ReportWire

Tag: fact-check

  • CID’s inspector Abhijeet aka Aditya Srivastava ties the knot after 25 years? Know who is the actor’s bride | Bollywood Life











    CID’s inspector Abhijeet aka Aditya Srivastava ties the knot after 25 years? Know who is the actor’s bride










































    Aditya Srivastava, who played Inspector Abhijeet, remains a favorite actor. Recently, when photos and videos of him dressed as a groom circulated on social media, fans were in a frenzy, and many began to believe that he had remarried.

    CID’s inspector Abhijeet aka Aditya Srivastava ties the knot after 25 years? Know who is the actor’s bride

    CID is a show that many people have watched since childhood and it still holds a special place in the hearts of viewers. Beginning in the 90s, the show became popular in every household due to its characters. Aditya Srivastava, who played Inspector Abhijeet, remains a favorite actor. Recently, when photos and videos of him dressed as a groom circulated on social media, fans were in a frenzy, and many began to believe that he had remarried.

    Did CID’s inspector Abhijeet aka Aditya Srivastava get married?

    The photos that went viral were not taken during a wedding, but during Aditya Srivastava’s wedding anniversary party. His spouse, Mansi Srivastava, was also there. Many people mistook this for a new wedding, when in reality, it was a special celebration spent with his family. Therefore, the rumors circulating online were not true, and people unreasonably assumed that he had remarried.

    Watch:

    All about Aditya Srivastava and Mansi Srivastava love life

    Aditya Srivastava and Mansi Srivastava were married in 2003. The couple celebrated their wedding anniversary on November 22, during which these photos were taken. Aditya is the father of two daughters—Aarushi and Advika—and is very happy with his family. Fans showered him with warm wishes when the anniversary photos surfaced. Some jokingly commented on how Inspector Abhijeet left Dr. Tarika got married, while others expressed their emotional sentiments, saying they have been watching CID since childhood and still see Aditya in that same light.

    All about Aditya Srivastava career

    In addition to his powerful role in CID, Aditya Srivastava has also appeared in numerous films and other projects. He has played significant roles in films like Kaalo, Bhakshak, and Super 30. Despite this, audiences still recognize him most for his role as Inspector Abhijeet. In an interview, he stated that no matter how many films he has done, people remember him most for his role in CID. This is a significant testament to his popularity and the show’s success.



    Bollywoodlife_Web/Bollywoodlife_AS_Inarticle_300x250|300,250~Bollywoodlife_Web/Bollywoodlife_AS_Inarticle_2_300x250|300,250~Bollywoodlife_Web/Bollywoodlife_AS_ATF_970x90|970,250~Bollywoodlife_Web/Bollywoodlife_AS_ATF_300x250|300,600~Bollywoodlife_Web/Bollywoodlife_AS_BTF_1_300x250|300,600~Bollywoodlife_Web/Bollywoodlife_AS_BTF_2_300x250|300,600~Bollywoodlife_Web/bollywoodlife_ros_strip|1300,50~Bollywoodlife_Web/Bollywoodlife_AS_OOP_1x1|1,1

    Source link

  • PolitiFact readers’ feedback on Trump, crime stats

    PolitiFact last shared some of our reader comments at the end of President Donald Trump’s first 100 days of his second term. 

    A lot has happened since then.

    Trump deployed Marines to Los Angeles during immigration protests and National Guard troops to Washington, D.C., to tackle crime. The U.S. struck Iranian nuclear sites and played a large part in securing an Israel-Hamas ceasefire. Trump met with Russian President Vladimir Putin as well as Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy. The Justice Department declined to release files related to Jeffrey Epstein. Commentator Charlie Kirk and a Minnesota state representative were killed in acts of political violence. The U.S. government shut down. 

    Here’s a selection of reader reactions to our fact-checks and stories from the past few months, lightly edited for length and clarity. Readers can email us fact-check ideas and feedback at [email protected]

    Readers think we missed the mark on medical research, crime statistics

    Ahead of the government shutdown that started Oct. 1, House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., criticized the Trump administration’s efforts to cut back medical research funding during a Q&A with reporters. 

    “Republicans have effectively ended medical research in the United States of America,” Jeffries said Sept. 24.

    Chief Correspondent Louis Jacobson wrote that Trump has proposed severe cuts to medical research at the National Institutes of Health and other agencies, including caps on indirect costs for grantees’ labs, terminated grant funding and staff reductions. But this is not tantamount to effectively ending U.S. medical research.

    Even if Trump gets his way on a 39% cut to NIH’s budget in 2026, the institutes would still have more than $27 billion to spend in fiscal year 2026.

    Trump’s medical research cuts are real and sweeping, but they have not “effectively ended medical research.” We rated the statement Mostly False.

    One reader disagreed with our assessment. 

    “You fail to take into account the chilling effect of the Trump administration’s cuts on the researchers themselves,” the reader wrote. “Anybody with a job wants to know it will still be there in a month or a year. Putting their job security at the whim of the President, drives researchers out of the public sector. It discourages talented researchers from other countries from coming here.”

    Another reader questioned our reporting on rhetoric about mass shootings and transgender people.

    “Regarding your report about the gender of gun violence perpetrators, your cited statistics are misleading,” they wrote. “Unquestionably, males constitute the majority of shooters. However, what is far more relevant than the gender of the shooters is the percentage of shooters relative to the percentage of the population.

    “Statistics showing that transgender people commit less than one percent of fatal mass shootings paints one picture. Statistics showing the number of mass shootings committed by transgender people relative to the number of transgender people in the population paints another. However, I’m sure you’ll ignore the latter statistic if it does not align with your priorities.”

    An August 2025 report from the LGBTQ+ policy research center Williams Institute at the University of California, Los Angeles found that 2.8 million people ages 13 and above identify as transgender in the U.S. That’s 1% of people in the U.S. aged 13 and older. 

    Staff writer Loreben Tuquero noted in her story that it is difficult to come up with an exact figure for the percentage of mass shootings committed by trans people, because there is no widely accepted definition of “mass shooting” and it is sometimes not possible to verify a shooter’s gender identity. 

    Questions about the best way to cover Trump

    PolitiFact has fact-checked Trump more than 1,000 times since 2011. Over time, we’ve received questions and comments about how we should cover the president, 

    “Your site seems to be mostly about Trump all the time,” a reader commented in an email. “How about a little less Trump, and write more about any other falsehood subjects?”

    When deciding what to fact check, we select statements about topics that are in the news. As noted above, Trump and his administration have been at the center of many major news stories over the past year. 

    But in 2025, we’ve also covered topics such as falsehoods about Kirk’s shooter, accusations that prominent women in politics are men and AI-generated images of celebrities helping Texan flood victims.

    Without keeping count, we try to select facts to check from all sides of the political spectrum. At the same time, we more often fact-check the party that holds power or people who repeatedly make attention-getting or misleading statements.

    “[Trump] is full of hyperbole and half-truths, like all politicians,” wrote one reader in an email. “Why not report on what he does, as compared to what he says? There is often a wide gap there… I, and everyone I know, cares about the end result, not the rhetoric leading up to it.”

    Actions often speak louder than words. That’s why, in addition to fact-checking presidents, PolitiFact also tracks how well those presidents keep their campaign promises. 

    We’re currently tracking 75 promises Trump made during his second campaign on our MAGA-Meter. We also tracked Trump’s promises during his first term, as well as promises from former presidents Barack Obama and Joe Biden. 

    Since it’s still the first year of Trump’s second term, many of his promises are rated In The Works. That said, he has accumulated 12 Promise Kept, three Promise Compromise and one Promise Broken ratings.

    Looking ahead to Lie of the Year

    Every December, PolitiFact looks back on the sum of our fact-checking year and names the most consequential falsehood as our Lie of the Year. The 2024 Lie of the Year went to Trump and Vice President JD Vance for the falsehood that Haitian immigrants in Springfield, Ohio, were eating pets.

    The official decision for the Lie of the Year is made by PolitiFact editors, but we also ask readers to weigh in with their votes. One reader got a jump start on suggestions this year.

    “I’m voting in advance for your Lie of the Year,” they wrote. “The propaganda campaign is in full swing, Kimmel, Heather Cox Richardson, Laurence Tribe, and many other prominent voices on the left have claimed that Kirk’s assassin was MAGA. And major press outlets have been misinforming the public.”

    What do you think should be the 2025 Lie of the Year? Send your suggestions to [email protected]

    Some words of thanks from our readers

    PolitiFact staff writers Madison Czopek, Grace Abels and Samantha Putterman have written a lot about Tylenol over the past month after Trump discouraged pregnant women from taking the drug and health officials tried to link its main ingredient, acetaminophen, to autism.

    Experts repeatedly told PolitiFact that acetaminophen is safe for pregnant women and children when used as recommended. Links between Tylenol and autism are based on inconclusive reviews of conflicting science, doctors and researchers said. 

    One reader in the mental health field wrote to say thank you.

    “As you might surmise, I sometimes contact writers about their articles and I have to say that this is one of the best examples of great writing I’ve talked to someone about,” they wrote.

    “Ironically, or perhaps not, I am also a mental health prescriber for children with autism among others, and you’re doing a great job at advancing truth in healthcare with this population which has been crucial and extremely challenging.”

    When Trump said that the Smithsonian Institution includes nothing about American success and is focused only on slavery, we sent Abels and Jacobson to Smithsonian museums to check out his statement. They found that the Smithsonian Institution’s collections are expansive and cover every aspect of U.S. history.

    “Thank you for taking the time to give a cohesive thoughtful response to Trump’s assertion,” one reader wrote in response to our Pants on Fire fact-check

    And after Tuquero and researcher Caryn Baird hosted a webinar on digging through public records and verifying information, one participant commented, “I have entirely new respect for the hard work, hours you journalists spend on getting reporting out that has integrity! Wow. Cheers. Many thanks to you all.”

    If you believe in PolitiFact’s mission to hold politicians accountable, donate to our newsroom today. And make sure you’re signed up for our newsletters and new broadcast channels on Facebook and Instagram

    Source link

  • Fact check: ‘Roofman’ is based on a true NC story. But how much truth is in it?

    Channing Tatum stars in Paramount Pictures' "Roofman," which is based on an N.C. crime story (and filmed in the Charlotte area last year).

    Channing Tatum stars in Paramount Pictures’ “Roofman,” which is based on an N.C. crime story (and filmed in the Charlotte area last year).

    TNS

    Of all the questions moviegoers can come up with regarding the authenticity of the new “Roofman” movie, this one might stand as the biggest: At the time of his crimes, was Jeffrey Manchester even remotely close to as good-looking as Channing Tatum?

    That, of course, is subjective. Meanwhile, many of the other “what’s true and what’s not” questions we expect to be raised by the film — based on Manchester’s brazen McDonald’s robberies, his bold escape from a North Carolina prison, and the bonkers series of adventures that saw him living in (and next to) a Charlotte Toys R Us while wooing a churchgoing single mom under false pretenses — can be answered much more objectively.

    “Roofman” opened in theaters nationwide on Friday; so if you haven’t yet seen it but plan to, you may want to bookmark this page and come back to it after.

    Because, obviously, spoilers abound.

    If you have seen it, then let’s dive right in to our great, big fact check, which outlines numerous examples of the creative license the filmmakers took on their way to adapting Manchester’s life and crimes for the big screen.

    Kirsten Dunst (who portrays Leigh Wainscott) and Channing Tatum (Jeffrey Manchester) on the set of "Roofman.”
    Kirsten Dunst (who portrays Leigh Wainscott) and Channing Tatum (Jeffrey Manchester) on the set of “Roofman.” Davi Russo Davi Russo

    In the movie: As the story begins, Jeffrey (played by Tatum) is in a tenuous off-again-on-again relationship with the mother of his three children, including very young twins and a daughter who turns 6 and then 7 in the first 15 minutes of running time. It’s implied that they reside in North Carolina (and, though it’s never made explicit, it’s suggested they’re in the Fayetteville area).

    In real life: Somewhat true, somewhat false. Manchester was never a permanent North Carolina resident. He had lived near California’s Bay area for years. He was divorced in 1999, and during that period became estranged from his three children. In May 2000, he arrived in the Tar Heel state on an assignment as an Army Reserve sergeant; shortly thereafter, he wound up in the Charlotte area — where he would rob two McDonald’s over the course of just a few hours. At the time, his daughter was about 7, but his twin sons were actually a year older than her.

    In the movie: Having broken into a Fayetteville McDonald’s through its roof, Jeffrey genially forces employees into the restaurant’s freezer — and in doing so, he makes sure they put on the coats they had worn to work (implying that it is wintertime).

    In real life: More true than not, though there’s no record of him ever committing a robbery anywhere near Fayetteville. Also, this is somewhat nitpicky, but … he actually was known for putting employees into the restaurant’s walk-in refrigerator. And FWIW, Mirvat Fayad says that when he robbed the McDonald’s she worked at in Belmont on the morning of May 20, 2000 (low temp that day: 65 degrees), he put them in the fridge after having the manager fetch for each of them a McDonald’s-uniform jacket. Those coats, she told us, were provided for employees who need to do work inside the refrigerators or freezers.

    This newly renovated McDonald’s, on Main Street in Belmont, stands in place of the old building that was originally broken into and robbed by Jeffrey Manchester in May 2000.
    This newly renovated McDonald’s, on Main Street in Belmont, stands in place of the old building that was originally broken into and robbed by Jeffrey Manchester in May 2000. Melissa Melvin-Rodriguez mrodriguez@charlotteobserver.com

    In the movie: As Jeffrey presents a new bike to his daughter at her seventh birthday party, police arrive to arrest him for his “Roofman” crimes.

    In real life: False. He was arrested as he fled with cash he’d taken from the Belmont McDonald’s, after Fayad and her co-workers were able to break open the refrigerator’s door and call police.

    In the movie: Jeffrey — who claims that he robbed 45 McDonald’s restaurants before being caught — is convicted of three counts of felony kidnapping. At a hearing on Feb. 4, 2004, a judge tells him, “Although you’re only being tried for one robbery, we know you’ve done many more,” then sentences him to 45 years in prison. (Jumping ahead a little here, but the movie suggests the whole Manchester saga played out over the course of two years. It actually spanned more than twice as long as that.)

    In real life: True-ish, and false-ish. A jury convicted him of seven counts of kidnapping and one weapons offense, all related to the two N.C. robberies. He was sentenced to 32 to 45 years by a Gaston County judge — on Nov. 2, 2000. Authorities had been investigating him for at least 42 armed robberies in other states, but eventually retired those efforts.

    In the movie: Jeffrey escapes from a Polkton prison by wedging a piece of plywood into the undercarriage of a large box truck, and then climbing up onto the plywood, where he could avoid being spotted by guards using under-vehicle search mirrors.

    In real life: True. The film’s and history’s timelines realign here, too, with the escape taking place in June 2004. (What’s false about how that scene plays out, however, is that it has Manchester managing to get a fair distance away from the prison while riding under the truck; in actuality, he only got as far as an outbuilding, then had to slip away from there.)

    In the movie: Jeffrey winds up in the Charlotte area and randomly decides that a Toys R Us store (shown late in the movie as being located in Pineville) would be a good place to hide out. He finds a difficult-to-access, walled-off area of the store — behind a display of kids’ bikes — where he creates a lair that includes a children’s mattress fitted with Spider-Man bedsheets and comforters. He manages to take control of the security cameras, sets up stolen baby monitors to spy on employees, uses the store as a playground at night, and eats stolen candy and baby food. The lair goes undetected for six months.

    Channing Tatum as Jeffrey Manchester in “Roofman,” much of which is set in the busy Toys R Us store he’s hiding in.
    Channing Tatum as Jeffrey Manchester in “Roofman,” much of which is set in the busy Toys R Us store he’s hiding in. Davi Russo Davi Russo

    In real life: More true than not. The false parts include the fact that the store was actually on Independence Boulevard in Charlotte; as well as the fact that while he did live behind a wall in the Toys R Us for multiple months, that hideout was discovered by employees (when he happened to not be there). Around that time, he bored a hole through a wall on the opposite side of Toys R Us, into a closed-down Circuit City electronics store, where he created another lair behind a wall underneath a staircase.

    In the movie: Leigh Wainscott (played by Kirsten Dunst) is introduced as an employee at Toys R Us and a recently divorced single mom of two girls — Dee, 11, and Lindsay, 16.

    In real life: Vaguely true, but largely false. Wainscott (now Leigh Moore) worked in the corporate office of a large automotive group at the time. She was separated, but not yet divorced; and she actually has three children, including daughter Ashley (who was about 15 at the time), son Matt (about 12 then), and daughter Ginny (about 9).

    In the movie: Jeffrey hacks into the store manager’s computer and changes Leigh’s work schedule.

    In real life: Again, Wainscott never worked at Toys R Us. However, it’s true that Manchester was able to get into the store’s scheduling system and made changes based on who he might want working (or not working) at particular times — and perhaps just to generally create chaos.

    In the movie: While spying on a conversation between Leigh and Toys R Us manager Mitch (played by Peter Dinklage), Jeffrey learns of a toy drive happening at Wainscott’s church — Crossroads, located “just across the interstate.” He starts attending the church after dropping by with a garbage bag full of stolen toys.

