The video appeared to come from the Facebook page “Branson Area Breaking News,” where more than 10,000 users reacted to the clip.
(Facebook user Branson Area Breaking News)
Snopes readers also searched our site for more information about the alleged incident.
Some readers seemed to interpret the rumor as a factual recounting of real-life events. However, it was posted by a Facebook page that calls its content satire. Additionally, the video was fake and showed obvious signs of artificial intelligence such as misshapen people and cars.
The Branson Area Breaking News Facebook page describes itself as “a world renowned satirical news organization.”
Some social media users speculated the video was AI-generated, with one commenting, “Seen lots of water tower takedowns. Never seen one bounce though. Can’t imagine how a tank full of water would bounce. AI?”
Closer inspection of the video did indeed reveal classic signs of AI use. For example, people and cars in the video both appeared misshapen at times.
(Facebook user Branson Area Breaking News)
Another key sign of AI appeared at 0:06, when a pole appeared to bend out of the way of the falling water tower.
This is not the first time Branson Area Breaking News posted about a purported disaster affecting a water tower in the city. According to the page, separate water towers in Branson allegedly bursttwice in October 2025 (archived, archived).
“The Dept. of Education just removed nursing from the list of ‘professional degree’ programs under the Administration’s new loan rules — a move nurses say threatens the future of patient care,” radio personality Angela Yee wrote Nov. 20 on Facebook.
Other social mediaposts passed on lists of degrees no longer considered “professional” under Trump, including nursing and also physical therapy, architecture, accounting, teaching, engineering and social work.
Graduate nursing students could soon face new federal borrowing limits, but these comments mislead by saying the Trump administration took nurses’ “professional” classification away.
Trump’s sweeping One Big Beautiful Bill Act set federal loan borrowing limits for nonprofessional and professional graduate students. The first step in implementing those new loan limits is defining which degrees are “professional.”
An Education Department committee agreed on 11 professional degrees based on an existing definition in federal code; the decision is not final.
Nursing was not demoted or removed; it wasn’t on the list of professional degrees to start.
However, the changes mean students pursuing graduate degrees in nursing would have a lower borrowing cap compared with borrowers enrolled in professional degrees.
The new loan caps don’t affect undergraduate students, and not all nursing jobs require graduate degrees.
Nurse Rod Salaysay plays guitar for patient Richard Hoang in the recovery unit of UC San Diego Health in San Diego, Calif., on Sept. 30, 2025. (AP)
A committee rule has not been finalized
One provision in One Big Beautiful Bill Act eliminated a loan program that allows graduate students to borrow enough money to cover their program’s full cost. That program provided for limitless borrowing, said higher education finance expert and University of Tennessee, Knoxville professor Robert Kelchen.
In its place, the Trump-era law implements new federal loan limits beginning July 1, 2026: up to $20,500 every academic year and $100,000 in total for grad students pursuing nonprofessional degrees and up to $50,000 every academic year and $200,000 in total for grad students seeking professional degrees.
The law defines professional students as those enrolled in degrees listed in federal code. That section lists examples of professional degrees that “include but are not limited to”:
Pharmacy (Pharm.D.)
Dentistry (D.D.S. or D.M.D.)
Veterinary Medicine (D.V.M.)
Chiropractic (D.C. or D.C.M.)
Law (L.L.B. or J.D.)
Medicine (M.D.)
Optometry (O.D.).
Osteopathic Medicine (D.O.).
Podiatry (D.P.M., D.P., or Pod.D.).
Theology (M.Div., or M.H.L.)
Nursing was never on that list. But graduate nursing students will be affected by the lower cap for nonprofessional graduate students.
“That distinction did not matter because graduate and professional students largely had the exact same loan limits,” Kelchen said. “Now, that distinction matters.”
On Nov. 6, a committee charged with implementing the federal student loan changes approved a definition for “professional students” that included the 10 degrees listed in federal code and clinical psychology. The committee also approved an expanded list of related programs that fall under those fields as “professional,” such as forensic psychology and counseling psychology.
The public comment period is expected in early 2026, the department said.
The Education Department referred PolitiFact to a Nov. 24 “myth vs. fact” press release, which said its data shows 95% of nursing students borrow below the yearly loan limits and “are not affected by the new caps.”
Loan limits will affect financing for advanced nursing degrees
Previously, only people seeking advanced nursing degrees would have qualified for the graduate loan program that had no borrowing limits, known as Graduate PLUS.
About 45% of nurses entered the workforce with bachelor’s degrees, according to a March 2024 National Center for Health Workforce Analysis report. Some nurses have less than a bachelor’s degree; others start their careers after obtaining advanced degrees.
Some nurses choose to pursue a master’s (17%) or doctorate degree (3%) after they start working. Half of nurses said they used loans, and most nurses used federal student loans to finance their initial nursing degree, the report said.
It typically takes two to three years to earn a nursing master’s degree and roughly five to eight years to earn a doctorate in nursing, Debra Barksdale, president of the American Academy of Nursing, said.
At the University of Michigan’s nursing school in Ann Arbor, Mich., instructor Betsy Cambridge, center, talks to students next to a high-fidelity mannequin on March 28, 2016. (AP)
Nurse practitioners, who must complete master’s or doctoral degree programs, fill in some gaps between nurses and doctors. They can perform and interpret diagnostic tests and diagnose and treat some conditions.
“The current demand for master’s- and doctorally-prepared nurses for advanced practice, clinical specialties, teaching and research roles far outstrips the supply,” Barksdale said.
Capping federal loans for graduate nursing programs could result in fewer nurses, Barksdale said.
Graduate nursing degree program costs vary. Some historic research shows that by the time nursing students complete their advanced degrees, they have borrowed less than $100,000. It’s unclear how that breaks down year-by-year for the annual $20,500 cap.
Of 140 advanced nursing programs with debt data, 115 programs’ data showed their 2019 and 2020 graduates finished degrees with median student debt below $100,000, wrote Preston Cooper, an American Enterprise Institute higher education finance expert. He said lower-cost schooling options exist.
Our ruling
Social media posts said the Trump administration removed nursing from the list of professional degree programs, affecting aspiring nurses’ student loan access.
A new Trump administration law imposes federal borrowing caps for people pursuing graduate degrees. The borrowing limits are lower for degrees not considered “professional.” An Education Department committee proposed a definition for “professional” that largely relies on an existing federal regulation that never included nursing.
Some nursing jobs require no advanced degree, and research shows nurses typically complete their degrees with loan amounts under the new cap. However, the proposed change would put a new burden on nursing graduate students seeking federal loans, because their degrees would not be eligible for the higher “professional” cap.
The statement is partially accurate but leaves out important details. We rate it Half True.
PolitiFact Researcher Caryn Baird contributed to this report.
U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) will spend $180 million on bounty hunters to track down “aliens,” meaning people without lawful status in the U.S.
Rating:
What’s True
ICE published a contract proposal seeking vendors to carry out “skip tracing” of 1.5 million people without legal status in the U.S. The agency originally offered contracts worth up to $180 million, but later adjusted the amount to more than $281 million.
What’s False
ICE did not specifically write in its proposal that it was seeking bounty hunters, meaning licensed agents who track down and detain people who have skipped bail, for the skip tracing work.
What’s Undetermined
ICE had not confirmed whether it was specifically seeking bounty hunters at the time of this writing. Professions like bounty hunters, debt collectors and private investigators all use skip tracing in their work.
In November 2025 a claim (archived) circulated online that U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) would spend $180 million on bounty hunters to track down “aliens,” meaning people without lawful status in the U.S.
Rumors about the Trump administration using bounty hunters — also known as bail enforcement agents or fugitive recovery agents — to carry out its deportation goals, havecirculated since the start of U.S. President Donald Trump’s second term.
One Threads user who shared the claim in November 2025 wrote, “This isn’t a rumor. ICE is hiring Bounty Hunters and giving them cash bonuses for acting as fast as possible. It’s official government policy.”
That user explained in a video that he had read about ICE’s rumored use of bounty hunters in a report by The Intercept, a nonprofit investigate journalism outlet.
According to SAM.gov, an official U.S. government website that lists contracts offered by government departments and agencies to private contractors, in November 2025, ICE offered contracts worth up to $281,250,000 for “skip tracing” services as part of its effort to locate a docket of 1.5 million “aliens.”
Skip tracing is the process of locating a person for any reason, including someone who is deliberately trying to avoid or skip detection. Law enforcement, debt collectors and bail bondsmen all use skip tracing to find fugitives, debtors or people who skipped bail. Bounty hunters, meaning licensed agents who enter into a deal with a bail bondsman to find and detain a person who has skipped bail, might use skip tracing to find their target.
The DHS/ICE skip tracing proposal did not include the word “bounty hunter” and did not specify whether the agency would prefer inquiries from specific types of vendors. The term bounty hunter appeared to have made its way into the claim through reports from outlets like The Intercept and 404 Media. Sam Biddle, who reported on the contract proposal for the Intercept, told Snopes via email the outlet’s report used the term “bounty hunter” in a more general way to mean a person who would be “hunting people for a monetary bounty.”
Given that ICE offered contracts for skip tracing but did not specifically seek licensed bounty hunters, we rate this claim a mixture of true, false and undetermined elements.
Snopes reached out to 404 Media to ask how it backed their use of the term bounty hunter in reports. We also reached out to ICE with additional questions about the proposal. We await replies to our queries.
ICE ‘skip tracers’ to locate 1.5 million people
According to publicly available documents, ICE wrote that it was looking to locate around 1.5 million people without lawful status in the U.S. and could offer contracts worth up to $281,250,000 for skip tracing services in order to achieve that goal.
ICE’s Statement of Work said that vendors would be tasked with finding people’s home addresses or, failing that, addresses for places of work and reporting that information back to ICE. Vendors were expected to investigate at least 50,000 people per month.
The agency wrote that, “The vendor must have a working knowledge/background in using investigatory tools to conduct advanced skip tracing using last known addresses.” Bounty hunters could fit that description but so could private investigators or ex-law enforcement personnel.
In late October 2025, ICE issued a request for information, a way for the agency to assess market interest, for what would eventually become its contract proposal for skip tracing.
In that request, ICE said it was considering an “incentive based pricing structure” that could provide bonuses or fee adjustments for vendors who could deliver results quickly and with high accuracy. That proposed reward structure did not feature in the contract proposal ICE eventually published in late November.
