming from a co-worker (I work in federal gov) who supposedly has a friend that works in the Pentagon. That's a MASSIVE undertaking though, & unlikely— Derty~Boi (@BoiDerty) March 14, 2020A “friend of a friend” (or FOAF) is also a common feature in folklore. As with the references to federal agencies and military branches, attributing unsourced information to a friend of a friend implies baseless rumors were obtained from a trusted source — not directly known to the teller, but known through mutual acquaintances.On Facebook, people shared versions of the same message to profiles and groups. Toggling to image results returned an array of previews for a Google Docs link often shared alongside the posts:A PDF anonymously uploaded to Google Docs was often added to the results shown here; it displayed a date of March 11 2020, but it’s not clear exactly when the message began circulating. It read:Anonymous Informant – 4 Week Quarantine to Start ~April 1stAudio Recording given on March 11, 2020: See YouTube Link: https://youtu.be/AizQ5Kx7RToTranscript of Message: Hey you guys, just wanted to give you a crucial update. So my cousin who works for the Pentagon and my aunt that lives in DC and my friend that works for the government in Knoxville… between last night and today I’ve had three people notified me that has not been announced yet but the US [entire USA] is about to go on a four week quarantine which means you cannot leave your home you can’t go to anywhere that you can do sales transactions like grocery store or shopping maybe weeds anything like that so in about two weeks one to two weeks they’re going to announce the shutdown. Once the shutdown is in place, or the warning you know everything from the grocery store is going be cleared out at this time it’s critical that you stock up on canned goods clothes and food things that you’ll be able to survive opportunities from our four weeks for toilet tissue paper towels with bigger than their supports and bleach you got to be able to feed your family.Syntax in the message was bizarre, and a link to a YouTube video was included; as of March 17 2020, that video (uploaded on March 11 2020 by a channel called “444 Prophecy News”) had been viewed nearly 100,000 times. Although the clip circulated as a video, it was in fact an audio message circulating in various forms on numerous platforms.A description for the YouTube iteration linked above indicated outright that it narrated a circulating text/email — words then transcribed on Google Docs as read above:I got this recording on an email today March 11, 2020. Person speaking is anonymous Please share and prepare best you canAgain, variations between these iterations created a false impression that numerous individuals with myriad connections to various federal agencies were spreading information from multiple sources. In actuality, the YouTube clip and the Twitter screen video below were completely identical, a single audio recording of a forwarded text or email:Listen and share US to go on a 4 week shutdown for quarantine. pic.twitter.com/57Pnz6ISqg— Postradamus (@PostUp_bbb) March 13, 2020The clips were narrated by the same woman (likely less an “anonymous informant,” but a recipient of the text), who seemed in essence to be dictating a circulating text message and/or leaving the content of the message as a voicemail:So my stepdaughter forwarded me an audio file of a woman claiming that her cousin, who works at the Pentagon, & her friend who works for the CDC, are saying we are about to face a mandatory 4-week full quarantine. No work or stores. Nowhere at all. Real or BS?— Kitty Bunghole (@SheTiger68) March 17, 2020To reiterate, all of these messages were originating from one single circulating text or email, not numerous federal government insiders, something apparent when viewing iterations from social media platforms.News of the virally spreading four-week quarantine rumor made it to the White House National Security Council on Twitter by March 15 2020, when the account addressed and debunked the rumor:Text message rumors of a national #quarantine are FAKE. There is no national lockdown. @CDCgov has and will continue to post the latest guidance on #COVID19. #coronavirus— NSC (@WHNSC) March 16, 2020If you use social media, chances are you saw or heard a rumor that a Pentagon insider advised of a four-week quarantine planned for the United States, and starting on April 1 2020. The National Security Council described the rumor of a pending four-week quarantine a hoax, stating that there was “no national lockdown” being planned. The NSC advised Americans to follow the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention for credible updates on COVID-19.