    Channing Tatum’s Jeffrey Manchester uses the Toys R Us as a playground in “Roofman.”
    Channing Tatum’s Jeffrey Manchester uses the Toys R Us as a playground in “Roofman.” Davi Russo Davi Russo

    In real life: Somewhat true, somewhat false. In mid-fall of 2004, Manchester did in fact wander over to Crossroads Church — about 300 yards from the Toys R Us, over on Monroe Road — but mainly because he was bored and lonely after more than four months of little to no human contact. He didn’t meet Wainscott until after he started attending services. Oh, and he did bring an impressive amount of (stolen) toys to support a church toy drive, but not till closer to Christmastime.

    In the movie: Jeffrey introduces himself to Leigh as John Zorn, a “just officially divorced” dad of “two little monster boys and … a little girl that is my best pal.” He says he works for the government, but “can’t really talk about it. It’s classified.”

    In real life: Mostly true. The only exception? Leigh Moore told us recently that Manchester never mentioned having kids or being married while they were dating.

    In the movie: “John” and Leigh attend a singles brunch at Red Lobster, after which she asks him out.

    In real life: All true, except the event was actually at TGI Friday’s.

    In the movie: Leigh tells “John” her ex’s name was Jeffrey, making for a strange coincidence.

    In real life: True!

    Jeffrey Manchester, photographed during his trial in November of 2000, one day before he was sentenced to serve at least 35 years in prison.
    Jeffrey Manchester, photographed during his trial in November of 2000, one day before he was sentenced to serve at least 35 years in prison. John D. Simmons Charlotte Observer File Photo

    In the movie: His excessively sugary diet causes Jeffrey to have to visit a nearby dentist to have 14 cavities filled.

    In real life: True. We don’t know exactly how many cavities he had, but he did indeed get some filled at a dentist’s office.

    In the movie: Speaking of candy, there’s a scene on Halloween when “John” and Leigh’s younger daughter Dee are shown trick-or-treating together, with him dressed as a pink bunny.

    In real life: False. Manchester hadn’t even met Wainscott by Halloween of 2004. He did steal a pink bunny costume from a staff area of Toys R Us (it was used around Easter), but he wore it — for kicks — to a Christmas party hosted by a member of Crossroads Church in December.

    In the movie: After a simmering rift between Leigh and her teenage daughter leads to an argument over Lindsay’s refusal to learn how to drive her mom’s stick shift, “John” announces they need a “beater” — i.e. a used automatic-transmission car that will make it easier for her to get her license. “John,” Leigh and the two girls pick out a green Chrysler Concorde sedan at a local dealership and take it for a memorably zany test drive. He winds up buying it, with a roll of cash.

    In real life: Kinda, sorta true. Ish. Wainscott grew to thinking he really needed a car, so they went to a local dealership and he stunned her by plunking down $5,000 cash for a green 1999 Chrysler Concorde. None of her children went with them. The test drive was uneventful.

    Channing Tatum and Kirsten Dunst chat next to the green Chrysler Concorde in “Roofman.”
    Channing Tatum and Kirsten Dunst chat next to the green Chrysler Concorde in “Roofman.” Davi Russo Davi Russo

    In the movie: Jeffrey is seen making three visits to a pawn shop. Twice, he goes when it’s open, to sell video games he stole from the toy store (at one point it’s mentioned that he stole $10,000 worth of games in total). Closer to the end, he breaks in at night and steals a pistol from a glass case along with a “POLICE” vest on a clothing rack.

    In real life: Almost entirely true. Manchester did steal a significant amount of video games from the store, and pawned them. Former Charlotte police sergeant Katherine Scheimreif told us he also stole two pistols from a pawn shop farther down Independence.

    In the movie: On Christmas Eve, Jeffrey robs the Toys R Us he’s been living in as it gets ready to open for the day. In the process, he knocks out and bloodies an armed security guard by striking him with his rifle.

    In real life: Fairly accurate. In the course of a day-after-Christmas robbery, Manchester — wearing a vest that had “POLICE” on it — got the jump on an off-duty Mecklenburg County sheriff’s deputy who’d been hired to protect the store that morning. He took her service pistol, pointed it at her, and ordered her to the floor. He did not physically harm her, but Scheimreif told us the woman was new to her job and decided to leave the profession after being victimized.

    Jeffery Manchester’s Jan. 5, 2005 mug shot. 
    Jeffery Manchester’s Jan. 5, 2005 mug shot.  File Photo

    In the movie: Jeffrey gets the big score he came for, but is thrown off his game when Leigh appears unexpectedly at the entrance. Rattled, he runs with the stolen cash to the rear of the store and flees via the emergency exit.

    In real life: Fairly inaccurate. Manchester’s robbery went awry when two employees escaped while he was pulling money from the safe. He did run to the back of the store, but his plan had been to trigger the emergency-exit alarm — to make everyone think he’d left the building — and then slip through the passageway to reach his Circuit City hideout. Unfortunately for him, he forgot to trigger that alarm. Responding officers found the passageway, then found the hideout. He wasn’t in it, but they found a fingerprint that matched the escaped convict Jeffrey Manchester. Leigh didn’t find out about any of this until a week and a half later (more on that in a moment).

    In the movie: Jeffrey tries to cover his tracks by burning down the dentist’s office where he had his cavities filled.

    In real life: True.

    In the movie: It’s implied that Leigh went to the police and then agreed to use herself as bait. As Jeffrey is on his way to the airport, to catch a flight that will take him to a country with no extradition, she calls and asks if he’s coming to Christmas dinner. He turns around and heads back to her apartment, where police are waiting to arrest him.

    Channing Tatum and Kirsten Dunst in a scene from “Roofman.”
    Channing Tatum and Kirsten Dunst in a scene from “Roofman.” Courtesy of Paramount Pictures

    In real life: Mostly false, but with grains of truth. Charlotte police were showing Manchester’s photo to residents and businesses all around the Toys R Us, and finally got a hit at Crossroads Church, where members recognized him as John Zorn. They said he’d been dating Wainscott, and on Jan. 6 — her 40th birthday — police made a surprise visit to her workplace to tell her that her boyfriend was on “America’s Most Wanted.” The couple already had plans for dinner, and although Manchester knew police were onto him, Wainscott successfully got him to stick to the plan by acting calm and cool on a phone call confirming their date. He was arrested without incident outside of her apartment when he arrived to pick her up. He apparently did have plans to leave the country after taking her to dinner.

    In the movie: Jeffrey is sentenced to “384 more months,” which is 32 years. “That means by the time I get out of here,” he says in voiceover, “I’ll be an old man.”

    In real life: Basically false. Manchester is in Central Prison in Raleigh serving out the rest of his original 35-year sentence (for his Gaston County crimes). He did get more than 25 years for the Toys R Us crimes and the arson conviction, but the Mecklenburg judge who sentenced him in that case ordered that time be served concurrently — so he’s still expected to be released in 2036. By then, he’ll be 65 years old.

    In the movie: A fellow convict asks Jeffrey if he ever got to see Leigh again. Then the film cuts to a scene in which Leigh visits Jeffrey in prison shortly after he’s recaptured. She tells him, tearfully, “I was really angry at you. I was most angry at how you hurt the girls. But that’s not the way I think about it now. I think about it as an adventure. I had a lot of fun. I’m thankful.”

    In real-life: True-ish. Wainscott did make one visit to the prison afterward. She said it was just “for closure.” She then went almost two decades without talking to him, and has been happily remarried since 2016. But she reconnected with Manchester after the movie went into production — both were involved as consultants. In an interview with The Charlotte Observer last month, she said, “Yes, he broke the law. Yeah, he was a criminal. But he’s a good person.”

    Leigh Moore, photographed this past summer at her home in Matthews.
    Leigh Moore, photographed this past summer at her home in Matthews. Melissa Melvin-Rodriguez mrodriguez@charlotteobserver.com

    This story was originally published October 10, 2025 at 4:28 PM.

    Théoden Janes

    The Charlotte Observer

    Théoden Janes has spent more than 18 years covering entertainment and pop culture for the Observer. He also thrives on telling emotive long-form stories about extraordinary Charlotteans and — as a veteran of three dozen marathons and two Ironman triathlons — occasionally writes about endurance and other sports.
    Support my work with a digital subscription

    Theoden Janes

    Source link

  • Fact-checks from Trump-Putin Alaska meeting

    Trump-Putin Alaska meeting: Live fact-checks

    Source link

  • Live fact-checks from Trump’s Madison Square Garden rally

    Live fact-checks from Trump’s Madison Square Garden rally

    We’re live fact-checking former President Donald Trump’s 5 p.m. ET rally at Madison Square Garden in New York City. Follow along here.

    Source link

  • Get the Facts: Claims from KCRA 3 Congressional District 3 debate with Kevin Kiley, Jessica Morse

    Get the Facts: Claims from KCRA 3 Congressional District 3 debate with Kevin Kiley, Jessica Morse

    Get the Facts: Claims from KCRA 3 Congressional District 3 debate with Kevin Kiley, Jessica Morse