Private companies have sought to involve themselves with the Trump administration’s deportation plans since early in Trump’s second term. In February 2025, Politico reported that a group of prominent military contractors had circulated a White Paper outlining a $25 billion plan that reportedly included “a network of ‘processing camps’ on military bases, a private fleet of 100 planes, and a ‘small army’ of private citizens empowered to make arrests.”
According to Politico’s report, Bill Mathews, the former chief operating officer of Blackwater, one of the companies that submitted the White Paper, reportedly said in February that there had been “zero show of interest or engagement from the government” with relation to the proposed plan.
At the time of this writing, ICE had not returned a request for comment on whether it would hire bounty hunters for skip tracing or whether it would give vendors who carried out the work the authority to arrest the people they traced.
Snopes previously reported on a claim that ICE considered “deputizing” bounty hunters in Washington and a since-failed bill in Mississippi that would pay bounty hunters to help deport people without lawful status in the U.S.
In the days leading up to Thanksgiving 2025, a rumor spread online that the U.S. Department of Homeland Security planned to conduct nationwide immigration raids in churches as congregants gathered to celebrate the holiday season.
The allegation originated from a Nov. 17 report by contributor John Keough for This Week in Worcester, a newspaper focused on a city in central Massachusetts. Keough’s story relied almost entirely on anonymous sources. He declined to share their names with Snopes, citing his sources’ fear of retribution from the federal government. As such, it was impossible to determine the legitimacy of his report and we therefore have not rated this claim.
Keough did, however, share additional information about his reporting process in a Nov. 21 phone interview and said that the “circumstantial evidence” pointed to his story being “accurate and true.” He referenced reported immigration raids at churches in California and North Carolina as examples that bolstered his reporting.
“I stand by my story,” Keough said.
A spokesperson for the Department of Homeland Security, Tricia McLaughlin, called Keough’s story a “smear.”
“Considering we haven’t conducted an operation at a church for the entirety of this administration I would say it’s a pretty crappy report,” McLaughlin said via email.
In response to a follow-up email pointing to several of the aforementioned reports of immigration-related arrests, including a video of the North Carolina arrest, McLaughlin reiterated her claim that there have been “no raids or operations at churches” under U.S. President Donald Trump’s administration.
Here’s what we know about Keough’s report:
This Week in Worcester report
This Week in Worcester’s report was titled, “Exclusive: Trump DHS Plans Immigration Raids on Churches Over Holidays.” In the report, Keough alleged that DHS agencies “intend to implement a comprehensive plan to target Spanish-speaking churches across the country during the upcoming holiday season between Thanksgiving, Nov. 27, and Christmas, Dec. 25.”
Keough cited three anonymous Department of Justice attorneys: “one in the U.S. Attorney’s office in the district of Massachusetts, one to the district of Rhode Island office, and the third posted at an office in New York.” The third source allegedly provided Keough with “a document with a multistage plan on it,” including references to the Customs and Border Patrol (CBP) Home Mobile App — which assists users in self-deportation — gathering information through churches and the “operational approach” for raids.
According to Keough, the story started with a tip from someone in the Massachusetts office, who had become a regular source of his after he did “a ton of” reporting on a Department of Justice investigation into the Worcester Police Department.
“Everything they’ve ever given us turned out to be true,” Keough said of his source. “Consistently, this guy has provided us pretty serious and significant corroborate-able information.”
“I’m a small-town newspaper reporter,” Keough added. “I think the reason why it came to me is because of my relationship with the Department of Justice attorney … and I protected his name.”
Keough’s report said the “Trump administration is pushing high-ranking Southern Baptist Convention (SBC) officials for public support of the plan, including Hispanic pastors.”
In an email to Snopes, the Southern Baptist Convention denied Keough’s allegation.
“Neither the SBC President nor the Executive Committee have participated in briefings or been in any discussions with governmental officials about these immigration enforcement operations,” said spokesperson Brandon Porter.
Keough said he also spoke with several pastors, whom he said he knew as a former staff member of the Baptist Churches of New England. The pastors told him they received CBP Home Mobile App paraphernalia, which he alleged followed a pattern the Trump administration has used, whereby federal law enforcement suggest self-deportation before conducting more confrontational immigration raids.
Keough claimed this was the pattern used in raids at Home Depot stores and farms. Snopes could not find any concrete evidence of this, although Trump said in a June Truth Social post that people in the country illegally should use the CBP Home App or “ICE will find you and remove you.”
These conversations with his sources, coupled with church protection training seminars happening in Worcester — and the additional reports of raids at churches in other areas of the country — pushed Keough to publish his report, he said. He added that he plans to follow-up on his report and attend a church protection training seminar “to see if, in fact, there are law enforcement and FBI people that are going there.”
ICE policy under Trump allows church arrests
McLaughlin, the DHS spokesperson, said in her email that “ICE does not raid churches — regardless of if it is Holiday season or not.”
But McLaughlin also acknowledged that the Trump administration rescinded all guidance preventing ICE from arresting people in “sensitive areas,” including churches:
The facts are criminals are no longer able to hide in places of worship to avoid arrest. The Trump Administration will not tie the hands of our brave law enforcement and instead trusts them to use common sense. If a dangerous illegal alien felon were to flee into a church, or a child sex offender was working as an employee, there may be a situation where an arrest is made to protect public safety.
Keough said the DHS spokesperson’s response only made him more confident in his report, pointing to the fact that McLaughlin “qualified her entire denial by saying we’re not going to tie the hands of our law enforcement.”
“I really think that she confirmed everything in the story by not truly offering a full denial,” he said.
In sum …
A spokesperson for DHS repeatedly said ICE does not raid churches, including during the holiday season. However, there have been several reported incidents of immigration enforcement arrests near or at churches under the Trump administration. Furthermore, Trump administration policy permits immigration enforcement activities in churches.
It was not possible to prove that DHS has a comprehensive, multistage plan to raid churches over the holidays because the allegation originated from a report relying on anonymous sources. However, the reporter behind the story said he stood by it.
Google’s ‘Aluminium’ OS Project to Bring Android to PCs
Google is reportedly preparing to launch a new Android-based operating system for traditional PCs, internally codenamed “Aluminium.” This move could reshape advertising strategies by merging Android’s mobile targeting capabilities with desktop’s immersive ad formats. Currently, Chrome OS holds just 1.53% of the global desktop market and 8.44% in the U.S., primarily within K-12 education and enterprises. The discovery of a now-deleted job listing referencing the “Aluminium” OS confirmed Google’s unified platform efforts. Advertisers are expected to benefit from cross-platform targeting and expanded desktop reach. Read More – MediaPost Rating
Alaska Landmine Sued for Defamation by State Official
Dorene Lorenz, chair of Alaska’s human rights commission, has filed a defamation lawsuit against Jeff Landfield, publisher of the Alaska Landmine, over social media posts and commentary she says misrepresented her involvement in a failed historic preservation project. The suit stems from comments Landfield made about Lorenz’s use of state funds related to the Jesse Lee Home, which she disputes. The case highlights tensions between political commentary, factual reporting, and defamation law in Alaska. Read More – News From The States
Survey Finds New Journalists Demand Reinvention in News Industry
A Tickaroo survey of 172 U.K. journalism students and early-career professionals reveals growing dissatisfaction with journalism’s economics and workplace culture. While 80% are driven by ideals such as truth-telling and accountability, many cite low pay, a lack of diversity, and inadequate training in digital and entrepreneurial skills as major obstacles. A majority call for newsroom hiring reform, fair pay, and support for underrepresented voices. Concerns about AI, misinformation, and shrinking relevance also loom. Tickaroo emphasizes that these insights are crucial for shaping a sustainable, trustworthy journalism future. Read More – Editor & Publisher
Media Bias Fact Check selects and publishes fact checks from around the world. We only utilize fact-checkers that are either a signatory of the International Fact-Checking Network (IFCN) or have been verified as credible by MBFC. Further, we review each fact check for accuracy before publishing. We fact-check the fact-checkers and let you know their bias. When appropriate, we explain the rating and/or offer our own rating if we disagree with the fact-checker. (D. Van Zandt)
Claim Codes: Red= Fact Check on a Right Claim, Blue = Fact Check on a Left Claim, Black = Not Political/Conspiracy/Pseudoscience/Other
Fact Checker bias rating Codes: Red = Right-Leaning, Green = Least Biased, Blue = Left-Leaning, Black = Unrated by MBFC
TRUE
Claim via Social Media: “The cost of coffee has increased by 40 percent since September 2024.”
Gigafact rating: True (The price of 1 pound of ground coffee rose from $6.47 in Sept. 2024 to $9.14 in Sept. 2025 — an increase of about 41%. The surge followed severe droughts in Brazil and Vietnam and was amplified by Trump-era tariffs on major coffee-exporting nations. Prices may fall following the administration’s recent tariff exemptions for coffee products.)
Claim by Donald Trump (R):“I have just gotten the highest poll numbers of my ‘political career.’”
PolitiFact rating: False (The opposite. Trump’s current approval and disapproval ratings are the worst of his second term and within a few percentage points of his first term’s weakest showing.)
Claim via Social Media: A photo authentically shows future U.S. first lady Melania Trump, then Melania Knauss, posing partially nude for modeling pictures on the late sex offender Jeffrey Epstein’s airplane.
Snopes rating: False (While the image is real, it was on Trump’s plane and not Epstein’s.)
(International: United Kingdom): The Department for Work and Pensions is increasing the Christmas Bonus this year from £10 to £200.
Full Fact rating: False (The Christmas Bonus will remain £10 in 2025. However, the DWP is offering larger amounts of money as part of other schemes to some people who get certain benefits.)
Disclaimer: We are providing links to fact-checks by third-party fact-checkers. If you do not agree with a fact check, please directly contact the source of that fact check.
Do you appreciate our work? Please consider one of the following ways to sustain us.
Contributor, WebMD Editorial. ‘Top Foods High in Tryptophan’. WebMD, https://www.webmd.com/diet/foods-high-in-tryptophan. Accessed 24 Nov. 2025.
Does Turkey Actually Make Me Sleepy? | St. Vincent’s Medical Center. https://stvincents.org/about-us/news-press/news-detail?articleId=59792&publicid=395#. Accessed 25 Nov. 2025.
Friedman M. Analysis, Nutrition, and Health Benefits of Tryptophan. Int J Tryptophan Res. 2018 Sep 26;11:1178646918802282. doi: 10.1177/1178646918802282. PMID: 30275700; PMCID: PMC6158605.
Girgen, Kayla, et al. ‘Does Turkey Actually Make You Sleepy?’ Health, https://www.health.com/nutrition/why-does-turkey-make-you-sleepy. Accessed 25 Nov. 2025.