Author J.K. Rowling promoted a website selling transphobic merchandise.

Explanation: Did J.K. Rowling Promote a Website Selling Transphobic Merchandise?

Author J.K. Rowling — no stranger to controversy — roiled anger in September 2020 after using her Twitter account to promote an online store selling merchandise bearing “gender critical” or transphobic messages.Rowling posted a photograph of herself wearing a shirt she said she bought from Wild Wymen Workshop, a United Kingdom-based site that, as LGBTQ Nation and other sites reported, features a merchandise section called “gender critical.”Among the items listed in the “gender critical” section are buttons bearing messages that seem less critical and more directly insulting:“This is only offensive to people who subscribe to transgender ideology,” site owner Angela C. Wild posted on the store’s Twitter account. “I don’t believe in gender. I don’t believe anyone is ever born in the wrong body. It is a biological impossibility. I also don’t believe in god, santa or the tooth fairy. You can’t make me subscribe to your cult.”The story spread further on Facebook; for example, one post republishing LGBTQ Nation’s story was shared several thousand times within 24 hours.The author, who has been criticized by both LGBTQ communities and public figures in the past for spreading disinformation about transgender people, also endorsed the online shop amid the release of a new mystery novel she penned under the pseudonym “Robert Galbraith.” Reviewers noted that one of the characters, a man, is depicted dressing like a woman to trick his victims. According to The Guardian:Creed lures his victims into his van by wearing a woman’s coat and wig, but the novel never describes him as a transvestite — although it does tell how, as a young man, he stole women’s underwear from his neighbours and masturbated into it.Writing on Galbraith’s website, Rowling has now revealed that Creed “was loosely based on real-life killers Jerry Brudos and Russell Williams – both master manipulators who took trophies from their victims”.Brudos killed four women in Oregon during the 1960s. As a young man, he stole female underwear from his neighbours, according to The Encyclopedia of Serial Killers, which also cites reports of “a large man, dressed in women’s clothing” in the garage from where he abducted his victim Karen Sprinker. Williams was sentenced to life in prison in 2010 for murdering two women. The former commander of Canada’s largest air force base, he pleaded guilty to two counts of first-degree murder, two sexual assaults and 82 counts of breaking and entering, which saw him take hundreds of items of underwear from women and young girls.Rowling, who amassed critical and commercial success writing the Harry Potter book series, has also drawn criticism for choosing the “Galbraith” alias. She described the process behind that name online:I chose Robert because it’s one of my favourite men’s names, because Robert F Kennedy is my hero and because, mercifully, I hadn’t used it for any of the characters in the Potter series or The Casual Vacancy.Galbraith came about for a slightly odd reason. When I was a child, I really wanted to be called ‘Ella Galbraith’, and I’ve no idea why. I don’t even know how I knew that the surname existed, because I can’t remember ever meeting anyone with it. Be that as it may, the name had a fascination for me. I actually considered calling myself L A Galbraith for the Strike series, but for fairly obvious reasons decided that initials were a bad idea.Odder still, there was a well-known economist called J K Galbraith, something I only remembered by the time it was far too late. I was completely paranoid that people might take this as a clue and land at my real identity, but thankfully nobody was looking that deeply at the author’s name.But the nom de plume, which Rowling began using in 2013, is also similar to that of the American psychologist Robert Galbraith Heath, who claimed in one experiment that he could “cure” homosexuality by inserting electrodes into parts of a subject’s brain.Journalist Robert Colvile, who reported on Heath’s practices in 2016, refuted that there was any connection between the Heath, who founded the department of psychiatry and neurology at Tulane University, and Rowling.“We called it one of the ‘great forgotten stories of neuroscience’ because everyone had forgotten it,” Colville wrote in June 2020. “J.K. Rowling did not choose her pseudonym out of homophobia or insensitivity. She could not have known about this guy — who everyone called Robert Heath anyway, or just Bob.”Comments