    In the race for Congress. There is *** lot on the line in California’s third district from the shores of Lake Tahoe to Roseville, from the Pluma National Forest to Death Valley. Tonight. The candidates answer questions that impact you. The cost of living, quality of life and health care, meet the candidates, Republican Kevin Kylie and Democrat, Jessica Morris. This is the KCR *** three debate for Congress district three. Now moderator Ashley Zavala, welcome to the debate between candidates running to represent California’s third congressional district. *** quick overview of the rules for tonight. Each candidate will have *** minute to respond to questions. We’ll have about 30 seconds for follow up or rebuttals. Viewers at home will hear *** time like this once *** candidate’s time is up, we received many viewer questions and we thank you so much for submitting so many. We have incorporated as many as we possibly could into tonight’s debate. We flipped *** coin to determine who will lead us off tonight. Jessica Morse won that coin toss. So we’ll start with you, Miss Morse. We’re gonna begin with fire mitigation. As our first question, the federal government owns more than half or 58% of California’s forest lands while the state owns just 3%. What would you do in Congress to protect those lands and essentially the state from wildfire? Yeah. Thank you. And thank you to everybody for tuning in tonight. I’m five generations from the Sierra foothills and this has always been my home and I’ve spent the last five years as secretary at the California Natural Resources Agency leading the state’s efforts on wildfire mitigation. How do we get ahead of this crisis? How we, how are we resilient to fire the strategy that works in which I want to continue to do in Congress is investing inside of communities. This is home, hardening and defensible space. So your homes don’t burn from embers, investing around communities. These are strategic fuel breaks like the one we got up and Cofax that saved Cofax from the Oak fire and investments around across our entire watershed landscapes to be able to get ahead of this crisis so that our forests and wild lands can safely except fire the way they were supposed to versus these catastrophic mega fires that we’ve been seeing. I was proud to be *** member of the Federal Wildland Fire Commission. And when I get to Congress, we have *** clear plan to be able to actually get fire mitigation across the finish line. And I’ll be honored to be able to serve that in Congress. This thank you, Mr K. Same question. What would you do in Congress to protect those forest land? Well, good evening, everyone. And thanks so much for tuning in. It’s an honor to be the representative for our district, *** district where I was born and raised and went to public schools. And while I’m still just in my first term, we’ve already had *** lot of success in bringing unprecedented federal resources to our district to help our local communities. And that includes millions of dollars specifically for fire resilience in our district. There are five national forests in my district and I’ve spent *** lot of time out in the forest with the forest service with the folks who are doing this mitigation work. And I’ve tried to get them every resource possibly can. And indeed, we have had unprecedented amounts of money coming in, but we also need need to make it easier to do forest management work by eliminating needless regulations. And I do have to say, well, my opponent just gave you an answer about what she would do. She claims to have been in charge of this for Governor Newsom for the last five years. And we’ve had some of the worst fires in state history and we’ve had *** fire insurance crisis that has spun absolutely out of control. So what we need is to have effective forage management practices, not someone who has *** record of negligence on this very issue. Mr Carley, thank you. You mentioned insurance and actually that’s our next viewer question. When it comes to wildfires, the climate crisis is bearing down on all parts of this nation in different ways here in California and in your district, as you know, uh, is in the form of wildfires, many people in this district have been forced to sign up for California’s fair plan that risks insolvency at this point. What can the federal government do to address this insurance problem? You are absolutely right. You know, this crisis has just spun out of control. People are being kicked to the fair plan. They’re having to pay five times as much as what they paid before. What I’ve tried to do is at least soften the blow financially by giving people *** tax relief based upon how much their premiums went up and by sponsoring the Safe Homes Act, which is going to give people *** tax credit based on the home, hardening work they do on their own home. But the reality of the situation is that in order to get the fire insurance crisis under control, we need to improve our forest management. And once again, we have *** candidate here who worked for Gavin Newsom for the last five years and we’ve had some of the worst wildfires in state history when they’ve done nothing to address the fire insurance crisis. And all the while Governor Newsom collects collected $720,000 in campaign contributions from insurance companies. While my opponent worked for him. What I’ve been doing in Congress is trying to bring unprecedented resources to the folks who are managing our forests so we can make them safer and we can mitigate risk. Is there anything Congress could do better as *** follow up here to help ensure that those resources get to your district quickly? Absolutely. What we need to do is build on the success. For example of what happened in the Christmas Valley, you know, the calder fire was one of the most devastating fires in state history, but it could have been *** lot worse. It could have engulfed the entire town of South Lake Tahoe, if not for *** mitigation project that had been done in the Christmas Valley. And that project was thanks to special legislation to expedite Forest management, specifically in the Tahoe Basin. I’m sponsoring the Fix Our Forest Act and the Effective Forest Management Act to allow that relief to be spread throughout the National Forest System. Thank you, Mr Kylie Miss Morse. The insurance question. The same one goes to you. What would you do in Congress to try to help with California’s insurance problem? Let me first address our record on fire. First of all, Kevin Kylie actually voted against expediting tools that help save South Lake Tahoe from the Caldor fire. He voted against *** $3 billion wildfire resilience initiative which I secured through the legislature to be able to get through projects, everything from fuel breaks to the goats grazing here in Roseville. We got 1200 projects on the ground in record time and Kylie voted against this $3 billion initiative three times when he was in Congress. Only because he was interested in playing partisan games with our fire safety rather than actually stepping up. It was *** bipartisan effort. I am so proud of the fire resilience work. So there’s two things we need to do on insurance. And Kevin Kylie is proposing to put *** band aid on *** bullet hole. We need real reform and we need it right now and I will deliver that in Congress. What I will do is actually invest in, in federal fire insurance reform so that we create incentives for insurance companies to start driving risk reduction rather than putting that cost back on the homeowner. Thank you, Miss Morris Mr Carly. Do you want to respond to her claims about your votes? I do and I want to thank KCR *** for being kind of an honest broker in this election because KC, the very station we’re debating on right now did *** fact check about all the ads and they found mine to be true. They found my opponents to be completely false. And incredibly, she then continued to air the ads after she was caught lying and this has happened every time she’s for Congress, she’s been rebuked for dishonesty by the Sacramento be by case by Politifact, even by *** judge who had to step in and penalize her for trying to deceive voters. Miss M Do you want 30 seconds to respond to that? I do. I’m so proud of my record and my work, I have *** proud career in service, everything from national security being on the ground in Baghdad as *** civilian with U *** ID to working with the defense department and the state department and last to serve the people of California in the California Natural Resources Agency. I’ve served Republicans. I served Democrats. Kylie has been playing political games with my record because he knows that his record can’t stand up to mine. And that’s what classic politicians do. That’s why we need to change. We need *** public servant. I will stand up for you and I tell the truth, Miss more. Thank you. Our next topic is going to be the Federal Emergency Management Agency and disaster relief. Miss More. We’re going to stick with you. Fema is right now under scrutiny as it responds to recent disasters on the east coast Congress already approved billions before they broke for recess and are facing calls to come back to approve more. What would you do in Congress to ensure that disaster response is efficient and cost effective? I was on the ground in paradise for the campfire recovery. Volunteering for *** month. I saw incredible resilience, but I also saw incredible trauma that I hadn’t seen since I was in Baghdad. And I realize that we need our emergency work to move faster and more quickly. And we can’t stand for bureaucracy and red tape to slow us down from getting the needs on the ground to both respond to *** disaster. But also FEMA has *** critical role in mitigating and preventing disaster. When I get to Congress, I will cut red tape just like I did at the state so that we can actually get these projects moving quickly. One of the unique things I want to do is actually help get our watersheds and safe in shape and we can use FEMA resources to do that if we classify our upper watershed. And remember, 60% of California’s water comes from this congressional district. If we classify our upper watershed as, as natural infrastructure and critical infrastructure, it unlocks federal dollars to help get in there and proactively do the forest management needed to safeguard our watersheds and our community. Thank you, Miss Morris. Just *** quick follow up there. Besides water. Is there any other red tape? You would specifically try to cut to do this? Absolutely. One of the things I did on the mitigation front in California was we cut state contracting law down from *** year to 10 days. We were formed environmental review timelines that were taking two years down to four weeks and we change state grant processes so that they can get on the ground quickly. FEMA has been slowing us down. And so when I get to fema, I’m going to work on making sure they have exemptions and tools and pathways so that we can actually lift the hood, fix the red tape so that our mitigation work can get on the ground within weeks of getting the appropriations rather than years. Thank you, Miss M Mr Kylie. We’re going to stick on this topic, but I have *** different question for you. Former President Donald Trump has said he would withhold disaster relief funds from California most recently saying this over his differences in water policy with state leaders. Do you agree with those plans? And if not, what would you do to prevent that from happening? I don’t know the context of those remarks, but I’ll tell you this, regardless of who the president is, I will fight in every way I can to get relief for our district and for our state and for proof of that. Just *** what happened last year, just days after I took office, we had unprecedented storms throughout California that wreaked havoc on my district. And I led *** bipartisan effort to get *** declaration of emergency at the state level. And from President Biden, and we’ve got *** lot of federal support that came in after that in order to help folks get through that to get their power back and then to recover. But it is true that we do need to have major reform when it comes to FEMA because when in these communities that have been struck by storms and fires and other disasters, fema often makes it way too difficult to rebuild and way too difficult to get victims, the support that they need to take one example, folks who have gotten *** settlement from PG and E currently, that is being taxed. And so I’ve sponsored legislation that is actually successfully passed through the House in order to make it. So when you’re compensated from being *** victim for *** wildfire, you don’t have to pay taxes on that settlement. Mr Kelly. Just *** quick follow up. I know you said you weren’t aware of the comments. But if Mr Trump gets re elected and he were to withhold disaster relief from California over policy differences, what would you do in that situation? Of course, I will fight to get whatever relief that we can. Although it is true that I think we need reform and how those resources are deployed. You know, when you look at what’s happening in our forests, we’ve made it way too difficult to actually do proactive forage management projects. And I have to say, you know, Governor Newsom, who my opponent worked for for five years slashed $150 billion *** million dollars from the fire prevention budget. And then worse capital Public Radio found that they lied about it. We didn’t even know that the work wasn’t being done because cap radio found they exaggerated the work they’d done by *** staggering 690%. Thank you, Mr Ky. We’re going to stick with you on our next topic, which is Social Security. The annual Social Security and Medicare Trustees report released in May said the program’s trust fund will be unable to pay full benefits beginning in 2035 without action from Congress. What should Congress do to address the depletion? Well, as *** matter of first principles, we absolutely have to protect social security and Medicare for me, that is non negotiable. So I help pass the non the bipartisan Fiscal Responsibility Act, which is going to save two $1 trillion for taxpayers. But I said from the get go, we cannot do that at the expense of our seniors. We protected Social Security and Medicare and we actually increased benefits for our seniors. But this is connected to the situation at the border as well because when you have millions of people coming in, if they start collecting benefits, that’s going to place enormous strain on the system. In fact, we already see that happening in California, Governor Newsom who my opponent worked for for five years is giving free medical, free health care to everyone here illegally costing taxpayers $3 billion *** year. Meanwhile, our own citizens are not being well served by me because the reimbursement rates are so low. But ultimately, the way that we can shore up the system is by catalyzing economic growth. That’s why I am *** strong proponent of regulatory reform that’s going to get rid of needless regulations in order to support small businesses and empower job creation, Miss Morris. Same question goes to you. How should Congress deal with the depletion? Yeah. Social security is uh really vital for our seniors. My first job was actually helping to protect um seniors in um when I was working in *** nursing home in Sacramento in high school. And um and I see that they need to retire with dignity. And so the best way to actually shore up um social security in particular and close that gap is to invest in closing the wage gap. Right now, people pay $120,000 who earn $120,000 pay 6% into their, into their social security every year. But somebody paying *** million dollars earning *** million dollars only pays 0.7 percent of their income. We need to make sure that people are paying the ultra wealthy are paying into social security to keep that solvent for our seniors. But my opponent has actually voted against seniors every step of the way and he has voted against them from cutting meals on wheels to closing social security offices that they can go to, to preventing negotiations for prescription drug prices which lowers cost for. Thank you, Miss M Mr K. You want 30 seconds to respond to that. I would and I just remind folks that this is *** candidate who has been condemned for dishonesty by KCR ***, by the Sacramento, by her fellow Democrats, by Politifact and even by *** judge. And if you want to look at my record on seniors, I point you to *** letter from the *** ARP in which the *** ARP gave me credit for saving *** critical program for seniors and Medicare that’s going to give millions of seniors better access to Medicare benefits. Thank you, Mr K, Miss Morse. I want to go back to you on our next topic which is health insurance. This is another viewer question. Health insurance premiums continue to soar with double digit increases. Year after year, the annual health insurance cost to cover *** family of four is about $24,000. What should Congress do in order to bring those costs down? First, I think we need to be able to have negotiation from the government with private companies to be able to drive down these costs. I want everyone to have the option to purchase Medicare if they want it. And we also need to shore up and rural and health care and rural investments because we are seeing maternity wards closing in *** because our rural health care system cannot sustain the entire private sector. But Kevin Kylie is being funded by pharmaceutical companies and large corporations that are driving up our health care. And I also want to address his accusations against me. Kevin K, the only person lying on the stage is you. I am so proud of my record and my work. It actually stands up to credulity, but you are the one who has actively played partisan games during the fire crisis. You were slinging mud at cal fire and these workers who were out there need deep in poison oak, delivering fuel breaks for us and you were sitting on the sidelines rather than rolling up your sleeves and helping us get the job done. Mr Carly, I’m going to go to you again. This, this question is about health insurance. What should Congress do to bring costs down for families? And I’ll just say she’s at it again. It’s not me that has made these accusations against KCR the very station we’re debating right now and they did *** fact check and found your ads and these other wild allegations to be false. But in some sense, the rising cost of health care is tied to the broader that is harming so many folks, especially in California. Thanks to the misguided policies of, of Governor Newsom who my opponent works for, worked for for the last five years. But when it comes to health care specifically, you know, the cost of premiums keeps going up while access is going down. It could take months to get an appointment. Even if you’re on private insurance. If you’re on medical, you might not get an appointment at all. So there are *** few things I think we need to do. Number one, we need to support our critical access. There’s *** number of them in my district and I’ve been to many if not all of them. Number two, we need to make costs more transparent to consumers. So you don’t get surprise bills. Number three, we need to empower patients to act as consumers with things like health savings accounts. So they have more choices. Number four, we need to expand access with things like telehealth where it makes sense. And number five, we need to focus more on preventative health care. So there are incentives for providers to treat problems early on that will save enormous costs as well as allow people to live longer and healthier lives. Thank you, Mr Kiley. We’re going to stick with you. Our next topic is abortion. California is one of 21 states where the procedure remains accessible and legal following the overturning of Roe versus Wade by the United States Supreme Court. You are on the record as saying you would not support *** total national abortion ban. But if the majority of Republicans in Congress do try to move forward with *** national ban, what will you do to make sure that this issue is still up to the states? I will not support it in any way, shape or form. I believe this is *** state issue and California has made its decision California voters placed an individual right around access to abortion in the state constitution itself. And there is no federal role in terms of interfering with that. And I’ll just reiterate. It was actually on this issue where my opponent has been spending hundreds of thousands of dollars on ads that this very station KCR called false. And again, this is part of *** pattern where neutral fact checkers, neutral observers for fellow Democrats, even *** state Superior court judge, I said this is *** candidate who is dishonest in terms of how she goes about talking to voters. So, uh at the end of the day, federal abortion policy is not *** disputed issue in this race. But what is an issue is that we have *** candidate who is asking to be your representative who has been caught trying to deceive you time and time again. M Morse. Do you want to respond to that? Yes, absolutely. Kyle. It’s not about what you say Kevin on, on abortion. It’s about what you do and you have an *** plus rating from anti choice groups around the country. You have an *** plus rating when you’re in the legislature. He has an *** plus rating in Congress. Kevin Kylie will vote against reproductive rights every chance he gets, he already has voted to take away reproductive rights for members of the military. He has voted to jail doctors who provide abortion care and he has voted to take away medication, abortion from women in California, which covers 60% of our miscarriage and abortion treatments here. He will take away our abortion rights if we give him the chance. Thank you, Miss. Thank you, Miss M I just have *** quick follow up for you. Specifically, California is seeing an influx of women from out of state who are seeking this procedure. What should Congress do to ensure that California can continue providing that service to not just Californians, but those from out of state. Congress needs to pass national reproductive care and we need to pass it. Now, women in California and across America can no longer afford to have our rights ricocheting around the court system. We need *** lot to protect us. When I get to Congress, I will pass that law and then I will work on tools that actually make it safer and easier for women to have families and choose to have families. Let’s invest in contraception education, prenatal care, child care, early childhood development. These are the tools that make it more that allow us to thrive as *** society because these issues are vital to us. I met *** doctor in Roseville the other day who is an OBGYN here and her offices are filled with women flying in from out of who have had miscarriages and in their moment of grief and pain, they are getting on an airplane coming here to get vital treatment. So they don’t die of sepsis, abortion rights are not *** state’s rights issue anymore. This is *** human rights issue and I will be *** champion for all this more. Thank you. All right. Now we’re going to move to our rapid fire around. It’s just *** yes, no or brief statement when, if you are prompted for one. All right. So Miss Morse, we’re gonna stick with you regardless of the winner. Will you accept the results of the upcoming presidential election? Mr Kylie? Same goes to you Mr Kiley. Do you support the US continuing to support Ukraine in its regional conflicts? Yes, military aid. And there needs to be accountability for where the money is going. Miss Morris. Same question to you. Yes, it is vital that we hold Russia in check and if Ukraine doesn’t do it, then NATO will have to step in and, and that would require deploying of us troops. Ukraine is doing the world service right now. Thank you, Miss Morris, Miss Morris. I’m going to stick with you. Do you support continuing to provide billions in military aid to Israel in its regional conflicts? I support humanitarian aid and defensive aid to Israel in the region. And I want to work to make sure we end this war and start restoring human rights in those areas. Thank you, Miss Morse. Mr Kyle. Same question goes to you. Yes, I do and I’ll say what Morse refuses to say, which I believe that Israel has the right to defend itself and the United States needs to stand by it. Thank you, Mr Kylie. All right. It’s been *** lively discussion so far. We’re going to take *** quick break when we come back. We’ll hear the candidates final statements. Welcome back to our debate for California’s third congressional district. Now we will move to the candidates final statements. And Mr Kylie, we’re going to start with you. You have one minute. Well, thank you everyone for tuning in. This is the district where I was born and raised and went to local public schools and it’s always been my home. So when I fly off to Washington DC, even though I’m *** long way away, my focus is always on what’s gonna benefit our communities. Here in last year’s budget, I was able to get $24 million in funding for specifically local projects for our roads, for water, for public safety. And we have another 22 million coming in this year’s budget. And I just recently got through the House of Representatives and signed into law by President Biden, the Lake Tahoe Restoration Act, which is going to unlock $415 million for forest management and to protect Lake Tahoe for generations to come. So that is always my number one priority is fighting to protect our quality of life in this area, maintained *** quality of life that doesn’t exist in other parts of California. We don’t have the level of waste and crime and homelessness that you have in places like L *** and San Francisco and even Sacramento. But that could change if we don’t have the representation. So I would be honored to receive your vote for *** second term. So I can keep fighting to keep our community *** great place to live, to work, to raise *** family. And thank you, Mr Kylie Miss m your final statement, I’d be honored to earn your vote and to serve you in Congress in five generations from Plaster County. And my parents were public school teachers here. So my family instilled in me *** very deep commitment to service. I took that commitment all around the world serving in national security roles under George Bush and under Barack Obama. It was never partisan. I came home and serve the people of California as Deputy secretary, working on wildfire resilience efforts. I was able to secure $3 billion initiative for new programs to get 1200 fire resilience projects on the ground in record time and cut red tape so we could move that quickly. But my opponent, he voted against this initiative three times, not because he didn’t like the project, but because he just didn’t want Democrats to have *** win. He defines winning as the other party losing and our issues are not partisan. Our issues are serious. I define winning as lowering your fire insurance as improving your health care as fighting to reduce fire risk and improving and protecting women’s reproductive rights. And I would be honored to serve you in Congress. Thank you, Miss m Thank you, Mr Kylie for joining us for viewers at home. You can learn more about this race and more on our case. Three up voter guide. Thank you so much for joining us. Have *** great night. So.

    Get the Facts: Claims from KCRA 3 Congressional District 3 debate with Kevin Kiley, Jessica Morse

    Both candidates for Congressional District 3, Republican incumbent Kevin Kiley and Democrat Jessica Morse, made several claims in Tuesday night’s debate on a variety of issues that KCRA 3 fact-checked.Here is a look at what’s true and false. (Watch the full debate in the video leading this story.)Wildfire ResponseKiley: “ claims to be in charge of this for Gov. Newsom for the last five years when we had some of the worst fires in state history, and we had a fire insurance crisis that has spun absolutely out of control. So what we need is to have effective forest management practices, not someone who has a record of negligence on this very issue.”False. Morse, at least in her ads, has not claimed to be in charge of the state’s wildfire mitigation and response. Her position was specifically in the California Natural Resources Agency as deputy secretary of forest and wildland resilience, but it is not Gov. Newsom’s top fire official. The person in charge of the state’s wildfire mitigation and response is the director of Cal Fire, who has been Joe Tyler since 2021. Thom Porter was the director from 2019-2021.California’s Insurance ProblemKiley: “Governor Newsom collected $720,000 in campaign contributions from insurance companies while my opponent worked for him.”True. Campaign finance records show Gov. Newsom between 2019 – 2022 received $725,000 in political donations from the insurance industry, according to Open Secrets.Source: Gavin Newsom Top Industries • OpenSecretsMorse: “Kevin Kiley actually voted against the expediting tools that helped save Lake Tahoe from the Caldor Fire.”“He voted against a $3 billion wildfire resilience initiative which I secured through the Legislature to be able to get through projects, everything from fuel breaks to the goats grazing here in Roseville. We got 1,200 projects on the ground in record time and Kiley voted against this $3 billion initiative three times when he was in Congress.”Mostly true. However, these votes did not happen when Kiley was in Congress, they happened when he was an Assemblyman. Two votes were against the state’s overall spending plan housed into budget bills that included fire funding, SB 170 in 2021 and AB 179 in 2022. On SB 901 to address wildfires in 2018, Kiley did not have a vote recorded.In Congress, Kiley is part of the House Republican caucus that voted last year on an appropriations continuation that cut wildfire suppression funds.Source: FACT SHEET: Republicans’ Extreme Continuing Resolution | House Committee on AppropriationsMorse: “When I get to Congress I will cut red tape just like I did at the state, so that we can actually get these projects move quickly.“We cut state contracting law down from a year to ten days, we reformed environmental review timelines that were taking two years down to four weeks and we changed state grant processes so they can get on the ground quickly.”True. Morse was part of Gov. Newsom’s administration that made these changes to state law, and she was among state leaders involved in developing the state’s wildfire strategy.Kiley: “Gov. Newsom who my opponent worked for five years slashed $150 million from the fire prevention budget and then worse Capital Public Radio found that they lied about it. We didn’t even know that the work wasn’t being done because CapRadio found they exaggerated the work they had done by a staggering 690%.”True. This information comes from a high-profile investigation in the summer of 2021 Source: Newsom Misled The Public About Wildfire Prevention Efforts Ahead Of Worst Fire Season On Record – capradio.orgHealth CareKiley: “Gov. Newsom, who my opponent worked for for five years, is giving free Medi-Cal, free health care to everyone here illegally costing taxpayers $3 billion a year.”True. Gov. Newsom’s administration has expanded access to the state’s health insurance to immigrants, regardless of age and immigration status. It’s an effort that’s expected to cost the state $3.1 billion a year.Source: California is expanding health care coverage for low-income immigrants in the new year | AP NewsMorse: “My opponent has actually voted against seniors every step of the way and he has voted against them from cutting Meals on Wheels, to closing social security offices that they can go to, to preventing negotiations for prescription drug prices which lowers cost for seniors.”True. Kiley did vote for initiatives that attempted to do this, including a House bill that attempted to make cuts to raise the debt limit. Kiley voted on the appropriations continuation legislation that also included funding for social security offices. House Republicans, a caucus Kiley is a member of, did propose repeals to the Inflation Reduction Act that empower Medicare to negotiate lower drug prices.Sources: Meals On Wheels America alarmed by harmful funding cuts in House bill to raise the debt limit, Kevin Kiley Votes To Gut Critical Programs for Californians While House Democrats Avert Shutdown – DCCC, Bills, Republicans’ Extreme Budget Guts Medicare and Takes Health Care Away from Millions of Americans | House Budget Committee DemocratsMorse: “Kiley is being funded by pharmaceutical companies and large corporations that are driving up our healthcare costs.”True. Campaign finance records show Starkey Hearing Technologies is among his top contributors. The top industries that help fund his campaign include hospitals, nursing homes and health professionals.Source: Rep. Kevin Kiley – Campaign Finance Summary • OpenSecretsKiley: “In some sense, the rising cost of health care is tied to the broader inflation that is harming so many folks, especially in California thanks to the misguided policies of Gov. Newsom.”False. Kiley did not mention any of Newsom’s specific policies, but as it relates to health care, experts note health premiums have gone up in California, regardless of who is in office. Gov. Newsom expanded access to Medi-Cal to low-income residents regardless of immigration status to ensure as many Californians as possible are insured and getting preventative care. Taxpayers foot an expensive bill when someone without insurance seeks care at an emergency room, for example.Newsom’s administration also created the Office of Health Care Affordability, which caps industry cost increases and regulates health industry consolidation.Source: PolitiFact | Health care is front and center as Ron DeSantis and Gavin Newsom prepare for Fox News debateAbortionKiley: “I will not support it in any way shape or form. I believe this is a state issue.”True. KCRA 3 fact-checked this while reviewing ads from both Morse and Kiley.Fact-checking Kevin Kiley, Jessica Morse attack ads in 2024 raceMorse: “Kiley has an A+ rating from anti-choice groups around the country.”“Kiley will vote against reproductive rights every chance he gets. He has voted to take reproductive rights away for members of the military. He has voted to jail doctors who provide abortion care, and he has voted to take away abortion medication from women in California.”True. Kiley has the rating from Susan B Anthony’s list, a leading anti-abortion group. Kiley voted against the Women’s Health Protection Act which sought to prevent a national abortion ban. Kiley voted for HR 26, the Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act, and voted to prohibit the Department of Defense from paying for abortion services. He also supported an effort to limit access to mifepristone.Sources: Rep. Kevin Kiley | National Pro-Life Scorecard, Office of the Clerk, U.S. House of Representatives – Vote Details, FACT SHEET: House Republicans Endorse a National Abortion Ban with Zero Exceptions in Latest Budget | The White House, Final Vote Results for Roll Call 300For more information about the November election, including key issues and other races on the ballot, check out the KCRA 3 Voter Guide.Find more political news from our national team here.