Google Search. https://www.google.com/search?sca_esv=3dbed19d9671262c&sxsrf=AE3TifMy7GamfOiIGvkCnFTo_6RCSd6iZQ:1764022786093&udm=28&fbs=AIIjpHxU7SXXniUZfeShr2fp4giZjSkgYzz5-5RrRWAIniWd7tzPwkE1KJWcRvaH01D-XIX002E0qNXsgfZ6fffiMQMi5-_D5b5oEjBGcsLP5FUOaaUQ7bIbj4iFLgtkUUPL7izG6aF9lg-KMgyDDndj9rGt89APCoytbniX64tVMdOtTqmZWqQ7sgBov5m065PISOzNbiJ4mvAhQBif43Aiv1iajWTuOw&q=tryptophan+supplements&ved=1t:220175&ictx=111&biw=1470&bih=832&dpr=2#oshopproduct=gid:17614147257072914229,mid:576462783858528238,oid:12571909512415126573,iid:15580583223869207148,rds:UENfMTc2MTQxNDcyNTcwNzI5MTQyMjl8UFJPRF9QQ18xNzYxNDE0NzI1NzA3MjkxNDIyOQ%3D%3D,pvt:hg,pvo:19&oshop=apv&pvs=0. Accessed 24 Nov. 2025.
Hartmann E. Effects of L-tryptophan on sleepiness and on sleep. J Psychiatr Res. 1982-1983;17(2):107-13. doi: 10.1016/0022-3956(82)90012-7. PMID: 6764927.
Hartmann E. L-tryptophan: a rational hypnotic with clinical potential. Am J Psychiatry. 1977 Apr;134(4):366-70. doi: 10.1176/ajp.134.4.366. PMID: 320887.
How Much Turkey Do You Have to Eat to Get Sleepy from Tryptophan? – Better Sleep Council | Start Every Day with a Good Night’s Sleep. 16 Nov. 2022, https://bettersleep.org/blog/how-much-turkey-do-you-have-to-eat-to-get-sleepy-from-tryptophan/.
Mikkelson, Barbara. ‘Does Eating Turkey Make You Sleepy?’ Snopes, 6 June 2003, https://www.snopes.com//fact-check/the-big-sleep/.
Pierce, Shanley. ‘Food Coma: The Truth About Turkey and Tryptophan’. TMC News, 1 Nov. 2016, https://www.tmc.edu/news/2016/11/food-coma-truth-turkey-tryptophan/.
Richard, Dawn M, et al. ‘L-Tryptophan: Basic Metabolic Functions, Behavioral Research and Therapeutic Indications’. International Journal of Tryptophan Research: IJTR, vol. 2, Mar. 2009, pp. 45–60. PubMed Central, https://doi.org/10.4137/ijtr.s2129.
‘Serotonin: What Is It, Function & Levels’. Cleveland Clinic, https://my.clevelandclinic.org/health/articles/22572-serotonin. Accessed 25 Nov. 2025.
Sutanto, Clarinda N., et al. ‘The Impact of Tryptophan Supplementation on Sleep Quality: A Systematic Review, Meta-Analysis, and Meta-Regression’. Nutrition Reviews, vol. 80, no. 2, Jan. 2022, pp. 306–16. PubMed, https://doi.org/10.1093/nutrit/nuab027.
‘Thanksgiving Mystery: Does Turkey Make You Sleepy?’ Science, 25 Nov. 2025, https://www.nationalgeographic.com/science/article/thanksgiving-mystery-does-turkey-make-you-sleepy.
The Turkey-Tryptophan Connection — Is It Really What’s Behind the Thanksgiving Snooze? https://www.texashealth.org/areyouawellbeing/Eating-Right/The-Turkey-Tryptophan-Connection-Is-It-Really-Whats-Behind-the-Thanksgiving-Snooze. Accessed 24 Nov. 2025.
Tryptophan: MedlinePlus Medical Encyclopedia. https://medlineplus.gov/ency/article/002332.htm. Accessed 24 Nov. 2025.
Victor, Daniel. ‘No, the Tryptophan in Turkey Won’t Make You Sleepy’. The New York Times, 25 Nov. 2025, https://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/26/science/no-the-tryptophan-in-turkey-wont-make-you-sleepy.html.
Scientists say the problem is that they are often doing just the opposite by relying on preliminary studies, fringe science or just hunches to make claims, cast doubt on proven treatments or even set policy.
Dr. Daniel Jernigan, who resigned from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in August, told reporters Wednesday that Kennedy seems to be “going from evidence-based decision making to decision-based evidence making.”
It was the latest example of the Trump administration’s challenge to established science.
U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services Robert F. Kennedy Jr. speaks during the Western Governors’ Association meeting Thursday, Nov. 20, 2025, in Scottsdale, Ariz. (AP Photo/Rebecca Noble)
U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services Robert F. Kennedy Jr. speaks during the Western Governors’ Association meeting Thursday, Nov. 20, 2025, in Scottsdale, Ariz. (AP Photo/Rebecca Noble)
In September, the Republican president gave out medical advice based on weak or no evidence. Speaking directly to pregnant women and to parents, he told them not to take acetaminophen, the active ingredient in Tylenol. He repeatedly made the fraudulent and long-disproven link between autism and vaccines, saying his assessment was based on a hunch.
“I have always had very strong feelings about autism and how it happened and where it came from,” he said.
“The discussion that has been brought up regarding safety is not based on evidence other than case reports and anecdotes,” said Dr. Flor Munoz, a pediatric infectious disease expert at Baylor College of Medicine and Texas Children’s Hospital.
Scientists say the process of getting medicines and vaccines to market and recommended in the United States has, until now, typically relied on gold standard science. The process is so rigorous and transparent that much of the rest of the world follows the lead of American regulators, giving the OK to treatments only after U.S. approval.
This April 1, 2025 photo shows the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention building in Atlanta. (AP Photo/Ben Gray, file)
This April 1, 2025 photo shows the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention building in Atlanta. (AP Photo/Ben Gray, file)
Gold standard science
The gold standard can differ because science and medicine is complicated and everything cannot be tested the same way. That term simply refers to the best possible evidence that can be gathered.
“It completely depends on what question you’re trying to answer,” said Dr. Jake Scott, an infectious disease physician and Stanford University researcher.
What produces the best possible evidence?
There are many different types of studies. The most rigorous is the randomized clinical trial.
It randomly creates two groups of subjects that are identical in every way except for the drug, treatment or other question being tested. Many are “blinded studies,” meaning neither the subjects nor the researchers know who is in which group. This helps eliminate bias.
It is not always possible or ethical to conduct these tests. This is sometimes the case with vaccine trials, “because we have so much data showing how safe and effective they are, it would be unethical to withhold vaccines from a particular group,” said Jessica Steier, a public health scientist and founder of the Unbiased Science podcast.
Studying the long-term effect of a behavior can be impossible. For example, scientists could not possibly study the long-term benefit of exercise by having one group not exercise for years.
Instead, researchers must conduct observational studies, where they follow participants and track their health and behavior without manipulating any variables. Such studies helped scientists discover that fluoride reduces cavities, and later lab studies showed how fluoride strengthens tooth enamel.
But the studies have limitations because they can often only prove correlation, not causation. For example, some observational studies have raised the possibility of a link between autism risk and using acetaminophen during pregnancy, but more have not found a connection. The big problem is that those kinds of studies cannot determine if the painkiller really made any difference or if it was the fever or other health problem that prompted the need for the pill.
Real world evidence can be especially powerful
Scientists can learn even more when they see how something affects a large number of people in their daily lives.
That real-world evidence can be valuable to prove how well something works — and when there are rare side effects that could never be detected in trials.
Such evidence on vaccines has proved useful in both ways. Scientists now know there can be rare side effects with some vaccines and can alert doctors to be on the lookout. The data has proved that vaccines provide extraordinary protection from disease. For example, measles was eliminated in the U.S. but it still pops up among unvaccinated groups.
That same data proves vaccines are safe.
“If vaccines caused a wave of chronic disease, our safety systems — which can detect 1-in-a-million events — would have seen it. They haven’t,” Scott told a U.S. Senate subcommittee in September.
The best science is open and transparent
Simply publishing a paper online is not enough to call it open and transparent. Specific things to look for include:
— Researchers set their hypothesis before they start the study and do not change it.
— The authors disclose their conflicts of interest and their funding sources.
— The research has gone through peer review by subject-matter experts who have nothing to do with that particular study.
— The authors show their work, publishing and explaining the data underlying their analyses.
— They cite reliable sources.
This transparency allows science to check itself. Dr. Steven Woloshin, a Dartmouth College professor, has spent much of his career challenging scientific conclusions underlying health policy.
“I’m only able to do that because they’re transparent about what they did, what the underlying source resources were, so that you can come to your own conclusion,” he said. “That’s how science works.”
Know the limits of anecdotes and single studies
Anecdotes may be powerful. They are not data.
Case studies might even be published in top journals, to help doctors or other professionals learn from a particular situation. But they are not used to making decisions about how to treat large numbers of patients because every situation is unique.
Even single studies should be considered in the context of previous research. A new one-off blockbuster study that seems to answer every question definitively or reaches a conclusion that runs counter to other well-conducted studies needs a very careful look.
Uncertainty is baked into science.
“Science isn’t about reaching certainty,” Woloshin said. “It’s about trying to reduce uncertainty to the point where you can say, ‘I have good confidence that if we do X, we’ll see result Y.’ But there’s no guarantee.”
Doing your own research? Questions to ask
If you come across a research paper online, in a news story or cited by officials to change your mind about something, here are some questions to ask:
— Who did the research? What is their expertise? Do they disclose conflicts of interest?
— Who paid for this research? Who might benefit from it?
— Is it published in a reputable journal? Did it go through peer review?
— What question are the researchers asking? Who or what are they studying? Are they making even comparisons between groups?
— Is there a “limitations” section where the authors point out what their research cannot prove, other factors that could influence their results, or other potential blind spots? What does it say?
— Does it make bold, definitive claims? Does it fit into the scientific consensus or challenge it? Is it too good or bad to be true?
___
AP Medical Writers Lauran Neergaard in Washington and Mike Stobbe in New York contributed to this report.
___
The Associated Press Health and Science Department receives support from the Howard Hughes Medical Institute’s Department of Science Education and the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. The AP is solely responsible for all content.
In addition to pardoning two North Carolina turkeys at the annual White House ceremony Tuesday, President Donald Trump discussed his crime-fighting efforts in Washington, D.C., claiming that it’s been months since the city has seen a murder.
But Metropolitan Police Department statistics say otherwise.
Trump deployed National Guard troops to Washington in August in an effort to curb violent crime even though it had already reached its lowest levels in decades.
Here’s a closer look at the facts.
TRUMP: “We haven’t had a murder in six months.”
THE FACTS: That’s false. There have been 62 homicides in Washington since May 25, including one last week, according to the MPD. The city has seen 123 homicides so far in 2025. Since National Guard troops were deployed to Washington on Aug. 11, there have been 24. In some data, only 61 homicides were reported in the last six months, and only 23 since Aug. 11, because of a technical error, the MPD said.
Asked for comment on Trump’s claim, the department said that the statistics speak for themselves.
White House spokeswoman Taylor Rogers stressed Trump’s transformation of Washington “from a crime-ridden mess into a beautiful, clean, safe city” when asked about the discrepancy between his claim and city data. She did not address the discrepancy directly.
A federal judge on Thursday ordered the Trump administration to end its monthslong deployment of National Guard troops in the nation’s capital. U.S. District Judge Jia Cobb found that Trump’s military takeover illegally intrudes on local officials’ authority to direct law enforcement in the district. The order is on hold for 21 days to allow for appeal.
District of Columbia Attorney General Brian Schwalb in September sued to challenge the Guard deployments. He asked the judge to bar the White House from deploying Guard troops without the mayor’s consent while the lawsuit plays out.
During the turkey pardoning, Trump said Washington “is now considered a safe zone,” making the erroneous claim that “we haven’t seen a murder in six months.”
A Department of Justice report from January showed that total violent crime in 2024 was at the lowest it had been in more than 30 years, including a 32% drop in homicides from 2023, when it experienced a post-pandemic peak.
Homicides in the past six months are down 46% from the same period last year, while homicides since the August deployment are down 38% from the previous period, MPD data shows. There has been a 29% decrease in homicides in 2025 to date compared to 2024.
Violent crime during the National Guard’s initial one-month surge in Washington was down 39% from the same period last year, including a 53% drop in homicides, with seven during the surge, compared to 15 during the same timespan in 2024.
Arson is the only type of crime that has not seen a decrease, with a 0% change from last year to this year.
The city’s statistics came into question, however, after federal authorities opened an investigation into allegations that officials altered some of the data to make it look better. The investigation is ongoing.
___
Associated Press writers Gary Fields and Lindsay Whitehurst contributed to this report.
Erika Kirk, the widow of conservative activist Charlie Kirk, said she would get less hate if she had touched U.S. Vice President JD Vance’s backside, in response to a question about the outrage around their hug.
Rating:
Context
Interviewer Megyn Kelly shared criticism of Kirk’s hug with Vance, saying people “were acting like you touched the back of his a**!” In response, Kirk said, “I feel like I wouldn’t get as much hate if I did that.”
More than two months after the shooting death of conservative activist Charlie Kirk, his widow and Turning Point USA CEO Erika Kirk faced criticism for a hug she shared with U.S. Vice President JD Vance at a Turning Point event. Posts online claimed said she would get “less hate” if she had touched Vance’s backside.
Numerous posts on Facebookand X shared clips of Kirk being interviewed by conservative commentator Megyn Kelly in which Kirk allegedly said: “I’d get less hate if I touched JD Vance’s a**.” One post stated:
ERIKA KIRK: “I’D GET LESS HATE IF I TOUCHED JD VANCE’S A**”
In her interview with Megyn Kelly, Erika Kirk finally addressed the viral “hug clip” and she didn’t hold back.
Megyn says critics went “to the weirdest places” over a hug:
“They were acting like you touched the back of his a**.”
Erika fires back:
“I feel like I wouldn’t get as much hate if I DID that.”
She says she’s an “intense hugger,” always touches the back of people’s heads when she says “God bless you,” and anyone who’s mad about it “needs a hug more than anyone else.”
So did she give JD an innocent hug or something that went way past normal?
Kirk did say she would get less hate if she had touched Vance’s backside, though not in those exact words. She was responding to Kelly’s comment, “They were acting like you touched the back of his a**.” As such, we rate this claim as true.
Kirk was speaking at an event hosted by Kelly on Nov. 24, 2025. The full event was available on Kelly’s YouTube channel. The transcript of their conversation is below (the exchange occurs at 1:19:28; emphasis ours):
KELLY: Forgive me. Did you see people didn’t understand the hug that you and JD had? They went to the weirdest places.
KIRK: Oh my gosh. You guys, please. So for those of you who know me, I never… I’m a very… I love… Hug is like…
KELLY: Yes, you’re an intense hugger, it’s awesome!
KIRK: Whoever is, like, hating on a hug needs a hug themselves. I will give you a free hug anytime you want a hug. My love language is touch, if you will. But seriously, that hug. So I will give you a play-by-play. I’m walking. They just played the emotional video. I’m walking over, he’s walking over, I’m starting to cry, he says, “He’s so proud of you,” and I say, “God bless you,” and I touch the back of his head. Anyone who I’ve hugged that I have touched the back of your head when I hug you, I always say “God bless you.” That’s just me. If you want to take that out of context, go right ahead. Again, that to me shows that you need a hug more than anyone else.
KELLY: They were acting like you touched the back of his a**!
KIRK: I feel like I wouldn’t get as much hate if I did that versus… But no seriously, so now when I go and hug people I’ll bring them back in and be like, I obviously didn’t give you the right hug. Like come, let me touch the back of your head. So I don’t know what to do with my hands!
While Kirk did not actually say the words, “I’d get less hate if I touched JD Vance’s a**” she responded affirmatively to Kelly’s statement to that effect saying people “were acting like you touched the back of his a**!”
We have covered a number of claims about Kirk after the death of her husband, including unverified affair rumors with Vance, and the fabricated claim she recruited victims for the late sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.
Sources
“Erika Kirk on Continuing Charlie’s Mission, Marriage, and Prayer, Plus Walter Kirn on UFOs and TDS .” YouTube, Megyn Kelly, 25 Nov. 2025, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wuChzINlHk4. Accessed 25 Nov. 2025.
Ibrahim, Nur. “Erika Kirk Isn’t in the Epstein Files as a ‘Recruiter.’” Snopes, 30 Sept. 2025, https://www.snopes.com//fact-check/erika-kirk-recruit-victims-epstein/. Accessed 25 Nov. 2025.
Liles, Jordan. “Erika Kirk and JD Vance Spark Affair Rumors, but There’s No Evidence They’re True.” Snopes, 31 Oct. 2025, https://www.snopes.com//news/2025/10/31/erika-kirk-jd-vance-affair/. Accessed 25 Nov. 2025.
Wrona, Aleksandra. “13 Rumors about Erika Kirk That We’ve Investigated.” Snopes, 9 Nov. 2025, https://www.snopes.com//collections/erika-kirk-rumors/. Accessed 25 Nov. 2025.
The Clinton Foundation lost its status as a tax-exempt charity after a U.S. Department of Defense audit found more than $100 million in military contracts awarded to franchisees of the foundation.
Rating:
In late 2025, a rumor spread online that the Clinton Foundation — founded by former President Bill Clinton — lost its status as a tax-exempt charity after a U.S. Department of Defense audit found more than $100 million in military contracts awarded to franchisees of the foundation.
A post shared by Facebook page America’s Last Line of Defense spreading the claim had more than 15,000 reactions as of this writing. Snopes readers also wrote in asking for verification of the rumor.
America’s Last Line of Defense is a satirical Facebook page. “Nothing on this page is real,” the page’s “Intro” section read. Furthermore, there was no evidence that the Clinton Foundation lost its tax-exempt status due to a Pentagon audit. As such, we have rated this claim as labeled as satire.
America’s Last Line of Defense and its associated Facebook pages and websites have a history of making up stories for shares and comments, as evidenced by Snopes’ archives and by their own admission.
Snopes has previously debunked various satirical rumors by America’s Last Line of Defense targeting the Clintons, including a satirical post claiming that a judge ordered Chelsea Clinton, daughter Bill Clinton and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, to pay back $3.7 million in checks she cashed for the Clinton Foundation.
It’s highly infectious and definitely not a welcome Thanksgiving guest.
Pertussis, also known as whooping cough, is on the rise with outbreaks across the country, leaving some parents of infants wondering whether they should travel or visit family at all.
Pertussis is a bacterial respiratory infection characterized by the “whoop” sound made by sharp intakes of breath between coughing fits. Infected adults and kids can develop a brutal, weekslong cough. Sick infants are at risk of dying.
Vaccination offers strong protection against disease, but immunity wanes over time and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention data show fewer children are getting the vaccine. The CDC recommends adults get a Tdap booster shot every 10 years.
Infections dropped nationally during and after the COVID-19 pandemic. In 2024, cases surged. This year, infections are similarly high. As of Nov. 19, preliminary data showed more than 25,000 cases nationwide in 2025. The states of Washington, California, Florida and Oregon have been hardest hit.
Heading into the holidays, what are the symptoms to watch for, who is most at risk and who needs to get vaccinated?
Symptoms to be on the lookout for
Whooping cough symptoms progress in stages, and the disease’s severity can depend on a person’s vaccination status.
Symptoms usually appear within five to 10 days after exposure, but they can also take twice as long to develop.
During the first one to two weeks, symptoms often resemble an average cold: a mild cough, a low-grade fever and a runny nose. Although the symptoms might seem innocuous, a person is contagious during this stage.
The second, more severe stage can last up to 10 weeks. The main symptom is intense coughing fits, called paroxysms, that can lead to vomiting. The cough ends with an intake of breath that sounds like a “whoop.”
“Sometimes the coughing is so severe that ribs are cracked,” said Dr. Joseph Bocchini, a pediatric infectious disease doctor at Willis-Knighton Health. “There’s such shortness of breath that people wake up at night with a coughing spell, they feel like they’re suffocating.”
People who have never been vaccinated are likely to experience worse symptoms than their vaccinated peers, Bocchini said.
Recovery is often gradual as the cough wanes. As a person recovers, they can be more vulnerable to contracting other respiratory infections, and the cough might return.
Getting sick confers natural immunity from the disease for a time, but that protection doesn’t last long.
Infections happen year-round, but peak whooping cough season lasts from late summer through fall. Pertussis is a cyclical disease, meaning it might spread widely through a community and then disappear from that population. Infections might return to an area once that immunity has waned.
What causes the cough?
The bacteria Bordetella pertussis causes the coughing.