    Both candidates for Congressional District 3, Republican incumbent Kevin Kiley and Democrat Jessica Morse, made several claims in Tuesday night’s debate on a variety of issues that KCRA 3 fact-checked.

    Here is a look at what’s true and false.

    (Watch the full debate in the video leading this story.)

    Wildfire Response

    Kiley: “[Morse] claims to be in charge of this for Gov. Newsom for the last five years when we had some of the worst fires in state history, and we had a fire insurance crisis that has spun absolutely out of control. So what we need is to have effective forest management practices, not someone who has a record of negligence on this very issue.”

    False. Morse, at least in her ads, has not claimed to be in charge of the state’s wildfire mitigation and response. Her position was specifically in the California Natural Resources Agency as deputy secretary of forest and wildland resilience, but it is not Gov. Newsom’s top fire official. The person in charge of the state’s wildfire mitigation and response is the director of Cal Fire, who has been Joe Tyler since 2021. Thom Porter was the director from 2019-2021.

    California’s Insurance Problem

    Kiley: “Governor Newsom collected $720,000 in campaign contributions from insurance companies while my opponent worked for him.”

    True. Campaign finance records show Gov. Newsom between 2019 – 2022 received $725,000 in political donations from the insurance industry, according to Open Secrets.

    Source: Gavin Newsom Top Industries • OpenSecrets

    Morse: “Kevin Kiley actually voted against the expediting tools that helped save Lake Tahoe from the Caldor Fire.”

    “He voted against a $3 billion wildfire resilience initiative which I secured through the Legislature to be able to get through projects, everything from fuel breaks to the goats grazing here in Roseville. We got 1,200 projects on the ground in record time and Kiley voted against this $3 billion initiative three times when he was in Congress.”

    Mostly true. However, these votes did not happen when Kiley was in Congress, they happened when he was an Assemblyman. Two votes were against the state’s overall spending plan housed into budget bills that included fire funding, SB 170 in 2021 and AB 179 in 2022. On SB 901 to address wildfires in 2018, Kiley did not have a vote recorded.

    In Congress, Kiley is part of the House Republican caucus that voted last year on an appropriations continuation that cut wildfire suppression funds.

    Source: FACT SHEET: Republicans’ Extreme Continuing Resolution | House Committee on Appropriations

    Morse: “When I get to Congress I will cut red tape just like I did at the state, so that we can actually get these projects move quickly.

    “We cut state contracting law down from a year to ten days, we reformed environmental review timelines that were taking two years down to four weeks and we changed state grant processes so they can get on the ground quickly.”

    True. Morse was part of Gov. Newsom’s administration that made these changes to state law, and she was among state leaders involved in developing the state’s wildfire strategy.

    Kiley: “Gov. Newsom who my opponent worked for five years slashed $150 million from the fire prevention budget and then worse Capital Public Radio found that they lied about it. We didn’t even know that the work wasn’t being done because CapRadio found they exaggerated the work they had done by a staggering 690%.”

    True. This information comes from a high-profile investigation in the summer of 2021

    Source: Newsom Misled The Public About Wildfire Prevention Efforts Ahead Of Worst Fire Season On Record – capradio.org

    Health Care

    Kiley:Gov. Newsom, who my opponent worked for for five years, is giving free Medi-Cal, free health care to everyone here illegally costing taxpayers $3 billion a year.”

    True. Gov. Newsom’s administration has expanded access to the state’s health insurance to immigrants, regardless of age and immigration status. It’s an effort that’s expected to cost the state $3.1 billion a year.

    Source: California is expanding health care coverage for low-income immigrants in the new year | AP News

    Morse: “My opponent has actually voted against seniors every step of the way and he has voted against them from cutting Meals on Wheels, to closing social security offices that they can go to, to preventing negotiations for prescription drug prices which lowers cost for seniors.”

    True. Kiley did vote for initiatives that attempted to do this, including a House bill that attempted to make cuts to raise the debt limit. Kiley voted on the appropriations continuation legislation that also included funding for social security offices. House Republicans, a caucus Kiley is a member of, did propose repeals to the Inflation Reduction Act that empower Medicare to negotiate lower drug prices.

    Sources: Meals On Wheels America alarmed by harmful funding cuts in House bill to raise the debt limit, Kevin Kiley Votes To Gut Critical Programs for Californians While House Democrats Avert Shutdown – DCCC, Bills, Republicans’ Extreme Budget Guts Medicare and Takes Health Care Away from Millions of Americans | House Budget Committee Democrats

    Morse: “Kiley is being funded by pharmaceutical companies and large corporations that are driving up our healthcare costs.”

    True. Campaign finance records show Starkey Hearing Technologies is among his top contributors. The top industries that help fund his campaign include hospitals, nursing homes and health professionals.

    Source: Rep. Kevin Kiley – Campaign Finance Summary • OpenSecrets

    Kiley: “In some sense, the rising cost of health care is tied to the broader inflation that is harming so many folks, especially in California thanks to the misguided policies of Gov. Newsom.”

    False. Kiley did not mention any of Newsom’s specific policies, but as it relates to health care, experts note health premiums have gone up in California, regardless of who is in office. Gov. Newsom expanded access to Medi-Cal to low-income residents regardless of immigration status to ensure as many Californians as possible are insured and getting preventative care. Taxpayers foot an expensive bill when someone without insurance seeks care at an emergency room, for example.

    Newsom’s administration also created the Office of Health Care Affordability, which caps industry cost increases and regulates health industry consolidation.

    Source: PolitiFact | Health care is front and center as Ron DeSantis and Gavin Newsom prepare for Fox News debate

    Abortion

    Kiley: “I will not support it in any way shape or form. I believe this is a state issue.”

    True. KCRA 3 fact-checked this while reviewing ads from both Morse and Kiley.

    Fact-checking Kevin Kiley, Jessica Morse attack ads in 2024 race

    Morse: “Kiley has an A+ rating from anti-choice groups around the country.”

    “Kiley will vote against reproductive rights every chance he gets. He has voted to take reproductive rights away for members of the military. He has voted to jail doctors who provide abortion care, and he has voted to take away abortion medication from women in California.”

    True. Kiley has the rating from Susan B Anthony’s list, a leading anti-abortion group. Kiley voted against the Women’s Health Protection Act which sought to prevent a national abortion ban. Kiley voted for HR 26, the Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act, and voted to prohibit the Department of Defense from paying for abortion services. He also supported an effort to limit access to mifepristone.

    Sources: Rep. Kevin Kiley | National Pro-Life Scorecard, Office of the Clerk, U.S. House of Representatives – Vote Details, FACT SHEET: House Republicans Endorse a National Abortion Ban with Zero Exceptions in Latest Budget | The White House, Final Vote Results for Roll Call 300


    For more information about the November election, including key issues and other races on the ballot, check out the KCRA 3 Voter Guide.

    Find more political news from our national team here.

    Source link

  • 2024 VP debate: Fact-checking JD Vance and Tim Walz

    2024 VP debate: Fact-checking JD Vance and Tim Walz

    Ohio Republican Sen. JD Vance and Minnesota Democratic Gov. Tim Walz met in an Oct. 1 vice presidential debate hosted by CBS News that was cordial and heavy on policy discussion — a striking change from the Sept. 10 debate between Vice President Kamala Harris and former President Donald Trump that often devolved into personal attacks.

    Vance and Walz acknowledged occasional agreement with each other on policy points and respectfully addressed one another throughout the debate. But they also blamed each other’s running mates for problems facing the U.S., including immigration and inflation.

    The moderators, “CBS Evening News” anchor Norah O’Donnell and “Face the Nation” host Margaret Brennan, had said they planned to encourage candidates to fact-check each other, but sometimes clarified after candidates’ answers. 

    They also pinned down the candidates when they evaded answers, with Brennan pressing Walz to say he misspoke in the past about being in China’s Tiananmen Square during the deadly 1989 protests. Brennan also pushed Vance for specifics on Trump’s mass deportation plan and whether he would separate parents from children, but didn’t get a specific answer.

    During the debate, Walz misspoke during a discussion about school shootings. He described changing his position on an assault weapons ban after the 2012 massacre at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Connecticut that killed 26 people, including 20 children.

    “I sat in that office with those Sandy Hook parents. I’ve become friends with school shooters,” Walz mistakenly said. The gaffe prompted derision on social media, including from Trump, who mocked Walz on Truth Social.

    The candidates sparred on numerous topics, including immigration, school shootings, reproductive rights and the economy. We fact-checked several of their statements.

    PolitiFact fact-checks statements of people in power, regardless of political party. We’ve rated claims with a variety of Truth-O-Meter ratings from the Republican presidential nominee, former President Donald Trump, and the Democratic nominee, Vice President Kamala Harris. This is how we choose claims to check.

    Immigration

    Vance: “We have 320,000 children that the Department of Homeland Security has effectively lost. Some of them have been sex trafficked.”

    Mostly False.

    This is not what a federal oversight report said. The claim refers to a federal oversight report about unaccompanied minors — children who came to the U.S. without a parent or legal guardian. The report covered fiscal years 2019 through 2023, which includes part of Trump’s presidency.

    The report mentioned 32,000 children who failed to appear for their immigration court hearings and 291,000 children whom Immigration and Customs Enforcement had not served a “Notice to Appear.” 

    A Notice to Appear is a charging document authorities issue and file in immigration court to start removal proceedings. The report said that by not issuing these notices to the children, Immigration and Customs Enforcement limits its chances of verifying their safety after the federal government releases them.

    The report led Republican lawmakers and conservative news outlets to say that Immigration and Customs Enforcement “lost” the children or that they are “missing.” But the report did not make that claim.

    The report said the children are at risk of trafficking, but it didn’t present a number.

    Vance: “So there’s an application called the CBP One app, where you can go on as an illegal migrant, apply for asylum or apply for parole and be granted legal status.”

    Mostly False.

    U.S. Customs and Border Protection launched the CBP One phone app in 2020, when Trump was president. Biden expanded its use. As of January 2023, people can use the app while in Mexico to make appointments with immigration officials for processing at official ports of entry.

    The app is a scheduling tool, not an application for asylum or parole; a lengthy process follows. Vance is wrong to characterize the people making the appointments as “illegal” migrants, because the people using the app haven’t crossed into the U.S. illegally.

    At ports of entry, immigration officials can give people humanitarian parole, for up to two years, allowing them to live and work in the U.S. as they apply for asylum. Under U.S. immigration law, people can apply for asylum, but they must be physically in the country. From January 2023 to August 2024, 813,000 people have scheduled appointments on the app, the Department of Homeland Security said.

    Humanitarian parole is an official permission to temporarily live in the U.S., but it is not a lawful status. To stay in the U.S. after protections expire, or eventually gain citizenship, people must secure legal status through other avenues, such as asylum, marriage or employment.

    Abortion

    Walz: “Their Project 2025 is gonna have a registry of pregnancies.”

    False

    Project 2025 recommends that states submit more detailed abortion reporting to the federal government. It calls for more information about how and when abortions took place, as well as other statistics for miscarriages and stillbirths.

    The manual does not mention, nor call for, a new federal agency tasked with registering pregnant women.

    Vance: “As I read the Minnesota law that (Walz) signed into law … it says that a doctor who presides over an abortion where the baby survives, the doctor is under no obligation to provide lifesaving care to a baby who survives a botched late-term abortion.”

    False.

    Experts said cases in which a baby is born following an attempted abortion are rare. Less than 1% of abortions nationwide occur in the third trimester. And infanticide, the crime of killing a child within a year of its birth, is illegal in all U.S. states.

    In May 2023, Walz, as Minnesota governor, signed legislation updating a state law for “infants who are born alive.” It said babies are “fully recognized” as human people and therefore, protected under state law. The change did not alter regulations that already require doctors to provide patients with appropriate care.

    Previously, state law said, “All reasonable measures consistent with good medical practice, including the compilation of appropriate medical records, shall be taken by the responsible medical personnel to preserve the life and health of the born alive infant.” The law was updated to instead say medical personnel must “care for the infant who is born alive.”

    When there are fetal anomalies that make it likely the fetus will die before or soon after birth, some parents decide to terminate the pregnancy by inducing childbirth so that they can hold their dying baby, Democratic Minnesota state Sen. Erin Maye Quade told PolitiFact in September.

    This update to the law means infants who are “born alive” receive appropriate medical care dependent on the pregnancy’s circumstances, Maye Quade said.

    Iran 

    Vance: “Iran, which launched this attack (on Israel), has received over $100 billion and unfrozen assets, thanks to the Kamala Harris administration.”

    False. 

    Under President Barack Obama, Iran did take possession of $100 billion in unfrozen assets after the signing of the Iran nuclear deal, which Trump later overturned. But Harris was not involved in the Obama administration.

    Something that occurred on Biden and Harris’ watch was a hostage-release agreement with Iran that was supposed to free $6 billion in frozen Iranian assets. There is no evidence that any of the $6 billion reached Iran.

    In August 2023, the U.S. announced an agreement with Iran to secure freedom for five U.S. citizens who’d been detained in the country in exchange for allowing Iran to access $6 billion of its own funds that had been frozen in South Korean banks.

    The money consisted of Iranian oil revenue frozen since 2019, when Trump banned Iranian oil exports and sanctioned its banking sector. It was not U.S. taxpayer money. In April 2024, Deputy Treasury Secretary Wally Adeyemo said that those funds had been frozen after the Oct. 7, 2023, Hamas terrorist attacks on Israel and had not reached Iran.

    Walz: “When Iranian missiles did fall near U.S. troops and they received traumatic brain injuries, Donald Trump wrote it off as ‘headaches.’”

    True.

    Walz was referring to a Jan. 8, 2020, Iran attack on U.S. soldiers in Iraq. More than 100 soldiers were diagnosed with traumatic brain injuries, according to the Pentagon.

    Trump has repeatedly called the injuries “headaches.”

    In 2020, Trump said he had “heard that they had headaches” and added it “is not very serious.” Trump repeated this claim in an Oct. 1 press conference in Wisconsin.

    After Iran attacked Israel Oct. 1, Trump responded to a question about whether he should have been stronger on Iran after the 2020 attack that injured U.S. troops. He said: “What does injured mean? You mean because they had a headache because the bombs never hit the fort?”

    Walz in China

    Walz said he ‘misspoke’ about being in Hong Kong during 1989 Tiananmen Square protests

    Walz once described being in Hong Kong during the May 1989 pro-democracy protests in Beijing’s Tiananmen Square that turned deadly that June. But contemporaneous news reports contradict that timeline. The CBS News debate moderators asked Walz to explain this discrepancy, and Walz said he “misspoke.”

    In the next sentence, he said: “So, I will just, that’s what I’ve said. So, I was in Hong Kong and China during the democracy protests, went in.”

    Minnesota Public Radio News and APM Reports found a 1989 Nebraska newspaper report that said Walz planned to leave for China in August of that year, months after the Tiananmen Square protests.

    Walz’s first trip to China in 1989 was to teach English and U.S. history for a year at a high school. He and his wife, Gwen, both high school teachers, led school trips to China in the 1990s and early 2000s. Walz said in 2016 that he had visited China about 30 times, but a Harris-Walz campaign spokesperson clarified in September that Walz has been to the country “closer to 15 times,” according to Minnesota Public Radio News and APM Reports.

    Economy

    Vance: “What (Harris has) actually done instead is drive the cost of food higher by 25%, drive the cost of housing higher by about 60%.”

    Half True.

    Grocery prices have risen by 22% since Biden and Harris took office. Housing prices, according to the Case-Shiller home price index, have risen 38%.

    Economists have told PolitiFact that the main factors driving the peak inflation in 2022 were postpandemic supply chain backups and Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. Biden’s pandemic relief bill, the American Rescue Plan Act, exacerbated this inflation, economists say, but it did not cause it.

    This also leaves out the simultaneous increase in wages, which have outpaced prices since the start of the pandemic. Wages have also outpaced prices for the past one-year and two-year periods.

    Fentanyl and opioids

    Vance: “Kamala Harris let in fentanyl into our communities at record levels.”

    Mostly False.

    Illicit fentanyl seizures have been rising for years and reached record highs under Biden’s administration. In fiscal year 2015, for example, U.S. Customs and Border Protection seized 70 pounds of fentanyl. As of August 2024, agents have seized more than 19,000 pounds of fentanyl in fiscal year 2024, which ended in September.

    But these are fentanyl seizures — not the amount of the narcotic being “let” into the United States.  

    Vance made this claim while criticizing Harris’ immigration policies. But fentanyl enters the U.S. through the southern border mainly at official ports of entry, and it’s mostly smuggled in by U.S. citizens, according to the U.S. Sentencing Commission. Most illicit fentanyl in the U.S. comes from Mexico made with chemicals from Chinese labs.

    Drug policy experts have said that the illicit fentanyl crisis began years before Biden’s administration and that Biden’s border policies are not to blame for overdose deaths. 

    Experts have also said Congress plays a role in reducing illicit fentanyl. Congressional funding for more vehicle scanners would help law enforcement seize more of the fentanyl that comes into the U.S. Harris has called for increased enforcement against illicit fentanyl use.

    Walz: “And the good news on this is, is the last 12 months saw the largest decrease in opioid deaths in our nation’s history.”

    Mostly True.

    Overdose deaths involving opioids decreased from an estimated 84,181 in 2022 to 81,083 in 2023, based on the most recent provisional data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. This decrease, which took place in the second half of 2023, followed a 67% increase in opioid-related deaths between 2017 and 2023.

    The U.S. had an estimated 107,543 drug overdose deaths in 2023 — a 3% decrease from the 111,029 deaths estimated in 2022. This is the first annual decrease in overall drug overdose deaths since 2018. Nevertheless, the opioid death toll remains much higher than just a few years ago, according to KFF. It’s too soon to predict whether the downward trend will continue.

    Walz’s son as shooting witness

    Walz: “Look, I got a, I got a 17-year-old and he witnessed a shooting at a community center playing volleyball.”  

    The Walz campaign told PolitiFact that Walz’s son, Gus Walz, witnessed a January 2023 shooting outside St. Paul’s Oxford Community Center, which houses the Jimmy Lee Recreation Center. The campaign spokesperson said Gus Walz witnessed the shooting but wasn’t involved in the altercation that preceded it.

    Exavir Dwayne Binford Jr., a 26-year-old recreation center employee, got into an argument with a 16-year-old boy that “mushroomed into a fight outside the center that ended with the worker shooting the boy in the head and fleeing,” Minnesota’s public radio station MPR News reported.  

    In February, Binford was sentenced to 10 years and five months in prison, MPR News reported

    MPR News reported that children were present during the shooting, and details reported from the criminal complaint support that was the case. 

    During a Sept. 12 campaign stop in Grand Rapids, Michigan, Walz mentioned this shooting:  “My own son was in a location where someone was shot in the head,” he said. “Too many of us have this.” 

    Health care

    Vance: “Donald Trump could have destroyed the (Affordable Care Act). Instead, he worked in a bipartisan way to ensure that Americans had access to affordable care.”

    False.

    As president, Trump worked to undermine and repeal the Affordable Care Act. He cut millions of dollars in federal funding for ACA outreach and navigators who help people sign up for health coverage. He enabled the sale of short-term health plans that don’t comply with the ACA consumer protections and allowed them to be sold for longer durations, which siphoned people away from the health law’s marketplaces.

    Trump’s administration also backed state Medicaid waivers that imposed first-ever work requirements, reducing enrollment. He also ended insurance company subsidies that helped offset costs for low-income enrollees, he backed an unsuccessful repeal of the landmark 2010 health law and he backed the demise of a penalty imposed for failing to purchase health insurance.

    Affordable Care Act enrollment declined by more than 2 million people during Trump’s presidency, and the number of uninsured Americans rose by 2.3 million, including 726,000 children, from 2016 to 2019, the U.S. Census Bureau reported; that includes three years of Trump’s presidency.

    Climate

    Walz: “Sen. Vance has said that there’s a climate problem in the past. Donald Trump called it (climate change) a hoax and then joked that these things would make more beachfront property to be able to invest in.”

    True.

    In a 2020 speech at Ohio State University, Vance said, “We have a climate problem in our society.” But Vance has grown more dubious of climate change in recent years. In 2022, he told the American Leadership Forum, “I’m skeptical of the idea that climate change is caused purely by man. … (The climate has) been changing, as others pointed out, it’s been changing for millennia.”

    Also that year, Vance said he had “become persuaded that climate change is certainly happening,” but that “some of the alarmism is a little overstated.”

    Trump tweeted that climate change is a “hoax” in 2012, though he made efforts in 2016 to describe that remark as a “joke.” But in 2014 and 2015 Trump repeatedly called climate change a “hoax” in speeches, tweets and media appearances. He also made similar “hoax” comments in 2022.

    In an August 2024 interview with X owner Elon Musk, Trump said, “The biggest threat is not global warming, where the ocean is going to rise one-eighth of an inch over the next 400 years … and you’ll have more oceanfront property.” (The claim about sea level rise is vastly understated and Pants on Fire!)

    Energy

    Walz: “We are producing more natural gas and more oil at any time than we ever have.”

    True.

    U.S. natural gas production has reached new highs during Joe Biden’s presidency, as has U.S. crude oil production, U.S. Energy Information Administration data shows.

    Taxes

    Walz: “Donald Trump hasn’t paid any federal tax in the last 15 years. The last year as president.” 

    Mostly False.

    Trump paid no federal income tax some years, including his last year as president, but not every year in the last 15 years — and we don’t know what he’s paid since 2020 because his tax returns have not been made public.

    In September 2020, The New York Times reported that it obtained copies of Trump’s tax returns. They showed that Trump paid $641,000 in 2015, $750 in federal income taxes in both 2016 and 2017, and, as of that 2020 report, “no income taxes at all in 10 of the previous 15 years.”

    In 2022, the House Ways and Means Committee released Trump’s tax returns from 2015 to 2020. According to those returns, Trump reported paying $999,456 in taxes in 2018, $133,445 in taxes in 2019 and $0 in taxes in 2020, ABC News reported

    Walz: Trump “gave the tax cuts that predominantly went to the top class. What happened there was an $8 trillion increase in the national debt, the largest ever.”

    Mostly True.

    Saying which income class earned a greater share of the tax cuts varies depending on the year studied. 

    A 2017 analysis of the Republican tax law by the nonpartisan Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center said that by 2027, the tax bill would deliver 82.8% of its benefits to the top 1% of  income earners.

    The distribution of the benefits before 2027 also skewed toward wealthier Americans, but by a lower percentage. For instance, in 2018, the bill was projected to deliver 20.5% of the benefits to the top 1%, the center’s analysis showed. And as late as 2025, 25.3% of the benefits would flow to the top 1%.

    Looking at the increase in federal debt on a president’s watch, Trump currently ranks first for debt accumulated in a single term, at $7.8 trillion. However, Biden is projected to pass Trump’s total by the time he leaves office in January 2025.

    Using a different method — counting how much future debt a president’s actions created — Trump’s policies are projected to accumulate roughly double the amount of future debt as Biden’s.

    January 6, 2021

    Vance: Donald Trump “peacefully gave over power on January the 20th as we have done for 250 years in this country.”

    Mostly False.

    Trump left the White House on Jan. 20, 2021, and another president was sworn in that day. But Vance’s statement ignores Trump’s words and actions that led up to the violent Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol. 

    In December 2020, Trump repeatedly encouraged his supporters to fight the election results and gather at the Capitol. On Jan. 6, 2021, Trump used his “Save America” rally to repeat inaccurate claims that he won the election. He continually urged the crowd to “fight” before inviting them to march to the Capitol.

    “Our country has had enough,” Trump said. “We will not take it anymore and that’s what this is all about. To use a favorite term that all of you people really came up with, we will stop the steal.” 

    The crowd later chanted: “Fight for Trump! Fight for Trump! Fight for Trump!”

    At the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, supporters mobbed the building and assaulted law enforcement officers. The riot injured about 150 federal and local police officers and caused more than $1 million in damages to the Capitol. More than 1,500 defendants have been charged.

    PolitiFact Executive Director Aaron Sharockman, Chief Correspondent Louis Jacobson, Senior Correspondent Amy Sherman, Staff Writers Grace Abels, Kwasi Gyamfi Asiedu, Maria Briceño, Jeff Cercone, Madison Czopek, Marta Campabadal Graus, Samantha Putterman, Sara Swann, Loreben Tuquero, Maria Ramirez Uribe, Researcher Caryn Baird, KFF Health News Senior Editor Stephanie Stapleton and KFF Health News Senior Correspondent Stephanie Armour contributed to this story. 

    Our debate fact-checks rely on both new and previously reported work. We link to past work whenever possible. In some cases, a fact-check rating may be different tonight than in past versions. In those cases, either details of what the candidate said, or how the candidate said it, differed enough that we evaluated it anew. 

     

    Source link

  • FactChecking Biden’s State of the Union

    FactChecking Biden’s State of the Union

    By Robert FarleyD’Angelo GoreSaranac Hale SpencerCatalina JaramilloKate YandellJessica McDonaldAlan JaffeEugene Kiely and Lori Robertson

    Summary

    In his final State of the Union address prior to the November general election, President Joe Biden focused on Ukraine, the Israel-Hamas war, the economy, reproductive rights, prescription drug costs and border security. Biden also criticized many of the policies of “my predecessor” — without naming former President Donald Trump. But he sometimes stretched the facts or left out important context.

    • Biden boasted that under his leadership “wages keep going up.” But over the entirety of Biden’s presidency, wages are down when adjusted for inflation.
    • Biden claimed that the more recent U.S. inflation rate of about 3% is the “lowest in the world!” But several nations reported lower rates than the U.S. in December.
    • He again claimed to have “cut the federal deficit by over one trillion dollars” — although declining deficits have mostly been the result of expiring emergency pandemic spending.
    • Biden said he had created a “record” 15 million new jobs. His 14.8 million new jobs is a record for any president in the first three years, but it’s not the highest job growth rate that any president has achieved in that period of time.
    • He suggested that “many” of the new jobs in U.S. semiconductor factories will be “paying $100,000 a year and don’t require a college degree.” But an industry trade group previously reported that only workers with bachelor’s or graduate degrees make that much.
    • Biden said that, “My policies have attracted $650 billion in private sector investment in clean energy [and] advanced manufacturing.” Those are announcements about intentions to invest, not actual investments.
    • Biden highlighted recent decreases in murder and violent crime rates, but neglected to mention that they are still coming down from their pandemic peak.
    • Biden omitted context of a Trump comment following an Iowa school shooting.
    • The president said billionaires pay an average federal tax rate of only 8.2%, but that’s a White House calculation that includes earnings on unsold stock as income.
    • Biden said that because of the Affordable Care Act, over 100 million people can no longer be denied health insurance due to preexisting conditions. But pre-ACA, employer plans covered many of those people and couldn’t deny policies.
    • Biden said he was “cutting our carbon emissions in half by 2030.” That’s the U.S. goal, relative to 2005 emissions, but studies suggest current policies will not reduce emissions by that much.

    Biden spoke to Congress on March 7.

    Analysis

    Wages

    Biden boasted that “wages keep going up, inflation keeps coming down.” But over the entirety of Biden’s presidency, wages are down when adjusted for inflation.

    Average weekly earnings for rank-and-file workers went up 14.8% during Biden’s first three years in office, according to monthly figures compiled by the Bureau of Labor Statistics. But inflation ate up all that gain and more. “Real” weekly earnings, which are adjusted for inflation and measured in dollars valued at their average level in 1982-84, actually declined 3.1% since Biden took office.

    The inflation-adjusted average weekly earnings of production and nonsupervisory workers — who make up 81% of all employees in the private sector — and the inflation-adjusted average hourly earnings of all employees have both been on the rise for the last year and a half, with real weekly earnings rising 1.5% since hitting the low point under Biden in June 2022.

    Inflation has also moderated greatly since hitting a peak increase of 9% for the 12 months ending in June 2022, the biggest such increase in over 40 years. The unadjusted Consumer Price Index rose 3.1% in the 12 months ending in January, the most recent figure available, and as Biden said, it has been trending down.

    But looking at the entire three years of Biden’s presidency so far, the Consumer Price Index has risen a total of 18%.

    Inflation

    Biden claimed that inflation in the U.S. “has dropped from 9% to 3% – the lowest in the world!”

    The year-over-year inflation rate was 3.1% in January, down from 9% in June 2022, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. But that’s still higher than the 1.4% rate when Biden took office.

    Furthermore, the current U.S. inflation rate is not the lowest of any country.

    December data from the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development show that Italy — a member of the G7, a group of seven of the world’s most advanced economies — had a lower year-over-year inflation rate than the U.S. While the U.S. inflation rate was 3.3% for the 12 months ending that month, Italy’s was 0.6%.

    Other countries with “advanced economies,” as defined by the International Monetary Fund, and millions of residents, including Denmark (0.7%), Lithuania (1.2%), Belgium (1.4%) and South Korea (3.2%), also had lower inflation rates than the U.S., as of December.

    Even by the White House’s own calculations, which adjust for differences in how countries calculate inflation, Biden’s claim was inexact.

    In a Jan. 11 post on the social media platform called X, the White House Council of Economic Advisers wrote that, as of November, the latest month with complete G7 data, “both core & headline U.S. inflation were among the lowest in the G7” — not the lowest.

    That’s because Italy had a lower headline inflation rate than the U.S., according to the CEA’s post. Supporting documentation provided by the White House shows that Italy’s rate was 0.5% and the U.S. rate was almost 2.5%.

    Headline inflation – unlike core inflation – factors in food and energy prices.

    Deficits

    Biden continues to misleadingly claim, as he did during his address, that’s he’s “already cut the federal deficit by over $1 trillion dollars.”

    Budget deficits have declined from the record spending gap of $3.1 trillion in fiscal year 2020, the last full fiscal cycle before Biden took office. In FY 2021, the deficit was about $2.8 trillion; in FY 2022, it was almost $1.4 trillion; and in FY 2023, which ended Sept. 30, it was roughly $1.7 trillion.

    But as we’ve explained several times, the primary reason that deficits went down by about $350 billion in Biden’s first year, and by another $1.3 trillion in his second, is because of emergency COVID-19 funding that expired in those years.

    Budget experts said that if not for more pandemic and infrastructure spending championed by Biden, deficits would have been even lower than they were in fiscal 2021 and 2022.

    As of February, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office projected that under current law, the deficit would fall to $1.6 trillion in fiscal 2024, rise to $1.8 trillion in fiscal 2025, then return to $1.6 trillion in fiscal 2027. “Thereafter, deficits steadily mount, reaching $2.6 trillion in 2034,” the CBO said.

    ‘Record’ Jobs

    As he has done in recent speeches, Biden boasted that he has created a “record” 15 million new jobs in his first three years in office. He frequently adds on the campaign trail that that’s more than any president had created in three years or in the first four-year term.

    “Fifteen million new jobs in just three years – a record, a record!” he said on Thursday night, right after saying “our economy is literally the envy of the world.”

    He’s right on the new jobs — to a point.

    Since Biden took office, the U.S. economy added 14.8 million jobs (not quite 15 million) — which is a record number of jobs, at least since 1939, for any president in his first three or four years in office, according to Bureau of Labor Statistics data that go back to January 1939.

    But Biden isn’t accounting for population and job growth. Other presidents have seen a greater percentage increase.

    The 14.8 million additional jobs under Biden represent a growth rate of 10.3%, as measured from January 2021, when Biden took office, through January 2024, the latest month for which data are available from the BLS. While impressive, the 10.3% growth rate isn’t as high as under some past presidents when there were fewer jobs.

    In President Jimmy Carter’s only four years in office, from January 1977 to January 1981, the U.S. added 10.3 million jobs. That’s an increase of 12.8%. In Carter’s first three years, the U.S. added 10.1 million jobs, or 12.5%.

    In President Lyndon Johnson’s only full term in office, from January 1965 to January 1969, the U.S. economy added 9.9 million jobs — a 16.5% job growth. In the first three years of that term, from January 1965 to January 1968, the U.S. added 7.2 million jobs, which was an increase of 12.1%.

    In President Bill Clinton’s first term, from January 1993 through January 1997, the U.S. added 11.6 million jobs, an increase of 10.5%. That’s a slightly higher rate of job growth than in Biden’s first three years. But in Clinton’s first three years, the number of jobs increased by 7.8%, which is smaller.

    However, the U.S. added a total of 22.9 million jobs in Clinton’s two terms, an increase of 20.9%, from 109.8 million jobs in January 1993 to 132.7 million in January 2001. It remains to be seen if job growth continues at such a pace under Biden in a second term, if he wins reelection.

    Semiconductor Jobs

    On multiple occasions, Biden has left the misleading impression that new jobs in U.S. semiconductor factories would pay above $100,000 annually for those without a college degree.

    During his speech, he said: “Private companies are now investing billions of dollars to build new chip factories here in America, creating tens of thousands of jobs. Many of those jobs paying $100,000 a year and don’t require a college degree.”

    In a 2021 report, the Semiconductor Industry Association, a trade group, and Oxford Economics found that 277,000 people worked in the industry with an average salary of $170,000 in 2020. While the report said industry workers “consistently earn more than the U.S. average at all education attainment levels,” it noted that “average wages vary based on educational attainment.”

    But only those with a bachelor’s degree ($120,000) or a graduate degree (over $160,000) had wages that topped six figures. Workers with a high school education or less could expect to earn a little more than $40,000. Those with at least some college experience could make $60,000, while earning an associate’s degree could increase that to $70,000.

    According to the report, only 20% of semiconductor workers at the time had not attended college. Conversely, 56% of workers had a bachelor’s or graduate degree.