The bacteria enter a person’s upper respiratory tract and latch on to cilia, hair-like extensions in the airways. Cilia are essential for clearing mucus and debris from your lungs. The bacteria release a toxin that damages the cilia and causes the airway to swell. With a person’s lung-cleaning apparatus damaged, the body resorts to coughing to get the gunk out.
If one person in a household is infected, data shows about 80% of exposed family members also will get infected, if they aren’t vaccinated or immune.
Pertussis spreads through droplets when someone sneezes or coughs.
How is whooping cough treated?
Doctors use nasal swab lab tests to identify infections.
Antibiotics are the most effective treatment, especially when taken early in the illness. If taken before the coughing fits begin, antibiotics can prevent the illness from progressing or make symptoms milder.
That’s why doctors sometimes prescribe antibiotics to the infected person’s family and other contacts: to halt further spread.
Once the coughing fits have begun, antibiotics are less effective at reducing symptoms or shortening the course of the illness. The cilia have already been damaged, and the lungs need time to heal.
Antibiotics are still prescribed at that stage because a five-day course kills the bacteria, making the person no longer contagious, even if the cough persists.
To manage symptoms, the CDC advises using a cool-mist humidifier, eating small meals to prevent vomiting and drinking plenty of fluids. The agency also recommends avoiding airway irritants such as dust, smoke or chemical fumes that might trigger coughing.
Some pertussis cases require hospitalization.
Young babies are most at risk
Whooping cough is most dangerous for babies under 1 year old, especially under 3 months. The CDC reports that 1 in 3 infected babies will need hospital treatment. About 1% of infected babies die from complications, such as pneumonia, damage in the brain or difficulty breathing.
Infants with pertussis sometimes don’t cough at all, but have dangerous pauses in breathing called apnea. Babies may turn blue as they struggle to breathe.
Older people, people who are immunocompromised and people with moderate to severe asthma also could be at higher risk of complications.
DTaP and Tdap vaccines can protect against illness
Scientists first developed a pertussis vaccine in 1914. In the 1940s, it became part of a combination vaccine that also protects against diphtheria and tetanus. It’s still combined with those today.
Two vaccines protect against whooping cough: DTaP, given to young children, and Tdap, given to adolescents, adults and pregnant women.
Vaccination doesn’t stop the bacteria from entering a person’s body, but it helps stop an infection from developing. Among the minority of vaccinated people who do get sick, vaccination decreases the illness’ severity.
The CDC’s childhood vaccine schedule recommends that babies get their first dose of the DTaP vaccine at 2 months old. The vaccine is delivered in four more doses at 4 months, 6 months, between 15 and 18 months and between 4 and 6 years.
“Just like we practice baseball or piano with many games of catch or lessons, providing multiple doses gives our immune system additional practice,” said Dr. Lori Handy, a pediatric infectious disease specialist at Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia. “The vaccine schedule is designed to give enough practice to our system that eventually, the person is adequately protected.”
Vaccinated children are muchless likely than unvaccinated children to get sick with pertussis.
During the 2024-2025 school year, 92.1% of kindergarteners received a DTaP vaccine, down from about 95% in the decade before the pandemic.
Protection from the vaccine wanes over time, which is why we have the Tdap booster vaccine. The CDC recommended preteens get one dose, and adults get a shot every 10 years. Adults can infect children, so staying up to date is important for the little ones in your life.
The CDC also recommends pregnant women receive a Tdap booster between the 27th and 36th week of pregnancy, regardless of when they were last vaccinated. “Vaccination of pregnant moms provides immunity to newborn babies, so that they are protected at the time when they are most at risk of deadly disease,” Handy said.
How can I stay safe over the holidays?
“Far and away, the most important thing is to be vaccinated and be up to date,” Bocchini said. And if you have a small baby, make sure the people around the baby are also vaccinated and up to date.
Other strategies are basic: Wash your hands often. Use good cough etiquette. Teach these habits to your kids.
Since the bacteria spreads through coughs and sneezes, wearing a mask can help slow the spread, whether you are infected or around someone who is.
If you think you might have been exposed, you can ask your doctor to test you. In its initial stage, whooping cough is hard to distinguish from other respiratory infections, Bocchini advised patients to ask themselves how they might have been exposed: Have I been around someone with a persistent cough that happens in fits? Although it may be hard, it’s safest to stay home when you are sick.
The House voted nearly unanimously on Nov. 18 to force the Department of Justice to release “all unclassified records, documents, communications, and investigative materials” related to the investigation and prosecution of Jeffrey Epstein. After resisting the release for months, President Donald Trump threw his late support to the bill, which he signed shortly after the Senate also passed it by unanimous consent.
Epstein, a financier, was arrested on charges of sex trafficking of minors in July 2019 and died in prison a month later. His death was ruled a suicide by the Department of Justice. Federal prosecutors alleged Epstein had “sexually exploited and abused dozens of underage girls” from 2002 to 2005.
A week before the vote, Democrats on the House Oversight Committee released several emails that they said called into question Trump’s relationship with Epstein and whether he had knowledge of Epstein’s crimes. The same day, Republicans on the committee released 20,000 pages of documents from Epstein’s estate.
In the days before and after the bill passed, lawmakers from both parties hurled accusations against political opponents related to Epstein and the contents of some of the released documents. Here, we’ll sort out what’s behind some of those claims.
Stansbury’s Unsupported Claims Involving Trump
Democratic Rep. Melanie Stansbury claimed during a Nov. 17 appearance on CNN that the recently released Epstein documents “name multiple cases involving sexual assault conversations Epstein had that involved the president and his time at his house, and the evidence that Donald Trump absolutely knew that Ghislaine Maxwell was recruiting and grooming young women from Mar-a-Lago and bringing them to Epstein’s house.”
Both parts of that claim overstate what the documents have revealed so far. Stansbury’s comments leave the false impression that evidence has been released showing that Trump “absolutely knew” about recruitment and sexual abuse of underage girls. Her office referred us to emails that only show Epstein making comments that could be interpreted that way but don’t show evidence of Trump knowing about criminal acts. Maxwell was convicted and sentenced to 20 years in jail in 2022 for helping Epstein to recruit and groom victims under 18 years of age.
When we asked Stansbury’s office for the evidence to support the claim, a spokeswoman providedfouremailexchanges from the recent release.
Someof them show that Epstein had said that Trump knew about his recruitment of girls from Mar-a-Lago through Maxwell. The messages don’t specify if Epstein was talking about underage girls.
Someof them show that Epstein had said that Trump had been at his house with girls, although they don’t explicitly say anything about sexual assault.
Billionaire Jeffrey Epstein in Cambridge, Massachusetts, on Sept. 8, 2004. Photo by Rick Friedman/Corbis via Getty Images.
First, we’ll assess the claim that “Donald Trump absolutely knew that Ghislaine Maxwell was recruiting and grooming young women from Mar-a-Lago.”
On Nov. 12, Democrats released three emails from a total of about 23,000 documents belonging to Epstein. One of those emails, from Epstein to the author Michael Wolff, referred to Mar-a-Lago and Trump and said, “of course he knew about the girls as he asked ghislaine to stop.”
When a reporter asked Trump two days later, on Nov. 14, “what did Jeffrey Epstein mean in his emails when he said you knew about the girls?” Trump responded, “I know nothing about that.”
Over the summer, Trump said he knew that Epstein had been hiring female employees from Mar-a-Lago, but the president’s comments didn’t pertain to any knowledge of Epstein abusing girls. The president was receiving questions at the time about a birthdaymessage to Epstein that featured a drawing of a naked woman and appeared to have Trump’s signature — although Trump has denied that he wrote the message.
“I have a great spa, one of the best spas in the world at Mar-a-Lago and people were taken out of the spa, hired by him. In other words, gone. And other people would come and complain this guy is taking people from the spa. I didn’t know that. And then when I heard about it, I told him, I said, listen, we don’t want you taking our people,” Trump said on July 29, referring to Epstein. “Whether it was spa or not spa, I don’t want them taking people and he was fine and then not too long after that, he did it again and I said, ‘out of here.’”
In a follow-up question, a reporter asked if one of the workers recruited from Mar-a-Lago was Virginia Giuffre, who was one of the women who came forward to publicly accuse Epstein of abusing her while she was underage. She died by suicide in April. Giuffre has explained that Maxwell first approached her when she was working at Mar-a-Lago at the age of 16.
“I think that was one of the people. Yeah. He stole her,” Trump said.
Second, we’ll assess the claim that the documents show “multiple cases involving sexual assault conversations Epstein had that involved the president and his time at his house.”
The emails highlighted by Stansbury show that, in 2015, Epstein had corresponded with Landon Thomas, who wrote the 2002 New York Magazine story famously quoting Trump saying of Epstein, “He’s a lot of fun to be with. It is even said that he likes beautiful women as much as I do, and many of them are on the younger side. No doubt about it — Jeffrey enjoys his social life.”
In one email to Thomas, Epstein wrote, “would you like photso [sic] of donald and girls in bikinis in my kitchen,” although it’s unclear whether or not he had such photos.
Another email exchange highlighted by Stansbury was between Epstein and Maxwell in 2011. There, Epstein wrote, “I want you to realize that that dog that hasn’t barked is trump.. [victim’s name was redacted] spent hours at my house with him.”
In an email that Epstein had sent to himself in 2019, he recounted parts of the 2008 plea agreement under which he admitted to soliciting minors for prostitution, which was a state charge in Florida. He wrote in that email that Trump “came to my house many times during that period.”
There have been various accounts over the years about when Trump stopped socializing with Epstein — most of them put the time frame in the early 2000s, before Epstein’s first arrest in 2006. Recently Trump has characterized the time he spent with Epstein as minimal, saying on Nov. 18, while he hosted Saudi Crown Prince Mohammad bin Salman, “I have nothing to do with Jeffrey Epstein. I threw him out of my club many years ago because I thought he was a sick pervert.”
When asked about the emails at a Nov. 12 briefing, White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said, “These emails prove absolutely nothing other than the fact that President Trump did nothing wrong.”
Epstein’s Communications with House Delegate Plaskett
In the released files, Virgin Islands Delegate to the House of Representatives Stacey Plaskett, a Democrat, was confirmed to have had text exchanges with Epstein. On Nov. 18, House Republicans introduced a resolution to censure Plaskett for “colluding with convicted felony sex offender Jeffrey Epstein during a congressional hearing.” The censure attempt failed, but a few days later, Republican Rep. James Comer claimed during a Fox News interview that Plaskett was colluding with Epstein to take Trump “down.”