    Clean Energy/Advanced Manufacturing Jobs

    Biden boasted that, “My policies have attracted $650 billion in private sector investment in clean energy, advanced manufacturing, creating tens of thousands of jobs here in America.” But those are announcements about intentions to invest, not actual investments.

    The policies Biden is referring to are mainly the CHIPS Act, which includes $39 billion to fund manufacturing facilities in the U.S. and $11 billion for semiconductor research and development, the Inflation Reduction Act, which includes an estimated $369 billion to combat climate change while also investing in “energy security,” the $1.9 trillion American Rescue Plan, and the bipartisan infrastructure law, which included $550 billion in new infrastructure spending.

    The claim about the amount of private sector investment in clean energy and manufacturing that those policies have created is based on a White House tabulation of public announcements about investments, or as a White House press release puts it, “commitments to invest.”

    “These are announced plans for investments,” Douglas Holtz-Eakin, president of the center-right American Action Forum, told us in a phone interview. “They may take years to happen, or they may not happen at all.”

    “He makes it seem like the investments have happened already or that they are happening this year, and they are not,” Holtz-Eakin said. “They may not come to fruition. Market conditions change.”

    And, he said, while $650 billion sounds like a lot of investment, with gross capital stock in the U.S. over $69 trillion, even if that amount were invested this year, “it wouldn’t exactly transform the economy.”

    Crime

    Biden highlighted the continued drop in murder and violent crime rates since he took office, but he left out some important context.

    “Last year the murder rate showed the sharpest decrease in history,” Biden said. “Violent crime fell to one of its the lowest levels in more than 50 years.”

    It’s true that there has been a sharp decline in murder and homicide rates recently.

    The number of homicides was 10% lower in 2023 than in 2022, according to a January report from the Council on Criminal Justice, which gathered data from 32 participating cities.

    And, as we’ve written before, a November report from the Major Cities Chiefs Association showed a 10.7% decline in the number of murders from Jan. 1 to Sept. 30, 2023, compared with the same time period in 2022, in 69 large U.S. cities.

    Similarly, violent crime has also gone down, according to the most recent data released by the FBI, and the Council on Criminal Justice report found that there were “3% fewer reported aggravated assaults in 2023 than in 2022 and 7% fewer gun assaults in 11 reporting cities. Reported carjacking incidents fell by 5% in 10 reporting cities but robberies and domestic violence incidents each rose 2%.”

    But in both cases, the homicide and violent crime rates are higher than they were in 2019 — the year before the COVID-19 pandemic broke out.

    While it’s unclear exactly why, there was a sharp increase in homicide and violent crime during the pandemic that may have been broadly due to the wide availability of guns and the insecurity brought on by the pandemic, according to an analysis from the Brennan Center for Justice.

    While Biden was correct in pointing out a recent decrease in murder and violent crime, he didn’t account for the preceding increase during the pandemic.

    Trump’s ‘Get Over It’ Comment

    While speaking about the mass shooting in Uvalde, Texas, and other gun violence, Biden said, “Meanwhile, my predecessor told the NRA he’s proud he did nothing on guns when he was president. After another school shooting in Iowa recently, he said — when asked what to do about it — he said, ‘Just get over it.’”

    But Biden omitted much of what Trump said after the Jan. 4 shooting at Perry High School in Iowa, where a 17-year-old student killed a sixth-grader and injured four other students and the principal.

    The following day, at a campaign rally in Sioux Center, Iowa, Trump offered his “support and deepest sympathies” to the victims of the school shooting. “We’re really with you as much as anybody can be. It’s a very terrible thing that happened. It’s just terrible to see that happening,” Trump said. “That’s just horrible. It’s so surprising to see it here.”

    He added, “But we have to get over it. We have to move forward. But to the relatives, and to all of the people who are devastated right now, to the point they can’t breathe, they can’t live, we are with you all the way.”

    Taxes Paid by Billionaires

    As he has said many times before, Biden claimed that billionaires pay an average federal tax rate of 8.2%, less than the rate paid by “a teacher, a sanitation worker, or a nurse.” But that’s not the average rate in the current tax system; it’s a White House calculation that factors in earnings on unsold stock as income.

    When looking only at income, the top-earning taxpayers, on average, pay higher tax rates than those in the income groups below them, as we’ve explained. Biden’s point — which he doesn’t make clear — is that the current tax system does not tax earnings on assets, such as stock, until that asset is sold, at which point they are subject to capital gains taxes. Until stocks and assets are sold, any earnings are referred to as “unrealized” gains.

    The president has used the 8% figure to argue that wealthy households, those worth over $100 million, should pay a 25% minimum tax, as calculated on both standard income and unrealized investment income combined.

    The problem with the current system, the White House has said, is that unrealized gains could go untaxed forever if wealthy people hold on to them and pass them on to heirs when they die.

    Under what’s called stepped-up basis, the value of an asset is adjusted to the fair market value at the time of the inheritance. This wipes out any taxes on the unrealized gains that accumulated from the time the investor bought the asset and the time it was inherited.

    When we wrote about this last year, Erica York, a senior economist and research manager at the Tax Foundation, explained that wealthy households can also borrow money against the assets they own “to consume their wealth without paying tax.” After the family member passes away, the assets can go to heirs, who won’t have to pay taxes on the unrealized gains. York referred to the strategy as “buy, borrow, die.”

    Biden’s brief talking point leaves the misleading impression that billionaires are only paying 8% on average in federal taxes under the current tax system.

    Preexisting Conditions

    Biden said that because of the Affordable Care Act, “over 100 million of you can no longer be denied health insurance because of preexisting conditions,” claiming that Trump wants to repeal the ACA and take away this protection.

    The 100 million figure is an estimate of how many Americans not on Medicare or Medicaid have preexisting conditions. But if the ACA were eliminated, only those buying their own plans on the individual, or nongroup, market would immediately be at risk of being denied insurance.

    The ACA instituted sweeping protections for those with preexisting conditions, prohibiting insurers in all markets from denying coverage or charging more based on health status. Those protections were most important for the individual market. Even before the ACA, employer plans couldn’t deny issuing a policy — and could only decline coverage for some preexisting conditions for a limited period if a new employee had a lapse in coverage.

    We last wrote about this issue in December, when Biden said “over 100 million people” had protections for their preexisting conditions “only” because of the ACA, a figure he also used during the 2020 campaign.

    Again, those with employer plans did have protections before the ACA. The law’s broad protections would benefit people who lost their jobs or retired early and found themselves seeking insurance on the individual market. As of 2022, 20 million people, or about 6.3% of the U.S. population, got coverage on the individual market.

    As for Trump, he has said he wants to get rid of the law, posting on social media in November that Republicans “should never give up” on terminating the ACA. Trump said he was “seriously looking at alternatives,” but he hasn’t provided a plan. And he never released one while he was president, either.

    Given what Trump has backed in the past, he may well support a plan that wouldn’t be as comprehensive as the ACA and would lead to an increase in the uninsured and fewer protections for those with health conditions. But Biden makes the assumption Trump wouldn’t replace the ACA with anything at all.

    Carbon Emissions

    In one of his few, short references to climate change in the speech, Biden said, “I’m cutting our carbon emissions in half by 2030.”

    Biden is likely referring to the emissions target for heat-trapping greenhouse gases his administration set for the U.S. in April 2021 as part of rejoining the Paris Agreement, the international accord that ideally aims to limit global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels — and from which Trump had officially withdrawn the country in 2019. The goal under Biden is to reduce American emissions by 50% to 52% from 2005 levels by 2030.

    The Biden administration has made substantial progress in meeting the goal, most notably with the passage of the Inflation Reduction Act, Biden’s signature climate legislation that includes investments in clean energy. But as we’ve written, when the president has previously claimed the U.S. is “on track” to achieve its Paris goal, estimates suggest existing policies will not quite get the country all the way there.

    “Based on Congressional action and currently finalized regulations, we are not on track to meet 50-52% below 2005 by 2030,” Jesse Jenkins, who leads the Princeton Zero carbon Energy systems Research and Optimization Laboratory, told us in an email last April. Jenkins said then it was possible “the gap could be closed” once certain rules are finalized and others are proposed. The Biden administration, however, has recently announced or is reportedly planning changes that some say would weaken rules related to vehicle and gas power plant emissions.

    In a January update, the research firm Rhodium Group estimated that under current policy, the U.S. will cut emissions 29% to 42% below 2005 levels in 2030.

    A recent analysis by Carbon Brief, a U.K.-based climate-focused website, similarly projected that if Biden were reelected, the U.S. would get to a 43% reduction. That’s much higher than a second term for Trump — who, assuming he would undo Biden’s policies, would cut emissions by just 28% — but also still not to the full halfway mark.


    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, 202 S. 36th St., Philadelphia, PA 19104. 

    Sources

    FACT SHEET: President Biden Sets 2030 Greenhouse Gas Pollution Reduction Target Aimed at Creating Good-Paying Union Jobs and Securing U.S. Leadership on Clean Energy Technologies.” White House. 22 Apr 2021.

    The Paris Agreement.” United Nations Climate Change. Accessed 8 Mar 2024.

    Pompeo, Michael R. “On the U.S. Withdrawal from the Paris Agreement.” Press release. U.S. Department of State. 4 Nov 2019.

    Jaramillo, Catalina. “Warming Beyond 1.5 C Harmful, But Not a Point of No Return, as Biden Claims .” FactCheck.org. 27 Apr 2023.

    Davenport, Coral. “Biden Administration Is Said to Slow Early Stage of Shift to Electric Cars.” New York Times. 17 Feb 2024.

    Friedman, Lisa. “E.P.A. to Exempt Existing Gas Plants From Tough New Rules, for Now.” New York Times. 29 Feb 2024.

    Kolus, Hannah et al. “Pathways to Net-Zero: US Emissions Beyond 2030.” Rhodium Group. 23 Jan 2024.

    Evans, Simon and Verner Viisainen. “Analysis: Trump election win could add 4bn tonnes to US emissions by 2030.” Carbon Brief. 6 Mar 2024.

    Robertson, Lori. “Biden’s Tax Rate Comparison for Billionaires and Schoolteachers.” FactCheck.org. Updated 16 Mar 2023.

    Biden, Joe (@POTUS). “A billionaire minimum tax of just 25% would raise $440 billion over the next 10 years. Imagine what we could do if we just made billionaires pay their taxes like everyone else.” X. 30 Nov 2023.

    Tax Foundation. “Step-Up In Basis.” Accessed 7 Mar 2024.

    Lopez, Ernesto and Bobby Boxerman. “Crime Trends in U.S. Cities: Year-End 2023 Update.” Council on Criminal Justice. Jan 2024.

    Kiely, Eugene et al. “Biden’s Numbers, January 2024 Update.” FactCheck.org. 25 Jan 2024.

    Major Cities Chiefs Association. Violent Crime Survey — National Totals, January 1 to September 30, 2023, and 2022. Accessed 22 Jan 2024.

    Major Cities Chiefs Association. Violent Crime Survey — National Totals, January 1 to December 31, 2020, and 2019. Accessed 22 Jan 2024.

    Grawert, Ames and Noah Kim. “Myths and Realities: Understanding Recent Trends in Violent Crime.” Brennan Center for Justice. Updated 9 May 2023.

    Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. Consumer price indices. All items, percentage change on the same period of the previous year. Accessed 7 Mar 2024.

    U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers. All items in U.S. city average, all urban consumers, seasonally adjusted. Accessed 7 Mar 2024.

    Council of Economic Advisers (@WhiteHouseCEA). “Measured on an apples-to-apples HICP basis to allow global comparisons, both core & headline U.S. inflation were among the lowest in the G7 in November, the latest month with complete G7 data.” X. 11 Jan 2024.

    Congressional Budget Office. The Budget and Economic Outlook: 2024 to 2034. 7 Feb 2024.

    Robertson, Lori. “Biden’s Misleading Talking Point on $100K No-Degree Jobs.” FactCheck.org. 26 Oct 2023.

    Semiconductor Industry Association and Oxford Economics. “Chipping In: The Positive Impact of the Semiconductor Industry on the American Workforce and How Federal Industry Incentives Will Increase Domestic Jobs.” May 2021.

    Remarks by President Biden at a Campaign Event | Henderson, NV.” The White House. 4 Feb 2024.

    Remarks by President Biden at the National Governors Association Winter Meeting.” The White House. 23 Feb 2024.

    Remarks by President Biden at a Campaign Event | Las Vegas, NV.” The White House. 4 Feb 2024.

    Remarks by President Biden During Greet with MGM Resorts Management and Culinary Leaders | Las Vegas, NV.” The White House. 5 Feb 2024.

    Databases, Tables & Calculators by Subject.” U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. 8 Mar 2024.

    C-SPAN. “Former President Trump Holds Rally in Sioux Center, Iowa.” 5 Jan 2024.

    Eller, Donnelle. “Trump sends ‘deepest sympathies’ over Perry school shooting: ‘But we have to get over it.’” Des Moines Register. Updated 8 Jan 2024.

    Savage, Charlie. “Trump Administration imposes Ban on Bump Stocks.” New York Times. 18 Dec 2018.

    Tumin, Remy, Victor Mather and Leah McBride Mensching. “Sixth Grader Killed and Five Others Injured in Iowa School Shooting.” New York Times. 4 Jan 2024.

    Avalere. “Repeal of ACA’s Pre-Existing Condition Protections Could Affect Health Security of Over 100 Million People.” Press release. 23 Oct 2018.

    Robertson, Lori. “Biden Misleads on Preexisting Conditions.” FactCheck.org. 1 Sep 2020.

    Pre-Existing Conditions.” Department of Health and Human Services website. Updated 17 Mar 2022.

    Gore, D’Angelo and Robertson, Lori. “Biden Spins the Facts in Campaign Speech.” FactCheck.org. 5 Dec 2023.

    Gore, D’Angelo and Kiely, Eugene. “Biden on the Stump.” FactCheck.org. 22 Oct 2020.

    Trump Says He Will Renew Efforts to Replace ‘Obamacare’ If He Wins a Second Term.” AP News, 27 Nov 2023.

    Originally appeared in FactCheck.org

    Media Bias Fact Check

    Source link

  • State of the Union: What to watch in Biden’s address to the nation | LIVE COVERAGE

    State of the Union: What to watch in Biden’s address to the nation | LIVE COVERAGE

    WASHINGTON — The State of the Union speech is one of the biggest pieces of political theater every year. It’s rooted in a simple requirement in the U.S. Constitution that directs the president to “give to the Congress Information of the State of the Union, and recommend to their Consideration such Measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient.” But in modern times, it’s a televised extravaganza where every detail is carefully scrutinized.

    Here’s how to watch and what to look for during Thursday’s address by President Joe Biden.

    Where to find it

    You can find the State of the Union on all major networks, which will be carrying it live. It will also be streamed online by the White House, ABC News and this station. The speech starts at 9 p.m. ET.

    Cast of characters

    You might notice a new face behind Biden when he starts his speech. Rep. Mike Johnson of Louisiana became the House speaker in October after unhappy Republicans ousted Rep. Kevin McCarthy of California. Rep. Nancy Pelosi had the job before McCarthy but lost it when Democrats failed to keep the majority in the 2022 midterm elections.

    That makes Johnson the third House speaker to sit behind Biden during a State of the Union, reflecting the political instability in Washington and a challenging shift for Biden. House leadership has fallen further under the sway of the chamber’s right flank, making it harder for the president to cut deals with the opposing party.

    President Joe Biden delivers his State of the Union speech to a joint session of Congress, at the Capitol in Washington, Tuesday, Feb. 7, 2023.

    AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite

    Biden’s age

    No president gets a free pass on the world’s biggest stage, but Biden will be watched more carefully than most because of his age. At 81 years old, he’s the oldest commander-in-chief in history, and he would be 86 at the end of a potential second term.

    Donald Trump, Biden’s Republican predecessor and likely opponent in this year’s election, is 77. A majority of U.S. adults doubt either of them have the mental capabilities to serve as president, according to a new survey by The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research.

    The State of the Union is a chance for Biden to dispel doubts about whether he’s up for the job at an age when most Americans are retired. Any verbal slips or apparent confusion would provide fodder for his opponents.

    Policy agenda

    Keep your ears open for any new policy proposals. The State of the Union is a chance for presidents to lay out their goals and rally Americans to support their plans. For example, Biden used a previous speech to discuss his “unity agenda,” which included expanded healthcare benefits for veterans.

    The White House hasn’t disclosed specific proposals that will be in this year’s speech. But he could reference unfinished business from his first term, and he’ll likely press for military assistance for Ukraine to reinforce American leadership overseas.

    Special guests

    There are more than just lawmakers and top officials in the chamber for the speech. Politicians bring guests to the gallery to put a face to whatever issue they want to highlight.

    The most high-profile guests are invited by the White House and are often recognized during the president’s speech. So far the White House has disclosed only one, Kate Cox, a Texas woman who was unable to get an abortion in her home state even though her health was in danger and her fetus had a fatal condition. Democrats are eager to demonstrate how the U.S. Supreme Court’s overturning of Roe v. Wade has limited reproductive rights.

    Lawmakers will have their own guests too. Johnson and two New York representatives are bringing police officers whose brawl with migrants in Times Square caused a political uproar among Republicans who have blamed Biden for loose border security. Rep. Elise Stefanik, another New York Republican, invited a Border Patrol officer who also serves as a union official.

    Rep. Dean Phillips talks about his political future after dropping out of the presidential race ahead of President Joe Biden’s State of the Union address.