“A few months after that communication between Plaskett and Epstein, Jamie Raskin named Stacey Plaskett as an impeachment manager,” Comer said. “So she was an impeachment manager in Congress, and she was communicating and colluding with Jeffrey Epstein to try to take Donald Trump down.”
Colluding is a subjective word, but we’ll break down the communication between Plaskett and Epstein. (As a delegate, Plaskett can participate in House debates, but she does not get a vote in House floor sessions.)
The text messages, which were first reported by the Washington Post, show Plaskett and Epstein exchanging several texts before and during a congressional hearing in February 2019 involving Trump’s former personal lawyer Michael Cohen — 11 years after Epstein pleaded guilty to solicitation of prostitution and to solicitation of prostitution with a minor under the age of 18 in 2008. (A few months after the hearing, in early July 2019, Epstein was arrested on charges of sex trafficking of minors.)
Cohen was testifying about Trump’s alleged misconduct in falsifying business records in order to pay “hush money” to silence a porn star shortly before the 2016 election. Trump was foundguilty in a New York court in 2024 of falsifying business records as part of an illegal scheme to influence the 2016 election; he recently appealed the conviction.
The Washington Post reported that Plaskett exchanged several texts before and during the hearing, with Epstein appearing to have influenced Plaskett’s line of questioning with Cohen.
At 12:25 p.m., Epstein texted Plaskett, “Hes opened the door to questions re who are the other hechmen at trump org.”
Plaskett responded, “Yup. Very aware and waiting my turn.”
Later in the hearing, Plaskett asked Cohen about other associates in the Trump Organization whom the House “should be meeting with.”
In another exchange, the Washington Post reported that Epstein texted Plaskett that “Cohen brought up RONA – keeper of the secrets.”
Plaskett responded: “RONA?? Quick I’m up next is that an acronym?”
Epstein was referring to Rhona Graff, a former personal assistant to Trump and senior vice president of the Trump Organization. Following this exchange, Plaskett asked about Graff later in her questioning of Cohen.
Epstein and Plaskett also exchanged personal messages, according to the Post. Earlier in the hearing, Epstein texted Plaskett: “Great outfit” and “You look great” to which Plaskett responded, “Thanks!”
Plaskett has since denied any wrongdoing. After the Washington Post article was published on Nov. 14, Plaskett’s office released a statement distancing the congresswoman from Epstein.
“During the hearing, Congresswoman Plaskett received texts from staff, constituents and the public at large offering advice, support and in some cases partisan vitriol, including from Epstein,” her office wrote. “As a former prosecutor she welcomes information that helps her get at the truth and took on the GOP that was trying to bury the truth. The congresswoman has previously made clear her long record combating sexual assault and human trafficking, her disgust over Epstein’s deviant behavior and her support for his victims.”
Five days later during a Nov. 19 CNN interview, in response to a question asking about her relationship with Epstein, Plaskett responded, “Jeffrey Epstein was a constituent.” (Epstein owned a pair of islands in the Virgin Islands.)
In response to another question asking why she was in contact with Epstein despite his known status as a sex offender, Plaskett responded, “I’ve been a prosecutor for many years. And there are a lot of people who have information that are not your friends that you use to get information for to get at the truth.” She later went on to say, “As a prosecutor, you get information from people where you can. I’ve interviewed confidential informants. I’ve interviewed narcotics, drug traffickers and others, and that doesn’t mean that I’m their friend. … It means that they have information that I need. And that I’m trying to get at the truth, and that’s what I did.”
Plaskett has previously been involved in other controversies surrounding political donations from Epstein. An ABC News report found that in the 2016 and 2018 election cycles, Plaskett received $8,100 from Epstein, which she later pledged to donate to organizations working with women and children.
Crockett Misses Mark with Accusations About Epstein Donations
Defending Plaskett from the House floor on Nov. 18, Rep. Jasmine Crockett said Republicans could spare her “with your moral high grounds.”
“Folks who also took money from somebody named Jeffrey Epstein, as I had my team dig in very quickly: Mitt Romney, the NRCC, Lee Zeldin, George Bush, Win Red, McCain-Palin, Rick Lazio,” Crockett said. “I just want to be clear, if this is the standard we are going to make, just know, we’re going to expose it all. And just know, that the FEC filings, they are there for everybody to review.”
But as Zeldin, now the EPA administrator, later pointed out on X, the Jeffrey Epstein who contributed to his House reelection campaign is not THE Jeffrey Epstein. As the Federal Election Commission records note, the Jeffrey Epstein who contributed a total of $1,000 to Zeldin in 2020 is a Long Island, New York, physician. Another Jeffrey Epstein from New Jersey who contributed $500 to Zeldin in February 2020 is the owner of a beverage company, FEC records indicate.
Moreover, all of the contributions were made in 2020, and Epstein, the convicted sex offender, died in August 2019.
“Yes Crockett, a physician named Dr. Jeffrey Epstein (who is a totally different person than the other Jeffrey Epstein) donated to a prior campaign of mine,” Zeldin posted on X. “NO FREAKIN RELATION YOU GENIUS!!!”
Three $250 contributions to Romney’s presidential campaign in 2012 were also made by a Jeffrey Epstein who is listed as a physician living in Long Island, the same physician who donated $500 in 2008 to the McCain-Palin campaign.
In an interview on Nov. 19, CNN anchor Kaitlin Collins asked Crockett if she wanted to set the record straight.
“Listen, I never said that it was that Jeffrey Epstein,” Crockett said. “Just so that people understand, when you make a donation, your picture is not there. And because they decided to spring this on us, in real-time, I wanted the Republicans to think about what could potentially happen, because I knew that they didn’t even try to go through the FEC. So my team, what they did is they Googled, and that is specifically why I said a Jeffrey Epstein. Unlike Republicans, I at least don’t go out and just tell lies. Because it was not the same one? That’s fine. But when Lee Zeldin had something to say, all he had to say was, it was a different Jeffrey Epstein. He admitted that he did receive donations from a Jeffrey Epstein. So, at least I wasn’t trying to mislead people.”
Zeldin posted a video of Crockett’s comments and responded, via X: “When you find yourself in a hole, it’s best to stop digging.”
In another X post, Zeldin wrote, “It’s such a foolish bet to double down on stupid. I’ll always be ready to push back with receipts. … [T]he right move for Crockett would have been to just confess her mistake, and ditch the spin job.”
Business Insider, citing the Center for Responsive Politics, reported that Epstein, the convicted sex abuser, made a single $1,000 donation to George H.W. Bush’s unsuccessful 1992 reelection campaign. Former Rep. Rick Lazio, a Republican who represented New York’s 2nd district, got $2,000 worth of donations from Epstein in 1996.
But as the Center for Responsive Politics reported in 2018, while Epstein donated to various Republican candidates and groups over the years, the vast majority of his donations were to Democratic candidates and groups, including former President Bill Clinton and Sens. John Kerry and Chris Dodd.
Communications from Jeffries’ Campaign
Comer, who chairs the House Oversight Committee, also linked campaign fundraising efforts on behalf of House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries to Epstein, citing a solicitation email sent to Epstein in 2013 seeking his support. Jeffries denied any knowledge of the email and called Comer “a stone cold liar.”
Speaking on the House floor on Nov. 18, Comer said the email “shows Democrat fundraisers invited Epstein to an event or to meet privately with Hakeem Jeffries as part of their 2013 effort to win a majority. Hakeem Jeffries’ campaign solicited money from Jeffrey Epstein. That is what we found in the last document batch.”
Documents released by Republicans on the Oversight Committee include a May 7, 2013, campaign solicitation to Epstein distributed by the fundraising firm Dynamic SRG, seeking participation in a Democratic fundraising dinner and offering “an opportunity to get to know Hakeem better.”
Comer shared the email from Dynamic SRG in a post on X. The email reads, in part: “Dear Jeffrey — We are thrilled to announce that we are working with Congressman Hakeem Jeffries, one of the rising stars in the New York Congressional delegation. Sometimes referred to as ‘Brooklyn’s Barack’, he is a staunch supporter of President Obama and a progressive voice for the people of New York City. … Hakeem is committed to electing a Democratic majority in 2014 and is encouraging his friends to participate in the DCCC/DSCC fundraising dinner with President Obama this coming Monday night. Shoot us an email or give us a call … if you would like to get involved with the dinner, or would like to get an opportunity to get to know Hakeem better.”
Jeffries responded to Comer at a press briefing on Nov. 20, saying, “I have no idea what James Comer is talking about in terms of anything that any prior consultant may have sent. I had no idea about that either, but James Comer apparently made the representation on the floor of the House that I sat down with Jeffrey Epstein, had dinner with Jeffrey Epstein, have contributions from Jeffrey Epstein. He’s a stone cold liar, and James Comer knows it.”
Jeffries also told CNN, “I have no recollection of the email” referred to by Comer. “I’ve never had a conversation with [Epstein], never met him, know nothing about him other than the extreme things that he’s been convicted of doing,” Jeffries said, and added that he had never received a political donation from Epstein.
Comer responded to Jeffries’ “liar” comment by posting the email, which Comer’s office has said “speaks for itself.”
We reached out to Dynamic SRG for comment on Jeffries’ knowledge of the email solicitation and to whom it was sent, but we did not receive a response.
We could find no record of political donations from Epstein to Jeffries.
Editor’s note: FactCheck.org does not accept advertising. We rely on grants and individual donations from people like you. Please consider a donation. Credit card donations may be made through our “Donate” page. If you prefer to give by check, send to: FactCheck.org, Annenberg Public Policy Center, P.O. Box 58100, Philadelphia, PA 19102.
An authentic photograph shows Donald Trump kneeling and unbuckling Bill Clinton’s trousers while the latter is seated in a leather armchair.
Rating:
In November 2025, an image circulated claiming to show a man in a library who looked like U.S. President Donald Trump in 2004, kneeling and unbuckling the trousers of another man, who appeared to be former President Bill Clinton. The image circulated after Trump signed into law a bill that forces the release of files related to the case of the late, convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.
The image appeared to be referencing an email sent by Mark Epstein in which he asked his brother, Jeffrey, to check with former White House Chief Strategist Steve Bannon about whether “Putin has the photos of Trump blowing Bubba,” referring to oral sex. “Bubba” was widely rumored to be referring to Clinton, though Mark reportedly denied this.
The image, which spread on Reddit, Instagram, Facebook and X, purportedly showed Trump and Clinton in a library, with one man (assumed to be Trump though only the back of his head with his distinctive hair is visible) kneeling on a carpet before a smiling Clinton, who is seated on a leather armchair. Trump is purportedly unbuckling Clinton’s belt, suggesting the two men were engaging in a sexual act. Several videos on Instagram claimed to have run the image through artificial intelligence-detector (AI) tools that concluded it was real.