    Fashion statements

    Television cameras will pan across the chamber during the State of the Union, so you’ll have a clear view of everyone in the audience too. This is a chance for lawmakers and guests to send a message of their own with their clothing.

    Democratic women wore white, the color of the women’s suffrage movement, during Trump’s State of the Union in 2019. In 2022, some lawmakers wore blue and yellow ribbons to show their support for Ukraine. (The country’s ambassador to the United States, Oksana Markarova, was a guest as well.)

    Protest potential

    You might think that everything about the State of the Union is scripted, but that’s not the case. Even in a tightly controlled environment, it’s still possible that someone could stage an interruption. Biden has been shadowed around the country by protests over his support for Israel’s war in Gaza. Activists have also planned a demonstration in Lafayette Square near the White House before the speech.

    In addition, Republicans have earned a reputation for interruptions. Reps. Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia and Lauren Boebert of Colorado heckled Biden during his State of the Union in 2022. Then in 2023, some Republicans shouted at Biden when he accused them of trying to cut Social Security and Medicare. “I enjoy conversation,” Biden said as he urged Congress to unite behind protecting the safety net programs.

    Johnson is trying to tamp down on outbursts from his caucus. He encouraged House Republicans to show “decorum” during the speech, according to a person familiar with his remarks at a private meeting on Wednesday.

    Protests can come in other forms too. Pelosi theatrically ripped up a copy of Trump’s speech after the State of the Union in 2020.

    Republican response

    If you’re not tired of politics when the State of the Union is over, stay tuned for more. The opposing party traditionally stages its own response to the speech. This year, Republicans chose Sen. Katie Britt of Alabama. At 42 years old, she’s the youngest female senator and some party leaders hope she could be a rising star.

    But whatever she says, many will be waiting to see Trump’s own response. In a post on his Truth Social account, Trump promised to provide “LIVE, Play by Play” commentary on Biden’s speech. As Trump cruises toward the Republican presidential nomination, his remarks will help frame the stakes of the election.

    Who is Sen. Katie Britt, the Alabama Republican giving the SOTU response?

    Sen. Katie Britt, R-Ala.,, speaks during a news conference on the border, Wednesday, Feb. 15, 2023, on Capitol Hill in Washington.

    Sen. Katie Britt, R-Ala.,, speaks during a news conference on the border, Wednesday, Feb. 15, 2023, on Capitol Hill in Washington.

    AP Photo/Mariam Zuhaib

    ___

    Associated Press writer Lisa Mascaro contributed.

    Copyright © 2024 by The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved.

    AP

    Source link

  • Biden to call in State of the Union for business tax hikes, middle class tax cuts, lower deficits

    Biden to call in State of the Union for business tax hikes, middle class tax cuts, lower deficits

    WASHINGTON — President Joe Biden is going into Thursday’s State of the Union address with an expanded plan to raise corporate taxes and use the proceeds to trim budget deficits and cut taxes for the middle class.

    The Democratic president in this election year is refining the economic agenda that he’s been pushing since the 2020 presidential race, trying to show that he is addressing voters’ concerns about the cost of living. With Republican control of the House, Biden’s agenda is unlikely to become law and serves as something of a sales pitch to voters.

    In a preview of Biden’s remarks, aides including Lael Brainard, director of the White House National Economic Council, said the president would contrast his proposals with Republican plans to extend former President Donald Trump’s expiring tax breaks and further slash corporate tax rates.

    Under Biden’s proposal, corporations would no longer be able to deduct the expense of employee pay above $1 million, which could raise $270 billion over 10 years. He also wants to raise the corporate tax rate to 28% from 21%, among other measures. And, as Biden has previously proposed, major companies would be charged a minimum tax rate so that they could not avoid the IRS through accounting maneuvers, deductions and specialized tax breaks.

    Billionaires would need to pay a minimum of 25% in federal taxes on their income under his plans. People earning more than $400,000 would also pay higher Medicare taxes to ensure the program’s financial viability.

    Biden would use some of those revenues to pay for expansions of the Earned Income Tax Credit and Child Tax Credit, which would help lower-income families. He is also seeking to permanently make health insurance premiums lower for those who receive their medical coverage through the 2010 Affordable Care Act.

    Aides said Biden’s forthcoming budget plan would trim the national debt by $3 trillion over 10 years, similar to what he pitched in last year’s budget proposal, which was not approved by Congress.

    Copyright © 2024 by The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved.

    AP

    Source link

  • (Fact Check) Tucker Carlson could Face Sanctions from the U.S. for his Interview with Putin

    (Fact Check) Tucker Carlson could Face Sanctions from the U.S. for his Interview with Putin


    Claim by Laura Loomer:

    America is not a free country when a journalist could face sanctions for doing journalism.

    Reasoning:

    The Newsweek article Loomer links address the situation where Tucker Carlson, a conservative pundit, may face sanctions from the European Union (EU), not the United States, due to his interview with Russian President Vladimir Putin.

    Guy Verhofstadt, a member of the European Parliament, has suggested the possibility of imposing a travel ban on Carlson for being a “mouthpiece” of Putin, who is considered a war criminal by the EU. The potential sanctions are related to EU policies against individuals assisting war criminals, not actions by the United States against journalists. The process for sanctioning individuals involves review by the EU’s External Action Service and approval by the European Council, distinct from any measures the United States might take concerning press freedom.

    MBFC Rating?

    FALSE. Laura Loomer’s claim misrepresents the Newsweek article by suggesting that the United States is imposing sanctions on Tucker Carlson for his journalistic activities. The potential sanctions discussed are from the European Union. They are based on Carlson’s interview with an EU adversary, not a general stance against journalism by the United States. Therefore, the claim that America is imposing sanctions and not a free country based on this scenario is false.


    Do you appreciate our work? Please consider one of the following ways to sustain us.

    MBFC Ad-Free 

    or

    MBFC Donation


     

    Subscribe With Email

    Join 23K other subscribers





    Media Bias Fact Check

    Source link

  • Biden Slapped Back Into Reality With Fact-Check After Falsely Claiming to 'Lower Costs' For the American People

    Biden Slapped Back Into Reality With Fact-Check After Falsely Claiming to 'Lower Costs' For the American People

    Opinion

    Joe Biden, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons

    This week, the White House posted an infographic on X explaining how Team Biden-Harris has made life more affordable for the American household. The cringe-worthy photo of President Joe Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris walking side by side in what appears to be some attempt to exude confidence and smoothness is enough to turn one’s stomach.

    But the real kicker is the community note that proves the intended message from the White House runs counter to the real-life lived reality of the average American citizen. (Isn’t it nice finally having an actual fact-checking source?!)

    How long will the White House continue to push the narrative that the economy is in great shape thanks to their leadership?

    A question of accuracy

    The White House posted on X the above infographic claiming:

    “Because of the Biden-Harris administration, Americans are seeing lower costs and getting much-needed breathing room.”

    Within the infographic are various claims about alleged decreased medical costs, lower energy bills, reduction in internet bills, and relief from overdraft fees.

    Of course, “lowered costs” is not at all the “lived experience” of we, the people. We have been beaten and battered by historic inflation.

    And so thankfully, it didn’t take long for Biden to get fact-checked by Community Notes.

    Linking to the Consumer Price Index inflation calculator, the note states:

    “According to the government’s own data, Americans are seeing costs 17% higher overall since Biden took office.”

    Upon clicking the link, one will see that $100 in January 2021 has the same buying power as $117.62 in October of this year. No matter what the Biden administration tries to do, they can’t outrun facts.

    RELATED: Biden Announces He Will ‘Forgive’ Another $5 Billion In Student Loans

    Much to Team Biden’s dismay, the American public continues to feel the pain of the poor economy despite how often they are told not to. According to Gallup and the Pew Research Center, only one in five Americans rate the economy as excellent or good.

    How could this be? A good chunk of these “bad vibes,” as some on the left try to downplay this feeling, is due to high food prices.

    Hungry for something else

    A whopping one in seven Americans are struggling with food insecurity. Last month, an alarming one third of Americans admitted they have experienced food insecurity at some point in their lives.

    The numbers alone prove that hunger isn’t something that just one group of Americans is suffering from. The head of Feeding America, Claire Babineaux-Fontenot foot stomps this fact:

    “This is not just one group’s issue; it’s an American issue. Hunger is an issue in America across every demographic group, and now, growingly, across more and more levels of income.”

    Grocery bills are insane, as this consumer can attest to. Feeding my family of four costs close to $300 a week.

    Across every food category, prices are up 25% since 2020. The following family staples are more expensive: ground beef, milk, and white bread.

    A pound of ground beef costs about $5, up over $1 over the last three years. A gallon of milk is just shy of $4, which is 20% more than pre-pandemic.

    RELATED: Biden Gets Fact-Checked For Claim He Created 800,000 Jobs

    And a loaf of white bread has gone up 50% to an average of $2. When a family of four like mine buys approximately five pounds of ground beef, a gallon of milk, and two loaves of white bread a week, the monthly cost for just those three items is over $130.

    Again, that’s just three items; that doesn’t include eggs, toiletries, paper products, fruit, vegetables, other meats, and canned goods.

    Maybe that’s not a lot for the highly-paid left-wing pundits who keep telling us the economy is great, but for most Americans, it is an immediate decline in their standard of living.

    No satisfaction

    The struggles of an American household can’t just be seen through the lens of the groceries; managing a home is a multifaceted beast. President of the Houston Food Bank Brian Greene explains:

    “Food inflation is only running about 3% now, but rent inflation is over 7%. And for low income or working families, rent can account for about 50% or more of their income.”

    After paying rent or mortgage, utility bills, gas for a vehicle, and insurance, there can be little left for food, let alone other necessities like new clothes, school supplies, or, unfortunately, gifts during the holidays. The future doesn’t look much better, either.

    A report from Bankrate says it could take until the end of next year before wage growth finally outpaces inflation. Essentially, another full year before the pay increase many Americans are receiving is more than the increase in goods they need to purchase.

    But even then, we are not talking about returning to the former standard of living. Prices are not going down, they are increasingly slightly slower than they were before.

    Another report, courtesy of an inflation tracker from Congress’ Joint Economic Committee, shows that American households need to spend about $10,000 more to afford the same quality of life they had three years ago. And yet Team Biden-Harris can’t figure out why Americans aren’t buying their economic success story.

    Perhaps it’s just too damn expensive.

    Now is the time to support and share the sources you trust.
    The Political Insider ranks #3 on Feedspot’s “100 Best Political Blogs and Websites.”

    Kathleen J. Anderson

    Source link

  • FactChecking the Third GOP Primary Debate

    FactChecking the Third GOP Primary Debate

    By Robert FarleySaranac Hale SpencerD’Angelo GoreEugene KielyLori Robertson and Jessica McDonald

    Summary

    The third Republican primary debate included a few arguments, mostly about China, and some misleading claims:

    • Former U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Nikki Haley and Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis sparred over their roles as governors in helping to lure Chinese companies to their respective states. Both spun some facts.
    • Entrepreneur Vivek Ramaswamy and DeSantis disagreed over whether a DeSantis donor had influenced a Florida bill blocking Chinese nationals from buying property within a certain distance of military bases. Bloomberg News reported that it happened, citing unnamed sources.
    • In vowing to ban TikTok in the U.S., former New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie misleadingly said former President Donald Trump “did not ban them when he could have and should have.” Trump tried, but his attempt was blocked by the courts.
    • In talking about Social Security, DeSantis correctly stated that life expectancy in the U.S. had recently declined, but neglected to say that much of the drop is due to COVID-19. 
    • Several candidates misleadingly claimed that Democrats support allowing abortions “up until birth.” Democrats support an exception for bans on abortion after fetal viability if the mother’s health is at risk.
    • Haley and Sen. Tim Scott disagreed over Scott’s support for a federal bill that would ban abortions after 15 weeks. Scott didn’t co-sponsor the bill last year, but did voice support for the idea in April.

    The candidates also repeated claims we’ve heard before on fracking, IRS agents and more.

    The Nov. 8 debate, held in Miami, was hosted by NBC News, with Salem Radio Network, the Republican Jewish Coalition and Rumble as partners.

    Analysis

    DeSantis Attacks Haley on China

    Haley and DeSantis sparred over their roles in helping to lure Chinese companies to their respective states as governor, but both spun each other’s record a bit.

    DeSantis said that when she was governor, Haley “welcomed them [Chinese companies] into South Carolina, gave them that land near a military base, wrote the Chinese ambassador a love letter saying what a great friend they were.”

    It’s true that Haley, who served as governor from 2011 to 2017 helped to lure Chinese business to the state and in 2014, she wrote a letter to the Chinese ambassador boasting about “the strong relationship we share with China” and expressing gratitude “for your contributions on the economic front.” The South Carolina Department of Commerce reported that capital investments by Chinese companies in the state grew from $307.8 million in 2011 to almost $669 million in 2015.

    When DeSantis said Haley provided a Chinese company land near a military base, he is referring to Haley’s role in helping to recruit China Jushi, a partially state-owned company that makes fiberglass. An ad from a pro-DeSantis super PAC highlighted Haley’s role in helping to entice the company to bring a manufacturing plant to South Carolina in 2016. Haley called the announcement “a huge win for our state” and touted the 400 jobs it would bring.

    In a fact-check, the Washington Post concluded the ad went too far with claims that the plant brought “China’s eyes and ears — dangerously close” to a military base, Fort Jackson, 5 miles away. “There is no indication it is a spy center for China” the Washington Post Fact Checker wrote, noting that Fort Jackson is not on a list of sensitive military sites for which a foreign entity would need U.S. government approval to locate within a mile.

    In the debate, DeSantis did not go as far as the ad’s conclusion, but why else would DeSantis note that the Chinese company was located on “land near a military base” if not to raise concerns about that.

    At the debate, Haley acknowledged, “Yes, I brought a fiberglass company 10 years ago to South Carolina.”

    Haley Attacks DeSantis on China

    Haley and DeSantis also tangled over Florida’s position on attracting Chinese business to the state.

    “Ron, you are the chair of your economic development agency that, as of last week, said Florida is the ideal place for Chinese businesses,” Haley said.

    “I abolished that agency that she’s talking about. Enterprise Florida? We abolished it,” DeSantis responded.

    They’re both right. And they both were also a little misleading.

    Here’s the deal with Enterprise Florida Inc., a quasi-government agency that was created in 1996 with the intent of bringing business and jobs to Florida.

    As Haley said, it’s true that DeSantis was the chairman of the board of directors for Enterprise Florida.

    It’s also true that the agency recently had posted on its website an annual report for the 2019/2020 fiscal year that said it had focused on “Positioning Florida as an ideal business destination for Chinese companies.”

    But that report is about three years old and the fact that it was still available on the website doesn’t necessarily mean that it reflects the agency’s current goals. A more recent annual report, from 2022, said that Enterprise Florida’s International Trade & Development team had “been working with partners in Central America, South America, the Caribbean, and Mexico to lure more manufacturing away from China and bring supply chains closer to home and into Florida.”

    That said, Enterprise Florida’s website, which is no longer live as of the first week in November, had said on its page about partnerships in Asia, “China remains Florida’s most important trading partner and export destination in the region.”

    So, Haley was correct in saying that DeSantis chaired the agency and that it had published a report saying that Florida would be an ideal place for Chinese business. But she misled a little in quoting from an outdated report.

    As for DeSantis’ claim that he abolished the agency, that’s sort of true.

    State politicians had been fighting for years about whether or not to dissolve the agency.

    In May, DeSantis signed legislation that “[c]onsolidates the responsibilities and resources of Enterprise Florida, Inc. (EFI) into the Department of Economic Opportunity (DEO), which the bill also renames as the Department of Commerce,” according to a press release from DeSantis at the time.

    The consolidation did away with some of the agency’s programs and re-distributed others. So DeSantis’ claim that he “abolished” Enterprise Florida overstates the impact of the bill he signed.

    The context of the exchange could also leave the impression that DeSantis was motivated to sign the bill in order to stanch Chinese investment in Florida, but he said nothing about China in his press release on the bill signing and, as one of the bill’s sponsor’s put it, the legislation was drafted because Enterprise Florida has “over-promised and under-delivered for years.”

    Florida’s Ban on Chinese Land Purchases

    When Ramaswamy said that a DeSantis donor successfully lobbied to amend a Florida bill blocking Chinese nationals from buying property within a certain distance of military bases in the state, DeSantis said the claim was not accurate.

    But Ramaswamy was referring to reporting from Bloomberg News.

    “I do have to recognize that Ron DeSantis was correct about acknowledging Nikki Haley’s tough talk when she was ambassador to the U.N., calling China ‘our great friend,’ bringing the CCP to South Carolina,” Ramaswamy started.

    “What you left out, though, Ron, and be honest about it, there was a lobbying-based exemption in that bill that allowed Chinese nationals to buy land within a 20-mile radius of a military base lobbied for by one of your donors. I think we have to call a spade a spade.”

    DeSantis could be heard saying, “that’s not true.”

    DeSantis signed the bill, SB 264, into law in May, and it went into effect in July. Among other things, it restricts nationals of seven “foreign countries of concern,” including China, from owning or acquiring agricultural land or real property in Florida. The law specifically states that they cannot purchase property “within 10 miles” — not 20 miles, as Ramaswamy said — “of any military installation or critical infrastructure facility in this state.”

    In an Aug. 16 article, Bloomberg News reported that “early drafts” of the legislation barred “all Chinese citizens and others from buying real estate within 20 miles (32 kilometers) of military bases and critical infrastructure, such as ports, airports and power substations.”

    The story said that posed a problem for Ken Griffin, the founder and CEO of investment firm Citadel, and a donor to DeSantis’ gubernatorial campaign, who planned to relocate hundreds of his company’s employees to a new global headquarters in Miami. Citadel employs 4,500 people, including key executives from China, Bloomberg News reported.

    “So the Citadel founder assembled a network of influence to rework the proposed law, according to people familiar with the matter,” the Bloomberg News article said.

    The version of the bill that DeSantis signed included an exception for individuals with non-tourist U.S. visas, allowing them to buy one residential property in the state that is not on or within 5 miles of any military installation.

    Bloomberg News, again citing unnamed sources familiar with the process, said “Citadel’s lobbyists persuaded lawmakers” to include that “carve out” in the legislation.

    According to the article, of the Citadel’s roughly 250 employees in Miami, “only a handful could have been affected by the harsher version of the law, one of the people close to the situation said.”

    Trump Did Try to Ban TikTok

    Asked if he would ban TikTok or force its sale, Christie said he would impose a ban on Day 1, and he criticized Trump for failing to “ban them when he could have and should have.”

    “This is one of the big failings among many of the Trump administration,” Christie said. “He talked tough about TikTok. I heard him do it many times. But when it came down to it, he did not ban them when he could have and should have. And now since then, we’ve had an additional nearly six years of this type of poison be put out throughout the United States.”

    Trump did more than talk “tough about TikTok.” His administration tried to ban the popular app — which is owned by the Chinese company ByteDance — but he was rebuffed by the courts, as Scott said later in the debate.

    In May 2019, Trump issued an executive order that declared a national emergency “to protect America from foreign adversaries who are actively and increasingly creating and exploiting vulnerabilities in information and communications technology infrastructure and services in the United States,” as described in a White House statement.

    No company was named in Trump’s order, but that order was referenced in another executive order issued by Trump in August 2020 that specifically targeted TikTok. “Under authority delegated by the 2020 Order, the Secretary of Commerce issued a list of prohibited transactions, which included maintaining TikTok on a mobile app store or providing internet hosting services to it,” the Congressional Research Service said in a Sept. 28 report.

    In separate lawsuits, TikTok and TikTok users challenged the Trump administration’s restrictions on TikTok’s U.S. operations. “The courts ultimately sided with the plaintiffs and issued preliminary injunctions temporarily barring the United States from enforcing the restrictions,” CRS said. “Both courts described the government actions as effectively banning TikTok from operating in the United States.”

    Life Expectancy and Social Security

    In speaking about Social Security, DeSantis pointed to a falling life expectancy as a reason not to increase the age of eligibility of the program.

    “When life expectancy is declining, I don’t see how you could raise it the other direction,” he said. “So it’s one thing to peg it on life expectancy, but we have had a significant decline in life expectancy in this country. And that is just a fact.”

    It’s true that life expectancy in the U.S. has fallen. According to the latest provisional data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, released in August 2022, life expectancy at birth for 2021 was 76.1 years. The figure reflects a drop of nearly a year of life expectancy from 2020 — and it’s the lowest it has been since 1996. The decline followed an even sharper drop of 1.8 years between 2019 and 2020. 

    But DeSantis failed to mention the primary reason for the large declines: the COVID-19 pandemic. Per the CDC, 74% of the drop in life expectancy between 2019 and 2020 and 50% between 2020 and 2021 was from COVID-19 deaths. Other major factors for the latest decline include increases in deaths from accidents — nearly half of which are attributed to drug overdoses — as well as upticks in deaths from heart disease, chronic liver disease and suicide.

    This is relevant for his claim about Social Security, since as time goes on, COVID-19 is likely to have less of an impact on life expectancy, making these large declines temporary. Moreover, these figures reflect life expectancy at birth, or as the CDC says, the “average number of years a group of infants would live if they were to experience throughout life the age-specific death rates prevailing during a period.”

    What’s actually relevant to the financial status of the program, the Social Security Administration explains, isn’t life expectancy at birth, but rather life expectancy at retirement age and the relative size of the working population compared with the retired population.

    “Increases in life expectancy are a factor in the long-range financing of Social Security; but other factors, such as the sheer size of the ‘baby boom’ generation, and the relative proportion of workers to beneficiaries, are larger determinants of Social Security’s future financial condition,” an archived agency webpage reads.

    Data show that despite recent declines, life expectancy at 65 is still higher than it was for much of the past.

    Abortion

    Just as in the first two debates, some candidates misleadingly claimed that Democrats, or certain states, support allowing abortions “up until birth.” As we’ve explained, Democrats support an exception for bans on abortion after fetal viability if the mother’s health is at risk.

    DeSantis, Scott, Ramaswamy and Christie all made some version of this claim. DeSantis said Democrats “will not identify the point at which there should be any protection, all the way up until birth.” Scott claimed “states like California, Illinois or New York … have abortion up until the day of birth.” Christie said his home state of New Jersey “goes up to nine months that you get an abortion.” And Ramaswamy talked about Ohio, where voters passed a ballot initiative on Nov. 7 to add an amendment on abortion rights to the state constitution.

    “That now effectively codifies a right to abortion all the way up to the time of birth without parental consent,” Ramaswamy said of the measure.

    Ohio’s new amendment — which passed with 57% of votes in favor — said that “abortion may be prohibited after fetal viability,” but not “if in the professional judgment of the pregnant patient’s treating physician it is necessary to protect the pregnant patient’s life or health.”

    As we’ve written, Republicans object to the health exception, claiming the bill would allow abortion on demand at any point in a pregnancy.

    Mary Ziegler, a professor of law at the University of California, Davis and the author of six books on the abortion debate and the law, told us that “Republicans view those health exceptions as sort of like a blanket permission to have an abortion whenever you want.” Democrats say “it’s an exception for life or health.”

    California, Illinois and New York also have bans on abortion after viability, but exceptions for the life and health of the mother. New Jersey’s law doesn’t specify a point at which abortions would be banned. The state’s Office of the Attorney General says: “New Jersey protects the ability of individuals to make decisions in collaboration with their provider throughout pregnancy.” Dr. Glenmarie Matthews, director of the Reproductive Choice Program at New Jersey Medical School, told our fact-checking colleagues at PolitiFact that, in practice, this means health care providers aren’t performing abortions after 24 to 26 weeks of gestation, which would be around the point of viability.

    The vast majority of abortions in the U.S. occur early in pregnancy. Statistics from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention show that 93.1% of abortions in 2020 were performed at or before 13 weeks of gestation and less than 1% were performed at or after 21 weeks.

    A 15-Week Abortion Ban

    Scott and Haley argued over Scott’s support for a federal bill that would ban abortions after 15 weeks.

    “I would certainly as president of the United States have a 15-week national limit,” Scott said. “We need a 15-week federal limit.”

    “But Tim, there was a bill last year, Lindsey Graham sponsored it. You didn’t even co-sponsor the bill,” Haley said. “And then when you first were interviewed on this, when you ran, you wouldn’t even say you were for 15 weeks.”

    “That’s just not true,” Scott said.

    It is true, as Haley said, that when Sen. Graham introduced S. 4840, the Protecting Pain-Capable Unborn Children from Late-Term Abortions Act, in September 2022, Scott was not one of the nine co-sponsors. The bill, which never made it to a vote, sought to make it a crime to perform an abortion after 15 weeks of pregnancy. It included exceptions for the life of the mother, or if the pregnancy was the result of rape or incest.

    A month before Scott officially announced his candidacy for president, HuffPost reported on April 13 that Scott repeatedly dodged questions about his support for a 15-week abortion ban, responding instead, “I am certainly 100% pro-life, without any question.” The article noted that Scott said he would “definitely” support a 20-week ban.

    But in an interview on Newsmax a week later, Scott laid the issue to rest when he was asked if, as president, he would sign Graham’s bill into law.

    “Every day I would sign that bill into law,” Scott answered. “I would sign the most conservative, pro-life legislation you could bring to my desk.”

    More Repeats

    We also heard several claims we’ve fact-checked before:

    • Haley claimed that DeSantis “banned fracking.” He hasn’t, but he supported it. During his campaign for governor in 2018, DeSantis pledged to ban both fracking and offshore drilling out of concern for Florida’s geological and natural resources. An amendment to ban offshore drilling passed in that same election. DeSantis signed an executive order directing the Florida Department of Environmental Protection to “[t]ake necessary actions to adamantly oppose all off-shore oil and gas activities off every coast in Florida and hydraulic fracturing in Florida.” But legislative attempts to ban fracking have been unsuccessful.
    • Haley referenced the well-worn talking point about “87,000 IRS agents going after middle America.” As we’ve explained many times, this figure refers to the number of employees that could have been hired by the IRS with funding from the Inflation Reduction Act. But the Treasury Department told us most of the new hires would replace retiring or departing employees, and most new positions would be in customer service. Some new employees would be tax enforcers but their focus would be high-income tax evaders, not middle America.
    • Ramaswamy repeated the unsubstantiated claim that “Hunter Biden got a $5 million bribe from Ukraine.” As we’ve written, the allegation refers to an FBI report made public on July 20 in which an FBI informant said that years ago, the owner of Burisma, a Ukrainian energy company, told the informant he was “pushed to pay” bribes of $5 million each to Hunter and Joe Biden for what the informant understood was assurance that the Ukrainian prosecutor general at the time would be fired. But the FBI agent who wrote the report said the claim couldn’t be substantiated. Hunter Biden was paid $1 million a year to serve on the Burisma board between 2014 and 2019, but that was to provide legal and consulting work.
    • Haley, echoing another popular Republican talking point, claimed that President Joe Biden gave Iran “$6 billion to get five hostages home.” Scott, too, said, “President Biden has sent billions to Iran.” To be clear, as we’ve written before, the $6 billion was Iranian money which had been frozen in foreign banks and not U.S. taxpayer money given by Biden. The money was released to banks in Qatar, and could be spent on humanitarian needs in Iran, such as food or medicine. On Oct. 12, amid the war in the Middle East, U.S. and Qatar agreed to block Iran’s access to the $6 billion for the foreseeable future.

    Sources

    Kaiser, Anna, et al. “Ken Griffin Reshaped Law Banning Chinese Real Estate Purchases.” Bloomberg.com. 16 Aug 2023.

    S.B. 264, Interests of Foreign Countries. 8 May 2023.

    Herlihy, Brianna. “Nikki Haley hailed China as ‘a friend’ in 2014 thank-you letter to ambassador.” Fox News. 26 Oct 2023.

    South Carolina Commerce. “Foreign Investment in South Carolina: Highlighting Chinese Investment.” Aug 2011.

    South Carolina Department of Commerce. “China Jushi bringing 80,000-ton fiberglass production line to Richland County.” 31 May 2016.

    Kessler, Glenn. “DeSantis group’s ad attacks Haley with facts but offers false conclusions.” Washington Post. 4 Nov 2023.

    Congress.gov. S.4840 – Protecting Pain-Capable Unborn Children from Late-Term Abortions Act. Introduced 13 Sep 2022.

    Delaney, Arthur. “Tim Scott Fumbles Abortion Questions After Announcing Possible Presidential Bid.” HuffPost. 13 Apr 2023.

    Enterprise Florida, Inc. Annual Report 2019-2020. Accessed 8 Nov 2023.

    Wallace, Jeremy. “Caught in crossfire between Rick Scott and Richard Corcoran, group fights for survival.” Tampa Bay Times. 22 Mar 2017.

    DeSantis, Ron. Press release. “Governor DeSantis Signs Legislation to Streamline Economic Development in Florida.” 31 May 2023.

    Turner, Jim. “State House panel backs shuttering Enterprise Florida.” WGCU. 31 Mar 2023.

    White House. “Executive Order 13873. Securing the Information and Communications Technology and Services Supply Chain.” Federal Register. 17 May 2019.

    White House. “Statement from the Press Secretary.” 15 May 2019.

    White House. “Executive Order 13942. Addressing the Threat Posed by TikTok, and Taking Additional Steps To Address the National Emergency With Respect to the Information and Communications Technology and Services Supply Chain.” Federal Register. 6 Aug 2020.

    U.S. Department of Commerce. “Identification of Prohibited Transactions To Implement Executive Order 13942 and Address the Threat Posed by TikTok and the National Emergency With Respect to the Information and Communications Technology and Services Supply Chain.” Federal Register. 6 Aug 2020. 24 Sep 2020.

    Congressional Research Service. “Restricting TikTok (Part I): Legal History and Background.” 28 Sep 2023.

    TIKTOK Inc. v. Donald J. Trump.” No. 1:20-cv-02658. U.S. District Court, District of Columbia. 7 Dec 2020.

    Douglas Marland et al v. Donald J. Trump.” No. 20-4597. U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Pennsylvania.” 30 Oct 2020.

    Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Abortion Surveillance—Findings and Reports, Abortion Surveillance 2020. 17 Nov 2022.

    Robertson, Lori. “The Political Disagreement Over a Health Exception for Later Abortions.” FactCheck.org. 5 May 2023.

    Ohio Attorney General’s Office. The Right to Reproductive Freedom with Protections for Health and Safety. Initiative Petition. undated.

    Kaiser Family Foundation. Abortion Gestational Limits and Exceptions. accessed 9 Nov 2023.

    New Jersey Office of the Attorney General. Know Your Rights. 29 Jun 2022.

    Kertscher, Tom. “Anti-abortion group exaggerates how states regulate late-term abortions.” PolitiFact. 28 Jun 2022.

    Life Expectancy in the U.S. Dropped for the Second Year in a Row in 2021.” Press release. CDC. 31 Aug 2022.

    Arias, Elizabeth et al. “Provisional Life Expectancy Estimates for 2021.” Vital Statistics Rapid Release. CDC. August 2022.

    Life Expectancy for Social Security.” Social Security Administration. Archived page, accessed 9 Nov 2023.

    Arias, Elizabeth and Jiaquan Xu. “United States Life Tables, 2019.” National Vital Statistics Reports. 22 Mar 2022.

    FactCheck.org

    Media Bias Fact Check

    Source link

  • Entirely Unrepentant

    Entirely Unrepentant

    “Our country is being destroyed by stupid people,” former President Donald Trump declared during a CNN town hall tonight, shortly after he endorsed defaulting on the national debt.

    Trump remains without shame. Neither impeachment nor indictment nor arraignment nor a barely day-old verdict against him in a civil suit can change the fact that he’s still leading the field of Republican presidential candidates—comfortably.

    During tonight’s hour-plus live broadcast from New Hampshire, Trump steamrolled over the moderator, Kaitlan Collins, at one point calling her a “nasty” person—an echo of his 2016 campaign against Hillary Clinton. Collins did her best to fact-check the former president, but her efforts consistently fell short. Trump’s ability to disgorge words is unparalleled. She tried to cut him off, but he battled through it.

    Tonight, Trump rattled off myriad conspiracy theories about voter fraud and claimed, as he had at CPAC, that he could end the war in Ukraine in a quick 24 hours. He painted the January 6 insurrectionist Ashli Babbitt as a martyr and called the Capitol Police officer who shot her a “thug.” He referred to former Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi as a “crazy woman.” He repeatedly denigrated the writer E. Jean Carroll, who was just awarded $5 million in damages after a jury found that he defamed and sexually assaulted her. Trump repeated his earlier claims not to know her, calling her a “whack job.”

    But will it matter? Has it ever mattered before?

    Trump is currently leading both the incumbent, President Joe Biden, and the top Republican alternative, Governor Ron DeSantis of Florida, in the polls. Though the 2024 election is still a long way off, the campaign is officially under way—such was the network’s justification for tonight’s town hall. Many observers on social media objected to the fact that it happened at all.

    On set in New Hampshire, Trump was speaking not just to the country, but to a roomful of undecided voters. Most of them seemed eager to applaud and giggle along with the former president, whom nearly everyone addressed as “Mr. President.” He’s still the star, the draw, the showman. When he theatrically pulled papers out of his breast pocket, the crowd hooted. He teased a few 2024 talking points: The economy? Stinks. Inflation? A disaster. Afghanistan? “The single most embarrassing moment in the history of this country.”

    And then there’s the topic of January 6. The laughably big question going into the next election is whether a president who incited a violent mob and tried to stage a coup in lieu of orchestrating a peaceful transfer of power can once again be president. Has Trump taken the past two years to reflect on his actions? Has he been humbled? Chastened? Of course not.

    Tonight, Trump doubled down on his claim that former Vice President Mike Pence should have overturned the results of the 2020 election. He said he was inclined to pardon “many” of the January 6 rioters, bemoaning that “they’re living in hell right now.” He referred to these insurrectionists as “great people,” a subtle callback to his comments in the aftermath of the “Unite the Right” rally in Charlottesville, Virginia, in which he claimed there were “very fine people” on both sides.

    Next month marks eight years since Trump descended the golden escalator in Trump Tower and announced his candidacy for president. Hardly anyone in the media seemed to know how to properly cover him then. CNN was among the networks that used to carry his campaign rallies live. Tonight’s town hall, despite Collins’s admirable attempts at pushback, felt like a regression to that earlier era. Even some of Trump’s lines felt ominously familiar. “If I don’t win, this country is going to be in big trouble,” he said. Are we really about to do this all over again?

    John Hendrickson

    Source link