(Reddit)
While many AI-detection tools claimed the image was unlikely to be AI-generated, we found plenty of inconsistencies in the image that show it was manipulated in some way. We found no evidence that this interaction took place, let alone was photographed. As such, we rate this image as fake.
We have reached out to digital forensic specialists to learn more about the image above and will update this story accordingly.
Several online users claimed the image was generated with Google’s AI Gemini chatbot as it supposedly carried a SynthID watermark — a digital watermark embedded directly into AI-generated images created through Google’s tools. When we ran the image through Google Gemini, it stated: “Yes, this image contains SynthID watermarks. The SynthID tool detected that all or part of the content was generated with Google AI (watermark detected in >50% of the image).”
However, we do not have access to the SynthID Detector tool itself, which had a waitlist, as of this writing. We reached out to Google to determine more about the image and will update this story accordingly.
Snopes ran the image through AI-detection tools AI or Not, SightEngine, and Hive Moderation. AI or Not determined it was likely AI generated, while the other two tools said it was unlikely. Research shows AI-detection software is imperfect. Readers should consider the tools’ results with skepticism.
We then looked closely at potential sources for the image. Using reverse-image search tools, we were unable to find any authentic news reporting or original source information for such a photograph. Snopes also found no reported evidence of their interactions from October 2004, per the time-stamp at the bottom right of the image. Were such an image real, it would have been front-page news.
In fact, in September 2004, Clinton underwent heart bypass surgery, according to The New York Times. He was gearing up to support Democratic then-presidential candidate John Kerry’s election campaign. On Oct. 24, 2004 — a day after the alleged photograph with Trump was taken — Clinton was photographed in his home in Chappaqua, New York, in an interview with journalist Diane Sawyer about his recent surgery and the upcoming election. On Oct. 25, 2004, he joined Kerry at a campaign rally in Philadelphia.
Between recovering from heart surgery in his home and jumping into campaigning for Kerry, it seems highly improbable that Clinton found time to be photographed in a compromising position with Trump.
We also looked at the image itself, which is of a very low quality. The carpet on which “Trump” is kneeling has inconsistent pattern, and there are no shadows under the two men’s hands or under the leather armchair. The lettering on the books in the background is also incomprehensible. The purported “Trump” figure’s knuckle also appears strangely shaped, showing his left hand’s ring finger at an odd angle.
The two men were frequentlyphotographed together at events in the 2000s, and some of the photos were misrepresented and manipulated on social media. We have previously covered a miscaptioned photograph of Trump that claimed he was grabbing Clinton’s privates at the U.S. Open in 2000. We also debunked a fake video that showed Trump kissing Clinton’s crotch but actually used an AI tool to bring an authentic still picture to life.
Kar, Sujita Kumar, et al. “How Sensitive Are the Free AI-Detector Tools in Detecting AI-Generated Texts? A Comparison of Popular AI-Detector Tools.” Indian Journal of Psychological Medicine, vol. 47, no. 3, May 2025, pp. 275–78. PubMed Central, https://doi.org/10.1177/02537176241247934. Accessed 25 Nov. 2025.
Barron Trump, U.S. President Donald Trump’s 19-year-old son, humiliated Democratic U.S. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez during a November 2025 Senate hearing by using a binder of 103 sources.
Rating:
In November 2025, people on social media began sharing a rumor that Barron Trump, U.S. President Donald Trump’s 19-year-old son, had humiliated U.S. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., on the Senate floor.
Both versions of the claim said Ocasio-Cortez gave a speech on the Senate floor, with Barron Trump entering the picture after she finished her speech. Trump then went through a binder with “103 verified sources” to counter Ocasio-Cortez on a wealth tax, the Green New Deal and Medicare-for-All. Both claimed a clip of the exchange received tens of millions of views and was trending globally. Each claimed that Ocasio-Cortez canceled all of her scheduled interviews.
The version of the claim posted to Instagram was as follows:
“You Brought the Drama — I Brought the Data.”
Barron Trump, 19, turns Senate hearing into a 10 minute masterclass
Yesterday the Senate chamber went dead silent.
AOC entered in peak form: eyes blazing, voice electric, armed with a week-rehearsed speech on taxing the rich, the Green New Deal, and “economic justice.” Everyone expected another viral fireworks show.
Then Barron Trump walked in. No smirk, no noise. He quietly placed a thin folder on the desk labeled “103 Verified Sources.”
When AOC finished her fiery opener, Barron asked for the floor. He never raised his voice. He simply turned pages:
70-90% wealth tax? Debunked by Brookings 2023: capital flight + 1.3 million jobs lost.
10-year Green New Deal energy transition? IEA says global lithium & cobalt supply runs out by 2040.
Medicare-for-All socialist model? World Bank simulation: $32 trillion deficit in the first decade.
Every claim cited publicly available reports, links included. AOC tried interrupting twice; both times Barron calmly replied, “Respectfully, Congresswoman, page 47 of your own office’s 2019 report says the opposite.”
The room froze. C-SPAN didn’t dare cut away.
AOC’s face went from glowing confidence to ashen shock. She ended her remarks 12 minutes early and took zero questions.
Barron closed the folder, nodded politely, and walked out.
Right now: the clip is at 40M+ views in 18 hours. #103Sources is trending worldwide. AOC’s office has canceled all interviews.
Washington is already calling it “the most humiliating moment of AOC’s career” and “the day Barron Trump taught adults how to debate.”
Exactly 300 words. Sometimes truth only needs one folder and ten minutes of silence.
Many Snopes readers sent us questions asking if the claim was true, while others searched the site for the claim.
This claim was false. Neither Ocasio-Cortez or Trump has recently spoken on the Senate floor, as neither is a senator. In fact, such an exchange would be improbable to outright impossible without violating Senate rules.
Google searches for the claim in news coverage and for the supposed clipitself using different combinations of “Barron Trump,” “AOC,” “103 sources,” “Senate” and “C-SPAN,” the last of which was included because some versions of the story claimed the clip was recorded on the network. None of the searches revealed such a clip or reporting of an event that was supposed to be trending.
The Instagram post claimed that the exchange happened “yesterday” when it was posted on Nov. 19, 2025. Neither the Senate’s record of floor activity for Nov. 18, 2025, nor Congress’ daily record of Senate activity for that date made any mention of Ocasio-Cortez or Trump speaking in front of the Senate.
One red flag that the rumor was untrue was that it claimed Ocasio-Cortez, a member of the House of Representatives and not a senator, was speaking on the Senate floor, which was an incredibly unlikely event in the first place.
According to Senate rules, members of the House of Representatives may be admitted to the floor of the Senate, however; the Senate’s rules on debate do not make mention of anyone but senators and former U.S. presidents speaking on the Senate floor. In either case, the presiding officer of the Senate must recognize, essentially giving permission, before somone can speak on the floor. Members of the House of Representatives do not speak on the Senate floor often and are instead more likely to speak on the House floor.
Those same Senate rules make it equally implausible that Trump, currently a college student and not a member of Congress, would even be allowed on the Senate floor to challenge Ocasio-Cortez.
The rules say that other than the U.S. vice president and senators, no one shall be allowed on the Senate floor except for a group of people listed in those rules. The list grants an exception to the president and the president’s private secretary, but makes no such exception for the president’s family members.
Additionally, had this exchange been real, Trump’s binder of “verified sources” would have some serious accuracy issues.
For example, the Brookings Institute did not publish anything in 2023 that linked the creation of a wealth tax to the loss of 1.3 million jobs. In fact, Brookings Institute released research in 2019 that supported a wealth tax. The closest research Snopes could find to the one referenced in Trump’s made-up speech include was a 2024 Tax Foundation piece that claimed one version of a wealth tax could cause 1.12 million jobs lost, which based the claim on a 2014 Tax Foundation analysis. Other research that has referred to 1.3 million jobs lost include a 2025 brief from The Commonwealth Fund claiming various cuts to governmental assistance on healthcare and food assistance would cause the job losses, and a 2019 Congressional Budget Office report claiming that a $15 federal minimum wage would be the reason for the jobs lost.
The other data also had errors. The International Energy Agency reported existing mines and those currently under development would not produce enough lithium and cobalt to meet climate goals by 2030, but that was before a section where the IEA suggested various strategies to increase the supply of those minerals to be able to meet demand. For the Medicare-for-all claim, the World Bank did not say it would cause a $32 trillion deficit over the next decade; however, a 2018 piece from the Mercatus Center did claim it would cause such a deficit over 10 years.
Finally, while AI detection tools are far from perfectly accurate, Copyleak scans of bothversions of the story reported that 100% of the text may be AI-generated.
For further reading, Snopes has previously fact-checked similar claims about both Ocasio-Cortez and Trump.
Trump Opposes Lifting Broadcast Ownership Cap, Contradicting His FCC Chair
President Donald Trump publicly opposed lifting the national ownership cap that limits any broadcaster from reaching more than 39% of U.S. households, contradicting his FCC ally Brendan Carr. Carr and the National Association of Broadcasters have long pushed for deregulation to allow local stations to consolidate and better compete with Big Tech. Trump, however, warned on Truth Social that lifting the cap would benefit “Radical Left Networks” like ABC and NBC, which he called extensions of the Democratic Party. Newsmax CEO Chris Ruddy, a Trump ally, also opposes the change, warning it could silence conservative voices. Read More (Axios Rating)
Senators Urge FTC and SEC to Investigate Scam Ads on Facebook and Instagram
U.S. Senators Josh Hawley and Richard Blumenthal have called on federal regulators to investigate Meta over billions in revenue from scam ads on Facebook and Instagram. Citing internal documents obtained by Reuters, they allege Meta earned around $16 billion from illicit ads in 2024 alone, with $3.5 billion coming from “higher risk” scams every six months. The senators criticized Meta for reducing safety staff and failing to enforce anti-fraud rules, citing fake government-related ads and AI-generated deepfakes. Meta rejected the claims as exaggerated, noting a 58% decline in user scam reports over 18 months. Read More (The Guardian Rating)
Sinclair Moves Forward With Full Takeover Bid for Scripps Amid FCC Uncertainty
Despite political uncertainty around FCC broadcast ownership rules, Sinclair has submitted a formal bid to acquire the remaining shares of E.W. Scripps that it does not already own. The proposal, worth $7 per share, comes as Sinclair increased its stake to 9.9%. The move is surprising given President Trump’s recent opposition to lifting the ownership cap. Sinclair CEO Christopher Ripley said the merger would strengthen local journalism and create long-term value. The company may be betting on eventual deregulation or planning strategic divestitures to gain regulatory approval. The FCC is currently reviewing the rules in question. Read More (Axios Rating)
U.S. President Donald Trump called Russell Vought, director of the Office of Management and Budget, “Darth Vader” in an October 2025 speech.
Rating:
Context
Trump followed up his statement with praise for Vought and pointed out that critics call him Darth Vader: “They call him Darth Vader. I call him a fine man. But he’s cutting Democrat priorities and they’re never going to get them back.”
During an October 2025 speech in the White House Rose Garden, U.S. President Donald Trump apparently called Russell Vought, director of the Office of Management and Budget, “Darth Vader,” the name of a villainous character from the “Star Wars” movie series.
Per the footage that circulated online, while Trump did not specifically name Vought, he gestured to someone in the crowd listening to his speech and said:
We have Darth Vader. You know Darth Vader, right? Darth Vader is a man who is sitting — is that Darth? Stand up please. Does everybody know — they call him Darth Vader, I call him a fine man. But he’s cutting Democrat priorities and they’re never gonna get them back.
Posts on TikTok poked fun at Trump, showing him edited to appear in a scene taken from a “Star Wars” movie while making the speech.
Trump did refer to Vought as “Darth Vader,” as seen in official White House footage of the event on Oct. 21, 2025. While he did not name Vought directly, he gestured toward Vought in the audience and referenced Vought’s work cutting $20 billion worth of New York City infrastructure projects. As such, we’ve rated this claim true.
Trump preceded his comments by blaming the Democrats for the federal government shutdown, before pointing out Vought in the audience:
I will say this, that we have Darth Vader. You know Darth Vader, right? Darth Vader is a man who, I think, is sitting right… Is that Darth? Stand up, please, Darth Vader. They call him Darth Vader. I call him a fine man. But he’s cutting Democrat priorities and they’re never going to get them back. And they’ve caused us and they’ve really allowed us to do it. And by the way, thank you. You’re doing a great job, I have to tell you. Because many of the things that they’re cutting, like the New York project, $20 billion, we’re cutting it. They’re not going to get it back. I mean, they’re not going to get a lot of things back. They may not get it back. Maybe we’ll talk to them about it, but they’re losing all the things that they wanted. But many of the things that they wanted are things that we don’t want. They’re things that are just so bad for our country.
The comments can be heard at the 40-minute mark of the video embedded below:
As we have previously reported, Vought was best known as the head of the lobbying branch of The Heritage Foundation and a leading adviser for Project 2025, earning him the media moniker “Project 2025 architect.” He previously led the OMB for two years during Trump’s first term, and Trump reappointed him in his second term.
Just hours after the government shutdown began in early October, Vought announced on X that the administration was stopping billions of dollars on infrastructure projects in New York City, the same projects that Trump referenced in his speech above: “Roughly $18 billion in New York City infrastructure projects have been put on hold to ensure funding is not flowing based on unconstitutional DEI principles.” He added that the cut would affect “the Hudson Tunnel Project and the Second Ave Subway.”
Vought was present at the Oct. 21 Rose Garden speech, as seen in photographs that appeared on the reputable image bank Getty Images. A C-SPAN video of the event noted in the caption that Trump was shouting out Vought as “Darth Vader.”
Reports have described Vought as “the driving force behind the [government] shutdown” and “basically a second commander-in-chief, a shadow president.” A ProPublica investigation of Vought’s work at the OMB found he was responsible for freezing vast sums of federal spending, laying off tens of thousands of federal workers and bringing federal agencies to a standstill.
“Director of the Office of Management and Budget Russell Vought…” Getty Images, 21 Oct. 2025, https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/director-of-the-office-of-management-and-budget-russell-news-photo/2242034232. Accessed 21 Nov. 2025.
“Director of the Office of Management and Budget Russell Vought ,…” Getty Images, 21 Oct. 2025, https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/director-of-the-office-of-management-and-budget-russell-news-photo/2242034283. Accessed 21 Nov. 2025.
Ibrahim, Aleksandra Wrona, Nur. “The Facts About Project 2025: The Pro-Trump Proposal To ‘Reshape America.’” Snopes, 11 July 2024, https://www.snopes.com/news/2024/07/11/project-2025-explained/. Accessed 21 Nov. 2025.
Ibrahim, Nur. “Unpacking Trump Admin’s New Hiring Plan for Federal Workers — Including Question about Implementing Presidential Policy.” Snopes, 4 June 2025, https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/trump-policy-hiring-plan/. Accessed 21 Nov. 2025.
“President Trump Hosts a Rose Garden Club Lunch .” YouTube, The White House, 21 Oct. 2025, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zY8feOdV4TU&t=2286s. Accessed 21 Nov. 2025.
“Shadow President: How Russell Vought Is Using Shutdown to Gut Federal Agencies.” Democracy Now!, https://www.democracynow.org/2025/10/21/russell_vought_propublica_shadow_president. Accessed 21 Nov. 2025.
“Trump Names Project 2025 Architect Russell Vought to Key White House Role.” PBS News, 25 Nov. 2024, https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/trump-names-project-2025-architect-russell-vought-to-key-white-house-role. Accessed 21 Nov. 2025.
“White House Freezes $18 Billion in New York City Infrastructure Funding.” NBC News, 1 Oct. 2025, https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/trump-administration/white-house-freezes-18-billion-new-york-city-infrastructure-funding-rcna234928. Accessed 21 Nov. 2025.
Media Bias Fact Check selects and publishes fact checks from around the world. We only utilize fact-checkers that are either a signatory of the International Fact-Checking Network (IFCN) or have been verified as credible by MBFC. Further, we review each fact check for accuracy before publishing. We fact-check the fact-checkers and let you know their bias. When appropriate, we explain the rating and/or offer our own rating if we disagree with the fact-checker. (D. Van Zandt)
Claim Codes: Red= Fact Check on a Right Claim, Blue = Fact Check on a Left Claim, Black = Not Political/Conspiracy/Pseudoscience/Other
Fact Checker bias rating Codes: Red = Right-Leaning, Green = Least Biased, Blue = Left-Leaning, Black = Unrated by MBFC
MISLEADING
Claim by Gary Brecka: “Fluoride is a neurotoxin. Studies link it to lower IQ in kids, thyroid dysfunction, and weakened bone density.”
Science Feedback rating: Misleading (Studies cited by anti-fluoridation activists involve fluoride levels far higher than those used in community water systems. At recommended levels, no credible evidence shows fluoride lowers IQ, harms the thyroid, or weakens bones. Water fluoridation remains a proven public health measure to prevent tooth decay.)
Claim by Kayla Young (D): West Virginia is “the only state losing population.”
PolitiFact rating: False (West Virginia lost residents over two timeframes: between the 2020 census and a 2024 population estimate, and between 2023 and 2024 population estimates. But it was not the only state to do so. Six other states lost population since the 2020 census, and two other states have seen a decrease since the 2023 population estimate.)
Claim via Social Media: In November 2025, a town in Montana that voted overwhelmingly for U.S. President Donald Trump held a “pedophile bonfire” to burn MAGA merchandise.
Disclaimer: We are providing links to fact-checks by third-party fact-checkers. If you do not agree with a fact check, please directly contact the source of that fact check.
Do you appreciate our work? Please consider one of the following ways to sustain us.
In November 2025, a rumorspread widelyon social media (archived here, here and here) claiming that Preston Kennedy, the son of U.S. Sen. John Kennedy, R-La., had been diagnosed with Stage 4 pancreatic cancer.
The posts claimed that doctors discovered the cancer had already spread to Preston Kennedy’s liver and lungs after he collapsed during a routine jog. According to the posts, the Kennedy family allegedly released a statement calling for prayers following the diagnosis.
Multiple Snopes readers searched our website and emailed us to verify whether the claim was true.
However, there was no evidence at the time of this writing that Preston Kennedy had been diagnosed with pancreatic cancer.
As of publication, Sen. John Kennedy had not posted any statements about such a diagnosis on any of his socialmediaaccounts. Instead, he shared a statement (archived) on Sunday, Nov. 23, that appeared to address the false claim, calling it “AI-generated fake news” and confirming that everyone in the Kennedy family was healthy:
Friends, I guess in 2025 you have to do this sort of thing… but please ignore the AI generated fake news stories you may have seen about my family and me these past few days on social media claiming we experienced tragedy.
We are all healthy, happy, safe, and sound! We are…
Snopes reached out to John Kennedy’s office for further clarity and will update this story if we receive a response.
Likewise, searches of Bing, DuckDuckGo, Google and Yahoo turned up no credible news reports supporting the claim. Since John Kennedy is a public figure, news about him or his family would likely receive coverage from reputable media outlets.
While it’s unclear who authored the posts, they are part of a trend of false stories about celebrities and politicians shared on social media. The story was seemingly written to generate advertising revenue for external websites or to boost engagement on social media.
AI likely helped create the text
Unlike posts that spread similar false rumors, the images did not appear to have been generated using artificial intelligence (AI). Using a reverse image search tool, we found that John Kennedy shared the family photo used in the posts on X (archived), formerly Twitter, in 2019. The other images are legitimate photos that Associated Press and GettyImages photographers captured of John Kennedy.
The text in both the Facebook posts and attached article showed signs of AI generation.
For example, the AI-detection tool GPTZero indicated it was “highly confident” that the text in one of the Facebook posts was AI-generated, though it’s worth noting these types of tools are not always accurate.
(GPTZero AI-detection tool)
We independently identified signs of AI generation in the text, too. For example, it contained over-the-top, emotionally charged language, such as “the news struck Louisiana like a freight train at midnight” and “begging heaven to hold him close and not let go.” This type of language is often found in AI-generated content that’s designed to elicit strong reactions and drive engagement.
The text also erroneously stated that Preston Kennedy was 43 years old. Previous newsreports (archived here and here) indicated he was actually in his late 20s at the time of this writing.
More red flags
Other evidence raised red flags about the Facebook posts’ claims.
For example, a page transparency tab for a Facebook page that shared the false claim about Preston Kennedy revealed that multiple page owners were based in Vietnam — a country that has repeatedly appeared in research into fabricated, AI-generated stories tied to major news events and public figures.
For further reading, we investigated a rumor claiming John Kennedy embarrassed former U.S. Secretary of State and 2016 Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton after she tried to “silence” him during a Senate hearing.
